A US Visa in 937 Days(daniel.haxx.se)
daniel.haxx.se
A US Visa in 937 Days
https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2020/11/09/a-us-visa-in-937-days/
149 comments
I made a similar mistake waiting for my H1b. I went to the embassy in London to sort it out - didn't work, they denied a tourist visa. Had to wait it out in rented accommodation - nightmare.
Next year I'm applying for citizenship - mainly because I don't want to face GC renewal...
Reminds me of the scene in the series "Lilyhammer", where
<spoiler> a similar literal interpretation of the ESTA check list, i.e. a Norwegian police officer answering "Yes" to the question if he has ever been in contact with terrorists/terrorism, eventually causes the protagonists' witness protection bubble to be pierced through a series of unfortunate events. </spoiler>
<spoiler> a similar literal interpretation of the ESTA check list, i.e. a Norwegian police officer answering "Yes" to the question if he has ever been in contact with terrorists/terrorism, eventually causes the protagonists' witness protection bubble to be pierced through a series of unfortunate events. </spoiler>
Heh, I could have had similar experiences that I didn’t want to push (but in hindsight, the border should have taken it as a lesson to improve for COVID).
Back in the Ebola days (5 years ago?), the Canadian border entry terminals at airport would ask:
“Have you been in contact with anyone with Ebola?, Yes or No?” and I wanted some help from them, because how the hell do I know? Can barely spell the disease, let alone explain it.
Back in the Ebola days (5 years ago?), the Canadian border entry terminals at airport would ask:
“Have you been in contact with anyone with Ebola?, Yes or No?” and I wanted some help from them, because how the hell do I know? Can barely spell the disease, let alone explain it.
I had a similar experience. I was flying to the US for a job interview, so I ticked the box that said I was seeking work. I was denied and missed my flight. I've been told I will never be eligible for and ESTA again. I got the job and am now on an E-3 visa, however if I ever want to visit and don't have an E-3, I need to apply for a proper tourist visa.
Similar experience incorrectly checking the “Have you committed a crime” checkbox for the Australian ETA. They are unable to “change my response” (Department of Immigration seems to have found a use case for blockchain :) I previously lived and worked in Sydney for 3 years. Now I’m banned from using ETA for life.
Once COVID is over...if you know someone’s first name, last name, and passport number, you can fill out an online form to ban them from visiting Australia for a mere $20!
Once COVID is over...if you know someone’s first name, last name, and passport number, you can fill out an online form to ban them from visiting Australia for a mere $20!
Ahh yes! the Get-Your-Friend-To-Call-A-Congressman approach. Works like a charm every time ;)
Seeing from comments in this post this seems to be a very common approach/story. It sounds super wrong though. Why should a letter from (the office of) a congressman make such a difference all of a sudden, while the facts regarding the matter hasn't changed at all? In any society priding itself on the rule of law, this sort of process shouldn't make a difference at all, and it sounds an awful lot like personal favor currying both on the side of the congressman and on the government agency that responded to such a letter. So whoever contacted a congressman would suddenly get an edge over whoever that just stays put, while the agency could/should have done its job with the same standard for everybody. Doesn't make logical sense.
This is actually how it works. The (small) silver lining is that your friend doesn't have to be anyone particularly important, they just have to be a voter who lives in their district. I've had to go through Constituent Services a few times to get USG paperwork snarls untangled - doesn't matter if they're who I voted for or not.
It actually does work. If you have your family member's nonimmigrant US visa application denied, you can ask your congressperson to help out, and they sometimes do help.
I think every Congress member has a "constituent services" office just for matters like this.
We have some friends whose child's passport application had gotten lost in processing. Their congresswoman was able to intervene and help them get their passports in time for a vacation.
Protip: Your House representative is likely to be more responsive than your Senator. Being up for re-election every 2 years rather than every 6, House members have more incentive to directly serve their constituents.
Protip: Your House representative is likely to be more responsive than your Senator. Being up for re-election every 2 years rather than every 6, House members have more incentive to directly serve their constituents.
I concur. My citizenship application was stuck for 2 years. I sent an email to the office of Pelosi and 2 months later I was at the oath ceremony.
I think here in Canada we can ask MP (Member of Parlament) to do this. Not sure how effective is that though as I've never tried it personally.
Canadian politician offices typically have constituent services. They usually have access to MP-only phone numbers to sort out regular snafus (often immigration related). But if you’ve been caught in a systematic issue that the government created, and your MP belongs to that party, your MP is unlikely to take any action whatsoever.
You can also email the prime minister and sometimes they’ll forward it to the Minister responsible and then they have to reply. Just make sure to phrase it as a non-systemic issue when it was a systemic issue they created ;)
You can also email the prime minister and sometimes they’ll forward it to the Minister responsible and then they have to reply. Just make sure to phrase it as a non-systemic issue when it was a systemic issue they created ;)
Thank you. This is sort of revelation to me.
I spoke face to face with my MP when I was at my wits end trying to get Permanent Residency. I was working for Bell at the time, as an Engineer. I have a degree in Engineering.
My MP told me to get a job at McDonald's, Wal-Mart or Crappy Tire, because they have rubber-stamp approval for Permanent Residency, and that would be the best way. I'd just have to suck it up and earn minimum wage for 2 years.
Or be a student for four years. He had no idea how I was supposed to pay for that.
My MP told me to get a job at McDonald's, Wal-Mart or Crappy Tire, because they have rubber-stamp approval for Permanent Residency, and that would be the best way. I'd just have to suck it up and earn minimum wage for 2 years.
Or be a student for four years. He had no idea how I was supposed to pay for that.
As a natural born Canadian, I'd give you full citizenship right now if I could, only based on the fact you called "Canadian Tire" "Crappy Tire"! Well done sir! You ARE a Canadian!
Thanks! I've been here 15 years, and "Crappy Tire" might be one of the first things I picked up!
... still not a citizen though. That's a LONG process!
... still not a citizen though. That's a LONG process!
ANECDOTE:
I came to Canada at 3 years old with first generation parent immigrants in the early 90's and we all had citizenship within ~3 years (I was 6 at the time).
Things are most likely different now.
Things are most likely different now.
Thanks to McDonald's (and others) breaking all the rules and abusing immigrants, the current situation is you have to be physically inside Canada for 5 years out of 7 before you can even apply for citizenship.
