Official statistics reveal 2,753 bans in 2025
In 2025 Austrian authorities issued 2,753 Aufenthaltsverbote — official bans on residence in the country — according to newly released foreigners statistics. The vast majority of cases involved male subjects. Residency bans can be imposed not only on third-country nationals but also on EU citizens and “privileged” third-country nationals if their personal conduct is deemed a threat to public order or security.
Nationals most affected
Romanian nationals were by far the most common recipients of residence bans with 929 cases recorded. Citizens of Slovakia and Hungary followed. The data underline that residency restrictions are being applied across different nationality categories, including EU member state citizens, subject to threat assessments by Austrian authorities.
(Re-)entry bans and removal actions
In addition to residence bans, authorities issued 2,318 (re-)entry bans linked to return decisions. Serbian citizens were the most affected group in this category, followed by Turkish and Albanian nationals, indicating a broader enforcement of exclusion measures.
Detention and alternative sanctions
Statistics also recorded 2,313 cases of Schubhaft — detention pending removal — while in 279 cases authorities applied “milder measures,” such as reporting obligations or instructions to remain at a specified location. A total of 14,156 departures were recorded in 2025, including 6,801 enforced removals.
Legal and policy context
The rise in residency bans in Austria comes amid tightened migration and return policies. Under Austrian law, a legal ban on residence may be imposed on EU citizens or their relatives only if their behaviour poses a present and substantial threat to public order or security. In such cases, due process and appeal rights apply, reflecting both EU and national legal safeguards.
As International Investment experts report, the increase in residency bans — including measures affecting EU citizens — underscores broader shifts in Austria’s approach to migration control and public security, emphasising the importance of procedural safeguards and legal clarity in the enforcement of residence restrictions.