" This article stresses the need to study how European Union (EU) member states define and implement the concept of habitual residence to assess boundaries of welfare in the EU. It focuses specifically on EU migrant citizens' social rights and draws on comparative qualitative research on two EU member states – Germany and Sweden. The article first clarifies the differences between legal and habitual residence, and distinguishes between legal definitions of habitual residence and administrative formalities tied to such definitions. After examining legal definitions at the EU level, it goes on to consider additional definitions found in each member state case and administrative formalities attached to these definitions. Following this, implications for EU migrant citizens' social rights in each country are assessed. The analysis reveals how administrative processes of residence registration shape conditionality. In this way, administrative aspects of habitual residence can have far-reaching exclusive effects on EU migrant citizens' access to social benefits and services in the destination member state, as well as inhibit their ability to enjoy their right to freedom of movement. The article thus illustrates the inherent tension between free movement and residence-based social rights in a Union with devolved social provision."

Support: Digital