And that's just to apply. The process can easily take a year or two longer. Also every day I spend outside Canada (holiday, visiting family, whatever) pushes that back.
It's a LONG process.
And that's just to apply. The process can easily take a year or two longer. Also every day I spend outside Canada (holiday, visiting family, whatever) pushes that back.
It's a LONG process.
Wrong info. Here are the actual rules from the Government site:
To be eligible to become a Canadian citizen, you must:
To be eligible to become a Canadian citizen, you must:
be a permanent resident
have lived in Canada for 3 out of the last 5 years
have filed your taxes, if you need to
pass a citizenship test
prove your language skills
Other requirements may apply.
....that, is extremely interesting.
My application in mid 2015 was denied because they received it the day after the rules changed from what you posted to what I posted.
It must have changed back in the mean time, and I've never looked into it again.
Thanks very much!
My application in mid 2015 was denied because they received it the day after the rules changed from what you posted to what I posted.
It must have changed back in the mean time, and I've never looked into it again.
Thanks very much!
Yeah, that was Mr Mike at his best. When they can't do something productive they get "tough" on immigration/crime/lap dancing/whatever other subject tickles their cockles. After him they must've changed the rules back.
Thanks again!
And because you said "ages ago" I suspect you and I have the same original passport.
And because you said "ages ago" I suspect you and I have the same original passport.
Hear hear - they get my vote for citizenship as well.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Why was it a problem to get the Permanent Residency permit while working for Bell as an Engineer?
Simply having a good job is not enough, there is no "stream" for that. I was on a 2 year working holiday visa for that job, and when the visa ran out I was done.
.. eventually though I convinced Bell and the Province I was living in to run me through the "Provincial Nominee" stream, which required TONS of paperwork to prove that no Canadian was willing or able to do the job, and therefore they needed a foreigner like me. That took 2 years of paperwork, interviews, medical tests and background checks and being saddled to that job before I finally got it.
.. eventually though I convinced Bell and the Province I was living in to run me through the "Provincial Nominee" stream, which required TONS of paperwork to prove that no Canadian was willing or able to do the job, and therefore they needed a foreigner like me. That took 2 years of paperwork, interviews, medical tests and background checks and being saddled to that job before I finally got it.
This makes me feel better about dealing with the staff at the office instead of ever hearing from the MP themself.
Though I did email an MP about how Bell was trying to destroy Teksavvy and out lacklustre telecom competition (my DSL line was stuck at 1mbps...). Their office responded that our MP was a retired Bell linesman and Bell’s competitors use poorer quality lines.
I guess Bell was good to him at the expense of their customers...
Though I did email an MP about how Bell was trying to destroy Teksavvy and out lacklustre telecom competition (my DSL line was stuck at 1mbps...). Their office responded that our MP was a retired Bell linesman and Bell’s competitors use poorer quality lines.
I guess Bell was good to him at the expense of their customers...
Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. My neighbour's work permit was stuck in limbo pre-covid. On my advice, she contacted our Liberal party MP, and although the MP signed off on a letter asking for it to be expedited, IRCC basically told her to pound sand. It still took an unreasonably long time to arrive, pretty much what they guaranteed.
I still think it would have been worse without the letter, and at least it helped my neighbour's spirits. She comes from a part of the world where nothing happens without a bribe, and even then it ain't very effective.
I still think it would have been worse without the letter, and at least it helped my neighbour's spirits. She comes from a part of the world where nothing happens without a bribe, and even then it ain't very effective.
My wife applied for a renewed US passport 8 months before an international trip. 7 months and dozens of calls, emails and letters later, we had no response besides "we are busy and can't tell you when we will be done, but it will not be sooner than a month."
My mother recommended that we contact our local congressperson, David Price. I was extremely doubtful that anything would come of it. We had never had any contact of any kind with him or anyone who knows him before. We are not wealthy or have any special status. We wrote an email to his office, two days later his office called us to tell us that they had contacted the passport agency, and the next day fedex delivered a renewed passport that had been overnighted to us.
I did some research and this is actually pretty common. If you want something like a phone call or letter of inquiry to a federal agency, congresspeople are generally happy to do it because it's easy to do and generates goodwill.
My mother recommended that we contact our local congressperson, David Price. I was extremely doubtful that anything would come of it. We had never had any contact of any kind with him or anyone who knows him before. We are not wealthy or have any special status. We wrote an email to his office, two days later his office called us to tell us that they had contacted the passport agency, and the next day fedex delivered a renewed passport that had been overnighted to us.
I did some research and this is actually pretty common. If you want something like a phone call or letter of inquiry to a federal agency, congresspeople are generally happy to do it because it's easy to do and generates goodwill.
Same deal with state agencies in my experience. My mom (unsurprisingly) had issues with unemployment earlier this year, she'd worked 1099 and W-2 jobs in multiple states so determining eligibility was taking forever. One call to her state rep and it was all cleared up within a week.
Another anecdote. I was at one point working in the US and had applied for status renewal. I was at a point where if I did not get the approval in 20 days I would have to stop working (after waiting for 5 months already). I reached out to my local congressperson - doubtful they might help me, a non citizen. Lo and behold, I got a letter back from the congress person and renewal in 2 weeks.
If you’re a foreigner attempting to visit the US, you do not have a representative to contact.
Not sure why you’re downvoted because it’s very true. What do you do then?
Maybe I should have said “local congressperson”? You could technically contact a “representative” at the US embassy.
Great to hear this worked out! In general the offices of your local representative do try to resolve issues - it is their job, and it is good PR.
As to renewing a passport, I just always pay up for a service that takes care of it for me. Less risk. I once got a new passport and a China visa in 5 days, but it did cost $600.
As to renewing a passport, I just always pay up for a service that takes care of it for me. Less risk. I once got a new passport and a China visa in 5 days, but it did cost $600.
If the article creates the impression that contacting the congressperson is an "unusually well connected person pulling strings," that's the wrong impression.
Anyone in the US can contact their congressperson & this is the typical course of redress if one is stuck in a process run by the federal government or having some issue with the federal government. A family member did it once to get a passport application expedited for a trip, it's not unusual.
