maximum residency can only reach a little more than 730 days, apply renewal or not?
- Thread starter bricksonly
- Start date
Can't really help you, I am not a lawyer. In short: DO NOT APPLY for PR card or other immigration benefits UNLESS you spend 730 days in Canada during the past 5 years. Period.
Ignore this fool, not only not a lawyer, just plain doesn't know what he's talking about. Any brushes with accuracy are, like a broken clock that's right twice a day, purely incidental to the endeavour.
Most should not apply without enough physical days in Canada.
There are exceptions, though - and one is truly accompanying one's spouse. Go ahead and renew.
I'm now returning to ignoring him, as I'd recommend all should do.
What a telling sign that ramansingh's wife is a Canadian citizen.... <<<this is stated with sarcasm. Some are so thick-skulled, they won't get it and take it for an admission of error, unless you put arrows and hammer into their heads that it's stated with sarcasm.
Below is my response to ramansingh (not to OP, or someone whose spouse is a Canadian citizen):
And here is why I ignore ignoramuses:
https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/do-cbsa-officers-at-the-airport-have-exit-records.752479/page-4#post-9870151
Last edited:
While I don't fully agree with the points @jakklondon repeatedly make on this forum, there is certainly an issue with the number of immigrants Canada is taking in. It seems like Liberals think the only way to fix most of the economical and social issues in Canada is to bring in more and more immigrants without investing enough in education, infrastructure, housing, healthcare and industry etc in Canada. It wont be long when skilled people will wake up to this and leave. Only mediocre and low skilled will stay, which wont add much productivity to the economy.
This below link fascinating and is from today.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/young-immigrants-may-leave-canada-due-to-high-cost-of-living-survey-1.5835140
This below link fascinating and is from today.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/young-immigrants-may-leave-canada-due-to-high-cost-of-living-survey-1.5835140
One could argue that Canada is not alone in high cost of living with inflation rapidly getting out of control. We had massive inflation the the US in the past two years, with Fed printing dollars like toilet papers. Our real estate despite being insanely expensive is probably still more affordable than Canadian. But we are not too far behind. Having said that, I must add that US job market is fantastic and is beyond imaginable if you compare it to Canadian. You can get 6 figure job here in a matter of one month, if you just look up the jobs and apply for what you can find on your field. You can even choose between 2 or more offers. And with 6 figure salary you can still afford decent living.
Oversaturation of the job market is the biggest issue Canada has, and instead of limiting/restricting immigration to let things stabilize, Canada brings ever greater number of skilled immigrants which makes job search a never ending, soul crushing experience. To make things worse, you must have insider connections and insider referrals even if you want to flip burgers at the street corner. You get zero consideration without Canadian experience and/or insider referrals. And things will only get worse, with 400K new immigrants planned for admission next year.
Anyone can share if PR still enter by scanning PR card at airport, and if pass, no CBSA interview needed?
This post is about the situation and queries posed by @bricksonly . . . except a note regarding the following query:
Back to the subject of the thread:
There is NO guarantee a valid PR card will get the traveler a pass with no referral to Secondary for immigration screening, where for example a returning PR can be asked questions related to the validity of their status including, in particular, as to the PR's compliance with the PR Residency Obligation. This is true whether the application for entry into Canada is made at an airport Port-of-Entry with kiosks in use, or at a PoE where the PIL is a CBSA officer personally examining the traveler's documents and asking enough questions to determine whether to authorize entry without further examination, or to make a referral to Secondary for further examination.
What might trigger a referral to Secondary for immigration is a huge subject, and includes some intentionally randomized as well as criteria-driven quality control screening in addition to whatever screening-criteria is being used generally (which is of course confidential), as well as the exercise of discretion by individual officers (including at kiosk screening which is being overseen by live officers). So of course being a jakkassistic jakkeroff, or otherwise being a jerk, being evasive or uncooperative, appearing to be deceptive, or otherwise suspicious, not only dramatically elevates the risk of a Secondary examination but is likely to have an impact on how it goes in Secondary, friendly or not-so-friendly, with a very broad range. (While the screening criteria is confidential, it is no mystery why some individuals tend to encounter less friendly, inconvenient scrutiny, or as they tend to describe it, being of a bend that it is always someone else's fault, "harassment.")
That is a subject far too broad and deep and complicated to try addressing in the abstract.
Which brings this to your situation, a more specific context: the PR living abroad with a Canadian citizen spouse, ostensibly entitled to Residency Obligation credit for time accompanying the Canadian citizen spouse, so at least ostensibly having no RO compliance issues.
