crg

Even though they generally avoid removal for overstaying per 237(a)(1)(B) because of being admitted without a specific date, they can get removed for failure to comply with the terms of admission per 237(a)(1)(C) or being inadmissible at the time of entry per 237(a)(1)(A)

Keep laughing. I routinely find Canadians with electronic I-94 visitor records online after airport arrivals in the B-2 classification. I didn't say that record would necessarily be binding, but it's there. You stick with "Duh... Sally at the port of entry in Podunk Montana and the janitor who answered the phone in DC told me Canadians don't get them" and hang your hat on that.

I still laugh about how you swore up and down that it was impossible to issue an electronic I-94 to a Canadian because it couldn't be done without biometrics, but didn't consider that they didn't fingerprint infants and diplomats either, but they get them!

Correct. Canadian students don't get visas. Where did I say that they did? They do get F-1 D/S I-94. But that wasn't the point either. I said that Canadians are generally insulated from unlawful presence like an F-1 would be. Of course an overstay of TN or similar would start to accrue time towards a bar.

MarylandNed

I was talking about US students in Canada. My daughter's USC boyfriend had to apply for a student visa to attend Western in London, Ontario. I don't see how he could have got around that requirement even if he'd lied to CBSA when entering Canada. My daughter, a Canadian citizen, also attends Western and they wanted proof of her eligibility for domestic tuition fees.

MarylandNed

Right - I wasn't saying that it was common. I was simply rebutting the assertion that it can't happen at all and crg's general assertion that the article I provided was a "train wreck". There's is much confusion on the whole issue of Canadians in the US (even among CBP officers), how long they can/should stay and what the penalties are for overstaying certain time limits. I thought the article did a pretty good job explaining things. I've seen many other articles that are a lot more contentious on this subject.

crg

I shouldn't have just blasted the article, but didn't want to hash it all out on my tablet. The tax stuff may be good, but I don't delve too deeply into tax laws. I'll pick out some issues with the immigration stuff:

Item: On one side, you have the immigration rule that allows Canadian visitors to the United States a maximum admission of six months.

False. Nothing in the INA or CFR says anything about 6 months for Canadians. Interestingly enough, a Mexican with a diplomatic or official passport can be admitted as a visitor like a Canadian without an I-94, but the law specifically says they only get six months (8 CFR 212.1). There's nothing in the law for Canadians though. The max period of admission for a B-2 is one year, so perhaps a Canadian could be found to be a status violator for exceeding that if caught in the US, but I have seen no cases about it. Chances are a Canadian in for that long is doing something else that makes them removable regardless of what the calendar says.

Item: Although Canadians citizens typically do not get a passport stamp or entry document that authorizes entry for a specific term, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) takes the position that Canadians citizens are deemed to be admitted for a maximum of six months.

Sketchy. Who takes this position? What is the basis of it? Has it been through an immigration court or the BIA. If it were truly law, they wouldn't have to "take the position. The law would have been cited. It wasn't because there isn't one.

Item: A person is in violation of the immigration laws if he or she does not depart the United States within the six-month limit, thereby becoming deportable and ineligible for other immigration law benefits such as a change or extension of status.

Sketchy: Refer to the prior comments about this phantom six month limit.

Item: Longer periods of overstay and “unlawful presence” can lead to a ban on subsequent re-entry that can last for up to 10 years.

Out of Context. These Canadians who didn't get a date specific admission and who were not found to be out of status by CIS (usually following a failed application) or an IJ (usually following removal proceedings) do not even accrue unlawful presence towards a bar so this item is out of place. It rarely applies.

Item: Don’t remain in the United States continuously for more than six months as a visitor.

I'm fine with this. But only because it's generally a good idea to avoid problems.

Steve_

I quoted the relevant sections of the CFR at some length. And it wasn't the janitor I spoke to.

I even asked the CBP inspector at the airport the other day in passing when I was renewing my NEXUS card. Answer: no. Not for Canadian visitors on NEXUS, not for any Canadian visitors, unless they have to limit the stay for some reason.

If Canadian visitors get I-94s then your lengthy explanation as to why that article is wrong falls apart. If they get an I-94 then it would be binding, that's the authorized period of admission.

One of the basic reasons for the whole Beyond the Border Initiative was to keep track of Canadians entering and exiting...

Have a look at the DHS statistics. Roughly 112 million admissions without an I-94 every year, roughly 4.7 million Canadians get an I-94. 3 million Canadian visitors are listed as getting an I-94. (Work-authorized categories and dependents (e.g. TN-1, H, L) are listed as 860,000 with an I-94).

I figure there must be at least 32 million Canadian visitor entries per year without an I-94 (going by population compared to Mexico, which distorts it in favour of Mexico as Canadians live nearer the border in general).

So add the two visitor figures together and you get 35 million, 3 million as a percentage is 8.6%

mmm I doubt that 91.4% of Canadian visitor arrivals are by land and sea, (in order for air travellers to routinely get one). And for that to even be possible, nobody by land or sea would ever get one. And the reality is that 35 million is maybe on the low side.

Look all I've got to tell you is that as a Canadian visitor, I've never gotten one ever, CBP have told me multiple times in multiple ways at multiple locations they don't routinely issue them and the statistics back that up.

Simple to prove me wrong, if you find them "routinely" take a screenshot of the electronic I-94 website after you enter their info and blur out the surname, DOB and part of the passport# and post it on here.

My advice would be to play the lottery more often.

Well then you have a very odd sense of humour as that was a much more trivial point.

I never said you did. I was pointing that out to Ned.

Steve_

No it's not, he doesn't mention form 8840. The whole thing about the "substantial presence test" is largely drivel anyway because of Article 4 of the tax treaty. It mentions that test, but then goes on to say if you're also resident in Canada then residency for tax purposes will be decided by closer ties.

It is actually possible to be in the US for more than 183 days and not become tax resident if you fit the criteria in the tax treaty and file an 8833 or fit in the criteria listed on 8843. But I digress.

Really I would e-mail what you just said there to him, that is a really bad article.

crg

I've managed to correct at least 2 articles. One journalist said North Korea could use VWP.

The other journalist pushed back when I called them on the claim that a mile of border wall cost as much as a billion dollars. I pointed out the entire agency budget was only 9 billion. They initially stood by their reporting. Later they contacted the Senator they had quoted. He did say a billion. The Senator's people corrected themselves and said they meant to say a million.

MarylandNed

Ok so I'm genuinely interested in this. I'm not trying to start a fight or prove anyone wrong. I really am interested in the definitive answers (assuming there are any).

What are the time limits (if any) for Canadians visiting the US (note: visiting - not on visas or TN status):

(a) in terms of immigration? Can Canadians stay as long as they like without later penalty as long as they don't end up in front of USCIS or an immigration judge before they leave the US?

(b) in terms of being deemed resident for tax purposes?

crg

I'd say there is no limit in the law for Canadians. However the max period of admission for a B being one year, a removal case could be made for someone who doesn't depart within a year, but not as an overstay. It may be seen as a failure to comply with the terms of the nonimmigrant status. That's if encountered within the US.

As for a Canadian who just completed a really long stay of let's say 2 years, there would be no penalty under the law that would kick in, but they may be viewed as an immigrant on a subsequent attempt at entry. That could lead to an expedited removal order and 5 year bar.