Anyone in the US can contact their congressperson & this is the typical course of redress if one is stuck in a process run by the federal government or having some issue with the federal government. A family member did it once to get a passport application expedited for a trip, it's not unusual.
Except if you only want to visit the US as a tourist, and you don't necessarily have acquaintances there who are willing to contact their congressperson on your behalf, then I guess you're screwed. Have to remember to be extra careful which boxes I tick when (or if) I visit next time. But hey, there are lots of other interesting (and more welcoming) countries in the world...
Many people who need visas to travel to the US are not current in the US and do not have a congressperson...
This is what we did for my family's visa issues. We wrote them a letter and they fixed it. Calling us with updates along the way. Also worked with VA benefits too..
US Senator in my case, but yes this is now how it works. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23942466
I visited the US 12 times if I count correctly. It was nice, but I seriously hope I'll never be tempted again. How deep can you sink to deal with such a defunct state? Others deserve my money more. If you travel often it's inevitable that some day you fill in some contradicting details just because you don't remember everything, you make a stupid mistake or you interpret some field differently than a couple of years ago. Their algorithms will conclude you are giving false information and the result can be seen in this blog post.
That is a country that is not interested in innovators. Good luck with that, USA. The economy is not based on sheer brute force anymore.
It seems to me that you got rejected because you applied for a tourist VISA, but your travels were business related. In that case I think you should have applied for a business VISA instead.
Nonetheless, what happened is quite upsetting. I am not sure if I ever go to the US given how they treat tourists. For me it's not worth to be degraded in such a way only to see things that probably exist or look similar in other countries.
He didn't get rejected for a visa. He got rejected for an ESTA. Travel on visa waiver is explicitly allowed for business meetings, as long as you're not travelling for "productive work" (meetings where you receive instructions are fine).
He was denied the right to travel. As you wrote yourself, business stuff is a grey area and perhaps something got triggered.
Business stuff is not at all a grey area. From the ESTA application website, appropriate use includes "You plan to travel to the United States for business or pleasure."
Meetings are fine. You'll note the visa he was approved for is a tourist visa. Which is also fine for the same use - given it was approved with the use of an invitation letter from his employer.
You need to say something very dumb to a border guard to get denied on the basis of exceeding the allowed use of the visa waiver, but if you do, you'd get turned away then and there, not rejected at the airport the next time.
"Something" certainly got triggered, but it's highly unlikely to have been about going for business meetings.
My guess would be that something got messed up with his previous departure, such as e.g. failing to register that he left on time, as that is one of the things that would pretty much instantly disqualify you from future visa free travel. I almost got into trouble for that myself with visa waivers (though pre-ESTA). The main reason I wasn't denied re-entry was that I was still within the 90 day window of the previous entry, so I provably hadn't overstayed, and they could see I had about a dozen or so short stays that made it very obvious it was a mistake. But that was in person, with someone manually looking through my passport stamps - I'm not at all sure it'd have gone as well today with automated pre-flight checks.
Meetings are fine. You'll note the visa he was approved for is a tourist visa. Which is also fine for the same use - given it was approved with the use of an invitation letter from his employer.
You need to say something very dumb to a border guard to get denied on the basis of exceeding the allowed use of the visa waiver, but if you do, you'd get turned away then and there, not rejected at the airport the next time.
"Something" certainly got triggered, but it's highly unlikely to have been about going for business meetings.
My guess would be that something got messed up with his previous departure, such as e.g. failing to register that he left on time, as that is one of the things that would pretty much instantly disqualify you from future visa free travel. I almost got into trouble for that myself with visa waivers (though pre-ESTA). The main reason I wasn't denied re-entry was that I was still within the 90 day window of the previous entry, so I provably hadn't overstayed, and they could see I had about a dozen or so short stays that made it very obvious it was a mistake. But that was in person, with someone manually looking through my passport stamps - I'm not at all sure it'd have gone as well today with automated pre-flight checks.
Thank you!
> There’s no end in sight of the pandemic. I will of course not travel to the US or any other country until it can be deemed safe and sensible.
With the "of course" I am wondering if people are really concerned about being "COVID shamed"?
Aren't we at "rapid test and move on"? As in, take a test one to two days before you board a flight, take a test during or after your trip? Results in 18 - 48 hours? It is a far cry from the mess of unavailable tests and the infinite delays if you managed to get a test that was occurring back in Spring and Summer.
And no, some false negatives aren't a rebuttal. All public policy measures are to get the R0 below 1 on average. The rapid tests in conjunction with the already existing measures are good enough for that. All we are doing here is skipping the need for 14 day quarantines on arrival.
Granted, he is 50, and is more likely to consider himself an at risk group. I was still wondering what he really thinks.
It really depends on what you are optimizing for. If you are optimizing more for not getting it, nothing has changed. If you are optimizing more for not spreading it, a lot has changed.
With the "of course" I am wondering if people are really concerned about being "COVID shamed"?
Aren't we at "rapid test and move on"? As in, take a test one to two days before you board a flight, take a test during or after your trip? Results in 18 - 48 hours? It is a far cry from the mess of unavailable tests and the infinite delays if you managed to get a test that was occurring back in Spring and Summer.
And no, some false negatives aren't a rebuttal. All public policy measures are to get the R0 below 1 on average. The rapid tests in conjunction with the already existing measures are good enough for that. All we are doing here is skipping the need for 14 day quarantines on arrival.
Granted, he is 50, and is more likely to consider himself an at risk group. I was still wondering what he really thinks.
It really depends on what you are optimizing for. If you are optimizing more for not getting it, nothing has changed. If you are optimizing more for not spreading it, a lot has changed.
It's not about being "COVID shamed" (first time i hear that term), it's more about not getting infected in your high risk destination country. In particular the US have a reputation for having many non mask-wearing citizens. Not sure if that is still accurate, but that's the impression.
I think this comment is perfectly valid POV that should be compatible with polite discourse; unfortunately despite recent developments we still live in a highly polarized society where merely tipping one's toe into an argument seized by one of the two sides taints the whole message. (context: instant downvote of parent post; Sorry for this meta-rant, I have some karma to pay for it)
> Aren't we at "rapid test and move on"?
Maybe in your country - in my country we don't even know if people will be able to visit their parents on Christmas day.
