bigglesafloat

I expect this has been answered already but .... here goes ? My wife and I have B2 Visas to visit USA and we adhere very strictly to the 6 month Visa period. At end of period we either got to Canada or UK (we are Brits) before returning to USA and our RV travels. Nobody seems to know how long you are supposed to stay out of USA before starting a new 6 month Visa period ? Can anybody give us the US law on this point please ?
One time we only stayed in UK 1 month before re-entering USA at Washington DC - we were treated like illegal Mexicans by the Immigration official - first words were 'You seem to be spending more time in USA than in your home country' True, but we thought we were within the law of the B2 visa. When I attempted to ascertain the US law he said 'I am the law and I could turn you round and send you back to UK now !' We are respectable retired Brits in our 60's and all we do in USA is spend money - I felt about 2" tall. That was a wake up call.
I am sure there is now a note on our computer records within the US Immigration system. We have stayed out 7 months this time and our 3 years planned trip has come to an end. Anybody want to buy a RV ?

Noorah101

There is no real "law" on this. The general rule of thumb is to stay outside the USA longer than you were inside. So if you come and stay 6 months inside the USA, you should try to stay outside the USA for 6+ months before returning to visit again. My guess is you'll probably be OK after 7 months away.

It IS up to the POE officer, though...he has the final judgement, and you won't know the answer until you come knocking on the door.

Rene

fatbrit

You met the law in person -- s/he wore a uniform and was unpleasant.

Probably time to try another place to visit for a while.

bigglesafloat

For a country that has some of the most rigid immigration laws in the World it seems very strange that the interpretation of the B2 Visa requirements is left to individual immigration officers. It seems there is probably no redress to the actual law or someone in more senior authority. Even in UK, the strictest in all Europe, that system would be unacceptable . Perhaps this is why so many Brits are selling their Florida properties and the US property market is dead as far as Europeans are concerned ?
Let me hasten to say that we love touring the USA and Canada and have made many friends even with the Police Chief of the small town in Virginia where we spent past few months.

fatbrit

Most Americans really wouldn't care.

S Folinsky

The law can be found at 101(a)(15) which defines the various classes of aliens who are not "immigrants" --

"(B) an alien (other than one coming for the purpose of study or of performing skilled or unskilled labor or as a representative of foreign press, radio, film, or other foreign information media coming to engage in such vocation) having a residence in a foreign country which he has no intention of abandoning and who is visiting the United States temporarily for business or temporarily for pleasure"

The system is designed to avoid a rigid application of the law and to afford flexibility.

Opinion: There is no similarity between an "illegal Mexican" [whatever the hell that is] being turned away at the border and the admission of a person with a B-2 visa. Observation: As an American citizen, the interrogation that can happen at Heathrow or at a Canadian port of entry is sometimes no picnic.

Opinion: I see nothing wrong with an immigration officer expressing her concerns, giving a concise explanation of the law and then letting you in. An interesting thread was started recently by Ian-mstm.

Any expression of contempt is nothing but an implication. No advice given nor intended.

Lissbovavd

fatbrit,

Unfortunately, you are probably right on that point.
Most Americans wouldn´t really care.
I do know quite a few, though, who do, but I realize that they most likely are the exceptions from the rule.

This being said, no wonder that the number of incoming US tourists have been falling for 14 consecutive months by now.
Also, most people in the know concur that this is not just a reflection of the harsh economic climate in most countries.
The reasons go deeper than that and the US tourism sector is getting increasingly worried.

lifehouse51

Well look at it this way: For eligible nationalities, The visa exemption for the Schengen area is something like 90 days over a 6 month period. So it is reasonable to adhere to that "Spend more time outside of the U.S. than inside the U.S." rule for B1/B2 or Visa Waiver program.

But I agree that the attitudes of some border agents are horrible. I've seen non-native English speakers getting yelled at for not understanding instructions or not acting fast enough. Once someone is marked for secondary screening, it seems like it doesn't matter how you explain yourself: You still go through secondary every time you enter. It's not until recently that you have the option to file for a TRIP complaint (for which processing can take months).

And it doesn't help improving the image to tourists when the U.S.'s likely gonna start charging for ESTA (Even though Australia has been charging for ETA for a while)

bigglesafloat

Thank you for the legal interpretation of what an alien under B2 visa is. However this still does not give guidance as to the period of time spent outside the USA between visa usage periods .
The first opinion is partially incorrect - Yes the officer did voice his concerns - No he did not explain the law in any manner except to state forcibly that he was the law - Yes he did let us into the USA. Thank goodness for the latter since we own $200,000 worth of vehicles within the USA.
I have no wish to compare similar situations in other countries - it is irrelevant to the question I posed.
Starting a tit for tat argument is foolish.

henryh

the "at least as long out as in" is about the best advice you can get, but it has wide error margins. It's really luck of the draw and up to the CBP officer.
Some people go for a couple of years on back-to-back 90-day VWP visits with only a few days in between. Others get turned away after two long visits in a year.

Being given a stern talking-to by one officer doesn't necessarily mean you're "on a warning" and that you should expect trouble next time. I once got a lot of grief on a VWP visit 5 days after my previous (2-month) visit. Expected problems from then on. I was indeed taken to secondary the following time (5 months later) but wasn't given much trouble, and haven't been to secondary on multiple entries since then.

S Folinsky

Advice not given nor intended. There was no, repeat, NO interpretation given. Section 101(a)(15) is part of the statute.

"Residence abroad" v. residence in the United States --
Matter of Kane
Matter of Huang

"Tuxidoguy" demonstrated that attitude counts in this thread.

Advice not given, nor intended.
Advice not given, nor intended.

bigglesafloat

My apology for my terminology - you indeed did not interprete the B2 definition of an alien - you merely repeated the law as written.
You stress that advice is not given or intended as though we are in a Court of Law ? Please do not worry - I will not sue you - you have my word.

As to the matters of Huang and Kane they are totally irrelevant to my original question. I AM NOT seeking employment or permnent residence in the USA. My wife and I are retired tourists just seeking to explore your beautiful country.

You refer to attitude. Do you mean that maybe my attitude caused the secondary inspection at POE and further caused the somewhat hostile reaction of the officver carrying out that inspection. If asking a simple question and interpretation of the law governing our B2 Visa entry is considered a bad attitude ...... need I say more ?

ian-mstm

The law is intentionally vague - as it gives the border officers the widest possible latitude in performing their duties... which, in case you were wondering, is to keep non-US citizens out of the US. Immigration law presumes immigrant intent - and, quite frankly, you openly admitted to spending more time in the US than out of it. Have you considered the tax implications of what you've done? Under IRS laws, you are considered resident for US tax purposes and are required to file a US tax return... yes, even if you don't live here (which, by your own admission, is what you've been doing).

Three things to ponder: 1) that you spend money here is irrelevant; 2) "illegal Mexicans" are not responsible for the way you were treated; and 3) being "respectable retired Brits" is not the same as being "respectful retired Brits". Your attitude suggests "entitlement" and only US citizens have the right of entry to the US... there is no entitlement for anyone else - yes, even Brits.

Ian

Duncan Roberts

And yes, the anyone else includes visa holders, greencard holders and visa waiver users...

crg

There is no set amount of time between trips. A visa gives you permission to knock on the door and ask to enter the US. If you're going to string long trips together, you need to be prepared to prove that you qualify to do it on each and every trip. Have enough money to wander around in an RV and not work? Be able to prove it. Have a home that you are maintaining overseas that you have no intention of abandoning? Be able to prove it.

Also, I find your assertion that you are better than someone from Mexico to be troubling. I don't see how anyone could think that is an appropriate thing to say.