PR Card Renewal-Supporting Documents

[Ponga]

The new IMM 5644 (04-2023) does not have the 1095 days part.

It just says " Proof showing that you meet the residency obligation in the past five (5) years immediately before the application"

Does that mean we need to provide proof even if we stayed more than 730 days

After the recent changes to the application and the Document Checklist, all applicants for a PR Card must now provide at least two pieces of `proof' that they have met the Residency Requirement...even those that have not left Canada once during the last 5 years.

 

[armoured]

After the recent changes to the application and the Document Checklist, all applicants for a PR Card must now provide at least two pieces of `proof' that they have met the Residency Requirement...even those that have not left Canada once during the last 5 years.

I'm going to get specific on language here because I think it's important - everyone must look at the Appendix A:
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/application/application-forms-guides/guide-5445-applying-permanent-resident-card-card-first-application-replacement-renewal-change-gender-identifier.html#appendixA

Where you will find this: "Supporting documents showing that you meet the residency obligation
-You must provide copies of 2 pieces of evidence that can show residency in Canada in the five (5) years immediately before the application, such as: ..."

Note the bolding is mine, for emphasis, and extra emphasis, underlined.

The part I'm underlining: some of the documents they are asking for are EVIDENCE that CAN SHOW residency in Canada.

So I very much dislike IRCC's use of 'proof' here because it is very difficult to 'prove' (for example) one was actually physically resident for all the days you are counting towards residency (eg the days in between arrivals and departures).

But they don't (seem to) actually ask you to prove all those days. They ask you to provide supporting evidence of residency during this period (employment, student records, tax statements, social things like club or gym memberships, etc).

Notably, none of these things directly prove residency. They are supporting, one might even say circumstantial, evidence of residency - the things one might accumulate while ... actually residing in a place.

@Ponga, not disagreeing with what you said, and - repeating - I hate the way they've used 'proof' in these documents. But when you look through, at least some of the evidence is just that - evidence that supports a case of having resided according to the dates one provides elswhere (travel dates).

So I hope people freak out a bit less, and look at what is requested. In particular, it does NOT seem that they are asking for eg full to-the-day employment records, or bank statements from every day in Canada, etc., etc., but ... evidence that supports you were here. Nor do they seem to ask for complete records or evidence covering every day in Canada, just evidence that 'can support' or can show residency in Canada.

My guess or interpretation is that they think for most easy cases this evidence will support and make decision making a bit easier for the officer.

We'll just have to see though.

 

[Ponga]

I'm going to get specific on language here because I think it's important - everyone must look at the Appendix A:
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/application/application-forms-guides/guide-5445-applying-permanent-resident-card-card-first-application-replacement-renewal-change-gender-identifier.html#appendixA

Where you will find this: "Supporting documents showing that you meet the residency obligation
-You must provide copies of 2 pieces of evidence that can show residency in Canada in the five (5) years immediately before the application, such as: ..."

Note the bolding is mine, for emphasis, and extra emphasis, underlined.

The part I'm underlining: some of the documents they are asking for are EVIDENCE that CAN SHOW residency in Canada.

So I very much dislike IRCC's use of 'proof' here because it is very difficult to 'prove' (for example) one was actually physically resident for all the days you are counting towards residency (eg the days in between arrivals and departures).

But they don't (seem to) actually ask you to prove all those days. They ask you to provide supporting evidence of residency during this period (employment, student records, tax statements, social things like club or gym memberships, etc).

Notably, none of these things directly prove residency. They are supporting, one might even say circumstantial, evidence of residency - the things one might accumulate while ... actually residing in a place.

@Ponga, not disagreeing with what you said, and - repeating - I hate the way they've used 'proof' in these documents. But when you look through, at least some of the evidence is just that - evidence that supports a case of having resided according to the dates one provides elswhere (travel dates).

So I hope people freak out a bit less, and look at what is requested. In particular, it does NOT seem that they are asking for eg full to-the-day employment records, or bank statements from every day in Canada, etc., etc., but ... evidence that supports you were here. Nor do they seem to ask for complete records or evidence covering every day in Canada, just evidence that 'can support' or can show residency in Canada.

My guess or interpretation is that they think for most easy cases this evidence will support and make decision making a bit easier for the officer.

We'll just have to see though.

Totally agree, but it's not so much the word `Proof' that is unclear, rather the words `residency obligation' that appear just before that sentence.

" Supporting documents showing that you meet the residency obligation"

2 documents from a random day in that 5 year period would clearly not address the `Obligation' part, correct?

 

[armoured]

Totally agree, but it's not so much the word `Proof' that is unclear, rather the words `residency obligation' that appear just before that sentence.

" Supporting documents showing that you meet the residency obligation"

2 documents from a random day in that 5 year period would clearly not address the `Obligation' part, correct?

I repeat - that's why I referred to the Appendix. Read it. It tells you to provide supporting documents. It says, I repeat: "pieces of evidence that can show residency in Canada" [in the relevant period.]

This part - the evidence you provide - does not address the obligation part (directly, anyway). It supports the residency part. It's not meant to show and meet the 'every day you were here' part.

Or if you prefer: they ask you to provide circumstantial evidence. That's it. Don't overthink it.

And if you won't like that answer: well, it's what they ask for. Don't overthink it.