And the meeting the author wanted to attend was several years ago, so it's not like he has anything vital to do in the US any more. Why go to the hassle when the US will be there in a year or two anyway?
Maybe in your country - in my country we don't even know if people will be able to visit their parents on Christmas day.
And the meeting the author wanted to attend was several years ago, so it's not like he has anything vital to do in the US any more. Why go to the hassle when the US will be there in a year or two anyway?
The problem is that taking the test before air travel or right after the arrival at the destination is like playing the Russian roulette. For example in my country you can take a COVID tests but:
1. you might need to wait for results for 4-5 days, while most destinations require taking it at most 72 hours before the arrival
2. if you turn out to be asymptomatic, but test positive, then you instantly get into at least 10 day quarantine (you cannot take tests anonymously). You have no time to cancel your travel plans.
Also, if you choose not do do it, but instead take test at your destination, you might get stuck in quarantine in the foreign country
So I would never travel to a country that requires tests. Only those which require just written statement, or location form, and maybe temperature check.
1. you might need to wait for results for 4-5 days, while most destinations require taking it at most 72 hours before the arrival
2. if you turn out to be asymptomatic, but test positive, then you instantly get into at least 10 day quarantine (you cannot take tests anonymously). You have no time to cancel your travel plans.
Also, if you choose not do do it, but instead take test at your destination, you might get stuck in quarantine in the foreign country
So I would never travel to a country that requires tests. Only those which require just written statement, or location form, and maybe temperature check.
> 1. you might need to wait for results for 4-5 days, while most destinations require taking it at most 72 hours before the arrival
It is easy to get in this circumstance in the US, it is also easy to not get in this circumstance in the US.
Huge range of service level. Money helps!
It is easy to get in this circumstance in the US, it is also easy to not get in this circumstance in the US.
Huge range of service level. Money helps!
Availability of testing in the US is still atrocious relative to what our resources should be able to support. Inconsistent, unavailable, overbooked.
That's true of everything in the US because it is uniquely in a position of having the resources to do anything, but leadership and consensus are the only things preventing it.
Its not that the consensus doesn't have its merits sometimes, it is just a unique position to be in where the infinite resources and infrastructure are available.
Its not that the consensus doesn't have its merits sometimes, it is just a unique position to be in where the infinite resources and infrastructure are available.
The (small-d) democratic consensus seems pretty strongly in favor of more intervention and aid in this crisis but the Senate is holding it up. It’s a failure in leadership in that they’re not helping the country but it’s also pretty clear that they are actively choosing not to.
> Aren't we at "rapid test and move on"?
Personally I wouldn't take a transatlantic flight at the moment simply because I don't want to be infected on the flight itself.
I haven't seen any figures for flight infection risk, so I'm left with intuition. And my intuition says it's a small metal box with recirculating air, filled densely with people for 8+ hours, almost all of whom have not met before and won't meet again.
I wouldn't mix with people like that on the ground at the moment even with the windows open, so I'm not enthused about doing it in the air.
Personally I wouldn't take a transatlantic flight at the moment simply because I don't want to be infected on the flight itself.
I haven't seen any figures for flight infection risk, so I'm left with intuition. And my intuition says it's a small metal box with recirculating air, filled densely with people for 8+ hours, almost all of whom have not met before and won't meet again.
I wouldn't mix with people like that on the ground at the moment even with the windows open, so I'm not enthused about doing it in the air.
That's wise and long flight really pushes the limits of acceptability. You shouldn't trust the airlines or other people, or the distancing / testing measures they employ before being there.
I personally think about the viral load, which I think isn't well researched.
My intuition is that the measures currently in play help reduce the viral load well enough. Flight attendants are decently vigilant about enforcing mask wearing or have been enough so that the threat of them enforcing it is real enough, even with the glaring exceptions for food service.
So that means exposure is likely, but too much exposure is mitigated in a variety of ways. If you want to totally avoid exposure at all, you should not fly, just as it has been.
If you want to take your chance, and focus more so on not spreading it further, trying to help keep your local R0 below 1, then I think it this is very practical.
I personally think about the viral load, which I think isn't well researched.
My intuition is that the measures currently in play help reduce the viral load well enough. Flight attendants are decently vigilant about enforcing mask wearing or have been enough so that the threat of them enforcing it is real enough, even with the glaring exceptions for food service.
So that means exposure is likely, but too much exposure is mitigated in a variety of ways. If you want to totally avoid exposure at all, you should not fly, just as it has been.
If you want to take your chance, and focus more so on not spreading it further, trying to help keep your local R0 below 1, then I think it this is very practical.
[deleted](1)
You did not run in trouble with
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_Waiver_Program#Visa_Waive...
right? If you are going to work meetings it seems that should be OK.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_Waiver_Program#Visa_Waive...
right? If you are going to work meetings it seems that should be OK.
The initial ESTA denials DO seem connected to the visa waiver program, and yes, work meetings are allowed under that, at least in my case, where I'm working for a foreign subsidiary of a US company, and have occasional meetings at the US headquarters. I don't know whether there is/was a Mozilla Sweden, and whether the absence of one would make a difference.
If you've never had to deal with the US immigration apparatus, think "Google customer service, backed with nuclear weapons".
If you've never had to deal with the US immigration apparatus, think "Google customer service, backed with nuclear weapons".
One thing we get told very strongly when we travel to US for intra-company meetings is to be sure to describe them as business meetings, not work meetings. "Work" is basically a keyword for the customs official to give you a bad day.
Knowing the right words to use or not use is very useful when crossing borders (and probably when talking to powerful officials generally). One strategy is to use the least specific language you can that's still truthful.
For example, I've heard of developers get turned away at the border because they began by saying they were "speaking at a conference/giving a workshop" and noting they were being paid or having their expenses covered as if that makes it more legitimate. Instead, you'd start by saying you're "attending a conference." This is something border officials encounter 1000 times a day and will rarely question further.
Likewise, if you're planning to record a podcast or take some photos at a conference, you don't mention that unless asked specifically because otherwise it puts them on the track of treating you like a member of the "foreign media" and demanding the relevant visa for that when it's really not relevant for most people doing such things as a side effect of their attendance.