Sure, for a PR in this situation with a valid PR card the odds are very good the PIL screening (kiosk or in person) does NOT result in a referral to Secondary for immigration. No problem. BUT again, there is NO guarantee that is how it will go. But even if there is a referral to Secondary, in this situation the odds are very good that examination will be casual, friendly, brief, and result in authorization to proceed into Canada without any hint of a problem.
Which, in addition to not needing a PR TD to travel to Canada, is in part why a PR in your situation is often tempted to apply for a new PR card despite continuing to live abroad and not meeting the eligibility requirements for a new PR card. If there are plans to travel to Canada even occasionally, it is a lot more convenient to have a valid PR card.
Which is where things get a little more tricky . . . since IRCC policy generally aims at limiting the issuance and delivery of new PR cards to those PRs actually staying in Canada.
Before getting into the details, generally IRCC's policies and practices tend to encourage PRs living abroad with a Canadian citizen spouse (and thus in ongoing RO compliance despite not being in Canada) to rely on obtaining a PR Travel Document for travel to Canada . . . unless and until the PR has actually returned to Canada to settle and live IN Canada. Indeed, even though we have not seen much anecdotal reporting about multiple-entry PR TDs lately, several years ago it appeared that IRCC began more or less regularly (but not universally) issuing long-term multiple-entry PR TDs to PRs in this situation.
The eligibility requirement at stake here is stated in IRCC's instructions, in some places stating that the PR must be "in Canada" to apply for a PR card, and in the guide for a PR card application itself it states:
Thing is, there are no particular statutory provisions or regulations which authorizes IRCC to deny a PR card application on the grounds the PR is not in Canada or because the PR was not physically in Canada when the application was made. There is at least one Federal Court decision which explicitly ruled that IRCC could not justify withholding the delivery of a PR card based on the application being made while the PR was abroad, and multiple decisions otherwise ruling that withholding a PR card from a PR abroad was improper. And, many PRs otherwise work-around the instructions by making their PR card application during a visit to Canada and using a friend or family member's address (some will have to return to Canada for an in-person pickup of the card, but more than a few will also find IRCC more or less waiting for them to return to Canada before completing the PR card application process).
Nonetheless, it remains clear that IRCC policy generally aims at limiting the issuance and delivery of new PR cards to those PRs actually staying in Canada.
For my loonie, working within a bureaucracy's instructions generally goes better than, so to say, trying to colour outside the lines. And this is in regards to both how the mechanics of bureaucratic processing works, and how individual officials tend to approach and handle clients. What stays on the mainstream assembly line, so to say, tends to work; anything taking the transaction out of the mainstream work flow, in contrast, increases the risk of things getting tripped up or even going off the rails. Unlike many other venues in life, where they say the squeaky wheel gets the oil, in the claustrophobic confines of bureaucracy the squeaky wheel tends to be sent to a maintenance or repair shop, often to sit on a shelf for a long while, almost never getting the sort of attention desired.
Which, when the time comes, pushes in the direction of applying for a PR Travel Document rather than a new PR card, and waiting to apply for a new PR card when you are actually coming to Canada to stay (or are at least in Canada for a relatively extended period of time). And hoping for a multiple-entry PR TD which would address the concern about only being able to drive to Canada and facing "a complex review" when you visit.
In regards to the latter, to the prospect of a Secondary examination asking questions about RO compliance, and potentially needing to show marital relationship and your spouse's Canadian citizenship, and showing you have been living together long enough to meet the RO based on credit for time together abroad, yes, that is an examination you could encounter at a Port-of-Entry, and yes, there is a much greater risk of that if you are arriving at the border without a valid PR card. The risk of that is much lower if you are traveling with your spouse. In contrast, the risk of that and that it goes in the direction of a more severe examination is higher if you are not traveling with your spouse (traveling together more or less illustrates accompanying, while traveling separately can raise questions about the extent of accompanying).
How much a nuisance the RO questioning will be is difficult to forecast and will undoubtedly vary depending on particular circumstances. Even if you have a valid PR card. Again, if traveling together with your spouse, that should make it a lot easier. And if not traveling together, the risk of troublesome questioning is higher, with or without a valid PR card, but obviously more so without a valid PR card. Depending on how it goes, and again the circumstances, the results of more thorough questioning at the PoE could lead to notes in your GCMS which make it much easier for later trips to Canada, if the border officials are satisfied there is no reason to challenge or question your RO compliance . . . but, this could go the other way as well, especially if there are multiple times you come to Canada not traveling together, building a history of not accompanying one another.