For example, I've heard of developers get turned away at the border because they began by saying they were "speaking at a conference/giving a workshop" and noting they were being paid or having their expenses covered as if that makes it more legitimate. Instead, you'd start by saying you're "attending a conference." This is something border officials encounter 1000 times a day and will rarely question further.
Likewise, if you're planning to record a podcast or take some photos at a conference, you don't mention that unless asked specifically because otherwise it puts them on the track of treating you like a member of the "foreign media" and demanding the relevant visa for that when it's really not relevant for most people doing such things as a side effect of their attendance.
The key difference is whether you are paid in US for whatever you do. If it is a business meeting, you do not earn any income in US (your pay is in your home country). If it is work, it means that you are getting paid in US for something you are going to do here. Work visas need one of H or L categories ( or maybe something else). Business visas are the B1. The wording is ambiguous and not friendly to anyone (even to native English speakers), but that is government bureaucracy for you.
Particularly important to remember for programmers, who probably have a natural inclination to prefer to characterize what they do as "work" rather than "meetings".
Same thing traveling to the UK or Australia.
Last time I filled out the UK application, I could not find their definition of "work" or "business",
Last time I filled out the UK application, I could not find their definition of "work" or "business",
The entire thing started exactly because he was refused travel with ESTA/visa waiver back in 2017.
Quick and unofficial poll... How many here are in the same or similar position?
I have the opposite experience in that I'm an American who has lived in the UK and have had visa issues in that direction.
At some point my visa was expiring and I applied for a new one, but my application was rejected. So I left the country under my own volition.
For the next two years, I visited the UK regularly (6 times total) for 2-4 week stints to see my longtime girlfriend, friends, and perform various activities related to a business I started with a friend in the UK (I had lived in the UK for 6 years).
The most recent time I tried to visit the UK, I was visiting my girlfriend before Christmas for two weeks. Already had an onward flight to the US booked for two weeks after my arrival, on an airline + route I had flown quite frequently. That is to say: none of the circumstances were different than all the other times I had visited the UK in the past two years.
This time, however, I was denied entry and held in detention for nearly 18 hours, having to book a same day flight back to the states (because my existing onward flight was out of a different airport and could not rebook).
My only crime was that when they denied a visa application, I left when they asked me to (which is another story about how hard they actually made it for me to leave in the first place).
---
On the other hand, my British girlfriend just got an ESTA to come visit me in the states. She had to stay in Mexico for two weeks as she was coming from Europe, but she's here now.
At some point my visa was expiring and I applied for a new one, but my application was rejected. So I left the country under my own volition.
For the next two years, I visited the UK regularly (6 times total) for 2-4 week stints to see my longtime girlfriend, friends, and perform various activities related to a business I started with a friend in the UK (I had lived in the UK for 6 years).
The most recent time I tried to visit the UK, I was visiting my girlfriend before Christmas for two weeks. Already had an onward flight to the US booked for two weeks after my arrival, on an airline + route I had flown quite frequently. That is to say: none of the circumstances were different than all the other times I had visited the UK in the past two years.
This time, however, I was denied entry and held in detention for nearly 18 hours, having to book a same day flight back to the states (because my existing onward flight was out of a different airport and could not rebook).
My only crime was that when they denied a visa application, I left when they asked me to (which is another story about how hard they actually made it for me to leave in the first place).
---
On the other hand, my British girlfriend just got an ESTA to come visit me in the states. She had to stay in Mexico for two weeks as she was coming from Europe, but she's here now.
My partner is trying to get a tourism visa to go visit the US with me. They aren't even doing in person interviews at all. Who knows when she'll be able to get a visa.
Interestingly, the site where you schedule an in person interview says she can go November 26th... next year
Interestingly, the site where you schedule an in person interview says she can go November 26th... next year
I am not - I am a US citizen. Fortunately, all the countries I have ever attempted to travel to have been extremely accommodating about providing a visa, or (in many cases) not even requiring one. I hope that generous attitude continues.
Europe is rolling out its ESTA equivalent (“ETIAS”). It’ll probably be a cake-walk for US citizens aware that they need to apply for it, and know to avoid the scam sites charging 5-10x to forward your application. The scam sites are already running so they can have max SEO on launch day.
I'm from Denmark and had to get a visa because I have been in Iran. It was rather easy and took two months or so.
So this processes only concluded because he got a friend who got their congressman to intervene. Otherwise it would have likely gone on forever.
"Why can't we have more immigrants from places like Norway?"
Why would someone from Norway want to immigrate to the USA. That’s like immigrating from a gated community to the ghetto.
Exactly why I left northern europe for the USA. I find real and metaphorocal gated communities unbearably suffocating.
Sounds properly kafkaesque. Being stuck in bureaucracy is my 2nd biggest realistic fear. (after dying while riding my bike in the US)
It appears as though getting the congressperson involved might've helped. It is nice to see that people can actually get in touch with their congressperson here in the US. A sign that democracy does somewhat work as intended.
Anecdotally, since Trump took office, the processing times for visa/EAD went up by 50%-ish in my peer group. Visa rejections for H1B also went up hugely among those who appear super qualified. 2 Friends' H1b was rejected for Data Science roles at a FANG despite having a CS/Comp Math major from Stanford and another having studied Information systems at another top 10 US-CS school.
It appears as though getting the congressperson involved might've helped. It is nice to see that people can actually get in touch with their congressperson here in the US. A sign that democracy does somewhat work as intended.
Anecdotally, since Trump took office, the processing times for visa/EAD went up by 50%-ish in my peer group. Visa rejections for H1B also went up hugely among those who appear super qualified. 2 Friends' H1b was rejected for Data Science roles at a FANG despite having a CS/Comp Math major from Stanford and another having studied Information systems at another top 10 US-CS school.
'we want people to come here LEGALLY in BIG NUMBERS like NEVER BEFORE' /s
to be fair to both sides:
He did propose a merit based H1b draw, which is stuck in processing. He also made it a lot harder for exploitative body shops like TCS/Infosys to get get approved for an H1b, making it easier for qualified unicorn/FANG-esque companies with real demand to get picked in the lottery.
He did propose a merit based H1b draw, which is stuck in processing. He also made it a lot harder for exploitative body shops like TCS/Infosys to get get approved for an H1b, making it easier for qualified unicorn/FANG-esque companies with real demand to get picked in the lottery.
> I switched approach and instead applied for a tourist visa. I paid 160 USD, filled in a ridiculous amount of information about me and my past travels over the last 15 years and I visited the US embassy for an in-person interview and fingerprinting.
Imagine repeat this process every year... as an international student.
Imagine repeat this process every year... as an international student.
I’ve thought about automating this process with a Chrome extension or puppeteer.
that's one hell of a gamble to shave off a few minutes per year
The tourist visa is good for 10 years IIRC
Each visa type has a different duration, and you can't study on a tourist visa.
I've had a visa that allowed me to work for 3+ years in the US, but was valid only for 90 days. Every time I left the country I had to renew it, a process which takes an indeterminate amount of time.
I've had a visa that allowed me to work for 3+ years in the US, but was valid only for 90 days. Every time I left the country I had to renew it, a process which takes an indeterminate amount of time.
Depends on a country, most is 10 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_policy_of_the_United_Stat...
you can't use tourist visa to enter the US and attend college/grad school.
The 10 year VISA he received does not imply he cannot be denied entry at the border anyway. I had a VISA like that and was almost denied entry once.
People seem to generally not understand how borders work. In most countries you are allowed to enter ENTIRELY at the discretion of the border control agent. If they don't like the look of you, don't like your name, find something they think is suspicious, are in a bad mood or are being ridden by their boss, they can turn you around and put you on the next plane home, regardless of what bit of paper you're holding.
There are obvious exceptions for citizen and diplomats, but that's generally how it works.
There are obvious exceptions for citizen and diplomats, but that's generally how it works.
Each country provides their own guidelines to border officers. How clear these are and how closely they are followed varies from country to country. Just because one country's officers apparently deny people entry on a whim doesn't mean that's what happens everywhere.
I was being a bit flippant but the fact is that you're always relying on the decision of the front line employee. Of course there are guidelines and decisions sometimes travel up the management chain, but the attitude of the first officer you meet can dictate the outcome.
Here's an example: You decide spontaneously to travel to the UK from the US after having finishing a grueling contract. Your travel plans are a bit vague because of the short notice. You work on your CV on the flight with a view to your next job.
The border control officer finds your lack of detailed travel plans suspicious. He decides to carry out a search of your luggage and finds your CV. He claims you are coming to the UK to seek work. You protest but you have no evidence to the contrary.
You're refused entry and you will now find it difficult to enter the UK for at least 10 years. You can expect to spend 3 or more hours at the UK border each time you try to enter.
Or, alternatively, none of this happens and instead the officer has a laugh with you about disorganised trips overseas and waves you in.
These sorts of scenarios are very common. People should be aware of the peril of crossing borders and be informed and well organised.
Here's an example: You decide spontaneously to travel to the UK from the US after having finishing a grueling contract. Your travel plans are a bit vague because of the short notice. You work on your CV on the flight with a view to your next job.
The border control officer finds your lack of detailed travel plans suspicious. He decides to carry out a search of your luggage and finds your CV. He claims you are coming to the UK to seek work. You protest but you have no evidence to the contrary.
You're refused entry and you will now find it difficult to enter the UK for at least 10 years. You can expect to spend 3 or more hours at the UK border each time you try to enter.
Or, alternatively, none of this happens and instead the officer has a laugh with you about disorganised trips overseas and waves you in.
These sorts of scenarios are very common. People should be aware of the peril of crossing borders and be informed and well organised.
Sure, I just wanted to point out that other places seem to have a much higher bar for denying entry to visa holders. A lot of the anecdotes in this thread would probably make the news if it happened in Australia, but seem to be unremarkable occurrences in the US.
I had a work visa, and almost got denied entry two times. They were questioning if i was qualified for the work i was hired to do. I already had my visa renewed two times at that point so i had been to the embassy for interview and document checking already. The CPB guy was being a jerk.
Correct. That VISA merely gives you right to be on the plane and speak to the border control after landing.
And the chance to litigate it, since denying entry or a Visa is reviewable by court, while an ESTA is not.
Most countries probably favour the government in decisions about the former, but it at least means you can force them to give up more details (e.g. FOIA).
Most countries probably favour the government in decisions about the former, but it at least means you can force them to give up more details (e.g. FOIA).
What happened in your case?
It is better than an ESTA, though. It has some rights attached to it. Though I wonder if the immigration agent will find it suspicious that he has a Visa when he could "simply" get an ESTA. Might hassle him on entries.
A VISA (credit card) won't be of any use, you need a visa (in your passport). SCNR...
Nightmare fuel. My partner is trying to get a visitor's visa to come to the US with me. I pay taxes to my government so that my government can keep my partner from visiting me. It's a great system.
It truly is ridiculous that we are forced at gunpoint (through taxes) to give our hard-earned money to an organization that too often actively works against our interests. I feel like the only way to ethically tax people would be have a process to enable taxpayers opt-out of funding with their tax dollars government programs they have a strong moral or personal disagreement with. For example, I would be too happy to fund schools, poverty relief efforts and infrastructure but it sickens me to think that money is being taken from my paycheck to fund pointless wars, genocidal racist thugs and immigration policy that is both racist and destructive to our economy. If financial contributions are a form of free speech, is not the forced usage of my tax dollars for these morally abhorrent equivalent to a law requiring me to purchase display an I <3 ICE bumper sticker on my car?
It seems with enough money you can get a U.S. visa, work permit, etc.
Hardly unique to America, tons of countries offer "Golden Visas" where committing enough resources to the country gets you an expedited or guaranteed Visa. The exact amount and details depend on the country, with richer countries obviously costing more, but tons of countries will straight up let you buy residency or citizenship. A few examples:
America - $900,000 investment for permanent residency (EB5)
Ireland - €1.0 million investment (plus €2.0 million net worth) for permanent residency for your family
Portugal - purchase and renovate at least €350,000 in property for residency, with an expedited path to citizenship
Germany - €360,000 investment for 3 year residency with a path to citizenship after 8 years
UK - £2 million investment for 3 year residency with a path to citizenship after 6 years.
America - $900,000 investment for permanent residency (EB5)
Ireland - €1.0 million investment (plus €2.0 million net worth) for permanent residency for your family
Portugal - purchase and renovate at least €350,000 in property for residency, with an expedited path to citizenship
Germany - €360,000 investment for 3 year residency with a path to citizenship after 8 years
UK - £2 million investment for 3 year residency with a path to citizenship after 6 years.