See response in the thread where you more appropriately posed your query.
Back to the subject of the thread:
. . . and with consideration for subsequent posts . . . starting, in particular, with this:
The crux of this question is "if pass," and what that means, how that works. The kiosk is essentially an automated PIL (Primary Inspection Line) screening, and apart from particular border control measures related to the Covid pandemic (which mean more screening than what one might say is "normal"), the result of that screening (where the PR card is scanned) can be:
-- authorization to proceed into Canada (no in-person interview)
-- referral to Secondary for further customs screening
-- referral to Secondary for immigration-related screening
-- referral to Secondary involving both further customs and immigration screening
There is NO guarantee a valid PR card will get the traveler a pass with no referral to Secondary for immigration screening, where for example a returning PR can be asked questions related to the validity of their status including, in particular, as to the PR's compliance with the PR Residency Obligation. This is true whether the application for entry into Canada is made at an airport Port-of-Entry with kiosks in use, or at a PoE where the PIL is a CBSA officer personally examining the traveler's documents and asking enough questions to determine whether to authorize entry without further examination, or to make a referral to Secondary for further examination.
What might trigger a referral to Secondary for immigration is a huge subject, and includes some intentionally randomized as well as criteria-driven quality control screening in addition to whatever screening-criteria is being used generally (which is of course confidential), as well as the exercise of discretion by individual officers (including at kiosk screening which is being overseen by live officers). So of course being a jakkassistic jakkeroff, or otherwise being a jerk, being evasive or uncooperative, appearing to be deceptive, or otherwise suspicious, not only dramatically elevates the risk of a Secondary examination but is likely to have an impact on how it goes in Secondary, friendly or not-so-friendly, with a very broad range. (While the screening criteria is confidential, it is no mystery why some individuals tend to encounter less friendly, inconvenient scrutiny, or as they tend to describe it, being of a bend that it is always someone else's fault, "harassment.")
That is a subject far too broad and deep and complicated to try addressing in the abstract.
Which brings this to your situation, a more specific context: the PR living abroad with a Canadian citizen spouse, ostensibly entitled to Residency Obligation credit for time accompanying the Canadian citizen spouse, so at least ostensibly having no RO compliance issues.
Sure, for a PR in this situation with a valid PR card the odds are very good the PIL screening (kiosk or in person) does NOT result in a referral to Secondary for immigration. No problem. BUT again, there is NO guarantee that is how it will go. But even if there is a referral to Secondary, in this situation the odds are very good that examination will be casual, friendly, brief, and result in authorization to proceed into Canada without any hint of a problem.
Which, in addition to not needing a PR TD to travel to Canada, is in part why a PR in your situation is often tempted to apply for a new PR card despite continuing to live abroad and not meeting the eligibility requirements for a new PR card. If there are plans to travel to Canada even occasionally, it is a lot more convenient to have a valid PR card.
Which is where things get a little more tricky . . . since IRCC policy generally aims at limiting the issuance and delivery of new PR cards to those PRs actually staying in Canada.
Before getting into the details, generally IRCC's policies and practices tend to encourage PRs living abroad with a Canadian citizen spouse (and thus in ongoing RO compliance despite not being in Canada) to rely on obtaining a PR Travel Document for travel to Canada . . . unless and until the PR has actually returned to Canada to settle and live IN Canada. Indeed, even though we have not seen much anecdotal reporting about multiple-entry PR TDs lately, several years ago it appeared that IRCC began more or less regularly (but not universally) issuing long-term multiple-entry PR TDs to PRs in this situation.
The eligibility requirement at stake here is stated in IRCC's instructions, in some places stating that the PR must be "in Canada" to apply for a PR card, and in the guide for a PR card application itself it states:
To be eligible for a PR Card, you must . . . be physically present in Canada . . .
Thing is, there are no particular statutory provisions or regulations which authorizes IRCC to deny a PR card application on the grounds the PR is not in Canada or because the PR was not physically in Canada when the application was made. There is at least one Federal Court decision which explicitly ruled that IRCC could not justify withholding the delivery of a PR card based on the application being made while the PR was abroad, and multiple decisions otherwise ruling that withholding a PR card from a PR abroad was improper. And, many PRs otherwise work-around the instructions by making their PR card application during a visit to Canada and using a friend or family member's address (some will have to return to Canada for an in-person pickup of the card, but more than a few will also find IRCC more or less waiting for them to return to Canada before completing the PR card application process).