If you ever need a proof that only money matters in this world. All the rest are empty words. Kids, dont pay attention to anyone who tells you otherwise.
You can also just get a "professional" job in said country and move there under the same or similar conditions. The application for an employment visa to move to Germany from South Africa took about a week to get approved.
Be careful with the kind of visa you get. I suppose the Germans are OK (but then again Germany is bureaucratic as fuck), if you visa is too restrictive you will be not better than a golden caged indentured servant. I am talking from experience here, I will never accept a long term contract in a country unless: A) A clear and straightforward path to legal residency is in place. B) I dont lose my chance of point A just because my employer decides to "downsize me".
With a few exceptions, having a “professional” job is just a proxy for future money. As an engineer, the primary benefit that I could bring any country is the economic value of my labor. The fact that I could get a visa approved much faster than a service worker is purely down to economic reasoning.
The one exception to this rule would be medical personnel. Every country needs doctors and nurses to keep the population healthy. Their labor has direct human value that’s not entirely reflected economically.
The one exception to this rule would be medical personnel. Every country needs doctors and nurses to keep the population healthy. Their labor has direct human value that’s not entirely reflected economically.
This is true of almost any country. It's usually a loophole in the form of foreign direct investment (ie. "invest $1M+ and employ at least 5 Americans and you and your family can come here").
Charitably put, there are two definitions of ‘merit’ in merit-based entry.
I would love to know what's actually happening in these situations. Is there just a backlog of PDFs sitting on some server and there's only 2 guys going through it? Is there a command from Washington to only process N visas per day? What's literally happening here?
What exactly are they doing when they put your application in "administrative processing" for years with no explanation or time estimate? What could possibly take years to process on a standard visa application? Does anyone know?
It can get stuck between departments.
US Visas bounce around between security services (Homeland Security, FBI, DoD/NSA), immigration, and State/NVC. These other departments can flag any visa for additional scrutiny.
When excessive delays like this occur it is often a security flag, because then it has to go back to the origin agency and even the department within that originally created the flag to decide if it is a valid match to this individual (and or the facts are correct).
Keep in mind that the other departments handling this, it isn't their primary responsibility. They're dealing daily with e.g. terrorist threats, drug trafficking, or similar threats/violations. Nobody is interested in prioritizing State's visa processing (of which they receive many).
Plus the people or department who created the original match could no longer exist/work there, and now the request is bouncing between different departments with nobody wanting to take responsibility for it.
PS - Just to be clear I'm not defending this. It is a giant mess and hugely dysfunctional. But to understand why something can get stuck in "administrative processing" for years, you have to realize how deep this rabbit hole goes.
US Visas bounce around between security services (Homeland Security, FBI, DoD/NSA), immigration, and State/NVC. These other departments can flag any visa for additional scrutiny.
When excessive delays like this occur it is often a security flag, because then it has to go back to the origin agency and even the department within that originally created the flag to decide if it is a valid match to this individual (and or the facts are correct).
Keep in mind that the other departments handling this, it isn't their primary responsibility. They're dealing daily with e.g. terrorist threats, drug trafficking, or similar threats/violations. Nobody is interested in prioritizing State's visa processing (of which they receive many).
Plus the people or department who created the original match could no longer exist/work there, and now the request is bouncing between different departments with nobody wanting to take responsibility for it.
PS - Just to be clear I'm not defending this. It is a giant mess and hugely dysfunctional. But to understand why something can get stuck in "administrative processing" for years, you have to realize how deep this rabbit hole goes.
I didn't see any defending. Maybe these departments are understaffed.
It's like a bug ticket. Unless there is a rule (law) that they must be fixed by a certain time, they'll just become forgotten.
Reading this made me glad to be Canadian as we are the only nation that doesn't require visas to enter the United States.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_requirements_for_Canadian...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_requirements_for_Canadian...
Actually, Bermudians can as well :)
Forgot about Bermuda.
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/tourism-...
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/tourism-...
This is very strange. In Israel all citizens are required to issue a tourist visa before traveling to the US. The process is super quick. The embassy have a website that updates you on each step in the process and from applying until you get the actual visa it can take only 3 weeks. The only busy times are usually in summer months where many tourists want to issue visas, so waiting for the in person interview can be up to a month. But again, from the interview to getting the actual the visa is a matter of days.
He’s swedish, so he enters under the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative which doesn’t require a visa, but usually requires an ESTA.
An ESTA is not a visa (otherwise the US could lose its reciprocal visa-free travel arrangements). The ESTA just walks, talks and quacks like a visa.
An ESTA is not a visa (otherwise the US could lose its reciprocal visa-free travel arrangements). The ESTA just walks, talks and quacks like a visa.
Note that their is a distinction. While arguably even the ESTA is too much paperwork compared to what US citizens going the other way under these visa-free agreements face, it's a short form you fill out online that gets automatically approved within 12 hours for 95% of cases. It's when you get denied for this system (and yes, this can be for arbitrary reasons which they won't disclose), that things go wrong. It would not surprise me if the logic went "owns domain haxx + curl is used in hacker tools (and many many more legitimate uses, but some agent doesn't care)", "possible hacker", "put on list that causes ESTA denials".
This reminds me of the articles I read about COVID-19 tests that took 19 days for results to come back. If it takes that long to get results back, the results are pretty much useless. Sure, in the end he got a visa, but his original travel plans are long gone.
If the backlog is so long, there should be a lottery system to ensure that at least some results are timely. Alas, government processes rarely have any logic applied.
If the backlog is so long, there should be a lottery system to ensure that at least some results are timely. Alas, government processes rarely have any logic applied.
This is grim and might portend reciprocal issues.
I had missed that the ETIAS start date has been pushed back to end of 2022.
As an American citizen I've taken it for granted that I can book a flight to Germany when a $200 mistake fare comes up and fly, like, within 24 hours, with no immigration preapproval required. I'm not going understand how much I miss that until it's gone.
Hard to imagine there won't be bureaucratic snafus where Americans are inexplicably denied an ETIAS and will expect to apply for a paper tourist visa to visit Europe, weeks or months in advance of travel.
I had missed that the ETIAS start date has been pushed back to end of 2022.
As an American citizen I've taken it for granted that I can book a flight to Germany when a $200 mistake fare comes up and fly, like, within 24 hours, with no immigration preapproval required. I'm not going understand how much I miss that until it's gone.
Hard to imagine there won't be bureaucratic snafus where Americans are inexplicably denied an ETIAS and will expect to apply for a paper tourist visa to visit Europe, weeks or months in advance of travel.
Each ETIAS will be 5 EUR and good for 5y. Edit: current plans is 3 years for 7 EUR. and it expires with your passport. It hasn’t launched and price has doubled!
The annoying thing is that every visa-free country is going in this direction.
I’m sure it will trip up Americans the most when it launches.
The other issue with ETIAS is that there are a lot of dual EU/xx citizens out there travelling on their xx passport. Technically they won’t be eligible for ETIAS.
I have a lot of family born... in a country that no longer exists. Dunno if ETIAS will bark because they didn’t get their EU passport from its successor EU country.
The annoying thing is that every visa-free country is going in this direction.
I’m sure it will trip up Americans the most when it launches.
The other issue with ETIAS is that there are a lot of dual EU/xx citizens out there travelling on their xx passport. Technically they won’t be eligible for ETIAS.
I have a lot of family born... in a country that no longer exists. Dunno if ETIAS will bark because they didn’t get their EU passport from its successor EU country.
This happened to me as well, but I "only" had to wait a year (and it only got fixed once we got a US Senator involved). Full story here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23942466
While the US visa is $160, it means you get to save on a pile of $14 ESTA applications :)
I’m not 100% sure how this works, but when OP renews their passport, they might need to keep their old passport because the visa is still valid, ie: travel with old and new passport. Not sure if the US works that way.
I’m not 100% sure how this works, but when OP renews their passport, they might need to keep their old passport because the visa is still valid, ie: travel with old and new passport. Not sure if the US works that way.
You can use the visa in the old passport but it must not be damaged. Some countries will punch a whole right through the old passport to invalidate it (thus damaging the still-valid visas), so you have to persuade them not to do that.
I think US citizens should lose the Visa-free travel arrangements in most countries. It's supposed to be reciprocal but the ESTA is a Visa, it walks, talks and quacks like one. If it's denied, there's no real recourse and the process is completely opaque...
Obviously, it's not in the interest of most countries to do that but it's really infuriating how something like ESTA was created to abuse the spirit of the reciprocal visa free agreements while sticking to the letter of the agreements.
Obviously, it's not in the interest of most countries to do that but it's really infuriating how something like ESTA was created to abuse the spirit of the reciprocal visa free agreements while sticking to the letter of the agreements.
> It's supposed to be reciprocal but the ESTA is a Visa
The thing is that, other countries looked at the US and instead of making US honour the reciprocal agreements, they reciprocated by creating non-visa visas of their own. Now, Canada has eTA, Asutralia has ETA, New Zealand has NZeTA, Schengen area is rolling out ETIAS, ...
So yes, there was a brief period of time when visa waivers became non-reciprocal. Now the reciprocity has been restored, but not to what it was before, instead to a new normal. We as the citizens are worse off and the governments have more power in this new normal.
The thing is that, other countries looked at the US and instead of making US honour the reciprocal agreements, they reciprocated by creating non-visa visas of their own. Now, Canada has eTA, Asutralia has ETA, New Zealand has NZeTA, Schengen area is rolling out ETIAS, ...
So yes, there was a brief period of time when visa waivers became non-reciprocal. Now the reciprocity has been restored, but not to what it was before, instead to a new normal. We as the citizens are worse off and the governments have more power in this new normal.
Yes and that's a real shame. Visa free was nice while it lasted... As a European, I'm appalled at the bullshit justification shown on https://www.schengenvisainfo.com/etias/
"The main reason for the approval of the ETIAS authorization is security. With the increased risk of travellers worldwide, the EU wants to ensure safe travels in its countries. " The increased risk of travellers worldwide? What increased risk... That's just using a baseless assertion and basing the entire argument on that.
"The main reason for the approval of the ETIAS authorization is security. With the increased risk of travellers worldwide, the EU wants to ensure safe travels in its countries. " The increased risk of travellers worldwide? What increased risk... That's just using a baseless assertion and basing the entire argument on that.
[deleted]
I think the EU created ETIAS as a direct response to ESTA
As a third world citizen, where we always have to apply for US visa to visit, this is highly unusual.
In most of the cases we are informed during the in person interview of approval or denial, in case of approval, we have our visas stamped within a month.
In most of the cases we are informed during the in person interview of approval or denial, in case of approval, we have our visas stamped within a month.
A tourism visa does not allow work in the US. He really shouldn't head to an all hands meeting on a tourist visa. The CBP officer will ask his purpose of travel and he'll have to lie about it, after putting it in public writing. This is a mess that he should fix ASAP.
Business meetings are explicitly allowed under ESTA rules. https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/business...
I don't know if ESTA is still involved, he explicitly said his ESTA applications were denied in 2017 and that's why he applied for a "tourist visa" and I don't think ESTA applies to that in any way. But he's a smart enough guy to read the limitations of tourist visa, I wish him the best and I hope I'm wrong.
Exactly, you can work in the US, you just can't get paid in the US.
If is the same as for Mexican citizens, the tourist visa is B1/B2, which allows you to do business during your travel. I used to attend company meetings all the time, i just handed a letter to the CBP officer with all the details for my visit, signed by the company's representatives on both sides of the border. It's actually pretty common.
ESTA is tourism + business trip. Arguably a one time all-hands meeting is a business trip.
Though I agree sharing all of this in public after all of the struggle he's been through isn't the smartest idea :)!
Though I agree sharing all of this in public after all of the struggle he's been through isn't the smartest idea :)!
There is no one you can talk to, no way to expedite any remediation, and you can't travel to the US by boat or plane to talk to the CBP.
What I ended up doing, and I don't necessarily recommend this, is flew to Canada and entered over the land border.
After spending something like an hour at the border, and holding up my bus, they let me in.
Supposedly I should be able to apply for an ESTA in the future, but it's not something I have tried since.
I didn't get the job.