Nonetheless, it remains clear that IRCC policy generally aims at limiting the issuance and delivery of new PR cards to those PRs actually staying in Canada.
For my loonie, working within a bureaucracy's instructions generally goes better than, so to say, trying to colour outside the lines. And this is in regards to both how the mechanics of bureaucratic processing works, and how individual officials tend to approach and handle clients. What stays on the mainstream assembly line, so to say, tends to work; anything taking the transaction out of the mainstream work flow, in contrast, increases the risk of things getting tripped up or even going off the rails. Unlike many other venues in life, where they say the squeaky wheel gets the oil, in the claustrophobic confines of bureaucracy the squeaky wheel tends to be sent to a maintenance or repair shop, often to sit on a shelf for a long while, almost never getting the sort of attention desired.
Which, when the time comes, pushes in the direction of applying for a PR Travel Document rather than a new PR card, and waiting to apply for a new PR card when you are actually coming to Canada to stay (or are at least in Canada for a relatively extended period of time). And hoping for a multiple-entry PR TD which would address the concern about only being able to drive to Canada and facing "a complex review" when you visit.
In regards to the latter, to the prospect of a Secondary examination asking questions about RO compliance, and potentially needing to show marital relationship and your spouse's Canadian citizenship, and showing you have been living together long enough to meet the RO based on credit for time together abroad, yes, that is an examination you could encounter at a Port-of-Entry, and yes, there is a much greater risk of that if you are arriving at the border without a valid PR card. The risk of that is much lower if you are traveling with your spouse. In contrast, the risk of that and that it goes in the direction of a more severe examination is higher if you are not traveling with your spouse (traveling together more or less illustrates accompanying, while traveling separately can raise questions about the extent of accompanying).
How much a nuisance the RO questioning will be is difficult to forecast and will undoubtedly vary depending on particular circumstances. Even if you have a valid PR card. Again, if traveling together with your spouse, that should make it a lot easier. And if not traveling together, the risk of troublesome questioning is higher, with or without a valid PR card, but obviously more so without a valid PR card. Depending on how it goes, and again the circumstances, the results of more thorough questioning at the PoE could lead to notes in your GCMS which make it much easier for later trips to Canada, if the border officials are satisfied there is no reason to challenge or question your RO compliance . . . but, this could go the other way as well, especially if there are multiple times you come to Canada not traveling together, building a history of not accompanying one another.
Short answer: yes, you can. But it's toss of a dice. You may or may not be stopped by CBSA for initial or secondary inspection.
IndianBos
Hero Member
- Oct 8, 2014
- 142
- Category........
- FSW
- Visa Office......
- CPC-O
- NOC Code......
- 2174
- App. Filed.......
- 19-Jun-2014
- Nomination.....
- 16-Oct-2014
- File Transfer...
- 11-Dec-2014
- Med's Request
- 24-Apr-2015 (Delayed for adding a child)
- Med's Done....
- 9-May-2015 (Updated 29-May-2015)
- Interview........
- N/A
- Passport Req..
- 17-Jun-2015 (mailed 29-June-2015)
- VISA ISSUED...
- 11-Jul-2015
- LANDED..........
- 7-Sep-2015
When you scan your PR card at the kiosk, a slip is generated. When you are walking out, the CBSA officer checks the slip. Usually the software puts a flag and prints in the slip, which the CBSA officer will see and redirect you to the interview room.
If your slip has no flags (only CBSA knows), you pass through without any secondary interview.
GuyanaGirl
Hero Member
- Jul 4, 2016
- 313
- Visa Office......
- Kitchener
- App. Filed.......
- July, 20th 2016
- Med's Request
- Upfront
And I am extremely sure that machine will flag an expired card. BUT if the traveller is from a country that requires either a visa or valid PR card etc to travel
To Canada then I also highly doubt someone will be allowed to check in for their flight home if the card it expired.
Affordability crisis is affecting many countries so this isn’t an issue limited to Canada. Also affecting young Canadians.
Lack of jobs and oversaturation of the market with hundreds of thousands of skilled immigrants per year is the real issue. Cost of living is very high in some parts of the US, but we also have robust, healthy job market. If you are skilled and experienced, you will get a job, and very quickly. No need to make connections, beg for insider recommendations, spend months or years just to get a foot into the door of company that does business in your field.
And "you lack US experience" is something that no employer will dare to say, that would get them in trouble with Federal Agencies that could see it as discrimination based on national origin.
I haven’t flown into Canada in many years; what is the process with the machines, do some people not have to speak with an actual agent?