If I currently meet the PR residency obligations but don’t have a valid PR card, and I cross into Canada through the US land border, is there still a risk I can get reported by CBSA? Would they be able to see that I meet the residency obligations through their entry/exit records? I also have 2 applications in process with IRCC, one for PR card renewal (submitted 88 days ago) and another for an urgent PRTD (submitted 46 days ago). Would they be able to see these applications in their system and would those pending applications help? I really don’t want to get reported at all even if I know I can win an appeal.
Overall, statistically sound (but not really informative if there are circumstances triggering suspicions), for a PR who was recently IN Canada and who is currently in compliance with the RO, upon arrival at the border there is very little risk of being "
Reported" (issued a Removal Order) for failing to comply with the RO.
Meanwhile, YES, yes CBSA officers will be able to access information about your pending applications in GCMS. Whether they will look or not is uncertain. But if they choose to look, as they can, yes they will see information about pending applications and be able to review a lot of the relevant detail. If they look.
Assuming they do look, whether that will help depends on what the details are, what questions are causing concern, if any.
I totally agree with the observation made by
@armoured, that "
factual disagreements about absences are rather rare." If you give border officers accurate information, which of course is
be-sure-for-sure-to-do, as
@steaky aptly noted, and YOUR accurate information shows RO compliance, it would indeed be rare and rather unusual for a screening officer in Secondary to prepare a 44(1) Report let alone that proceed to the issuance of a Removal Order (what most mean when they say "Reported") necessitating an appeal.
Beyond that . . .
It looks like there should be NO problem. There is always some risk, however, things do not go as they should. And then there's the risk of misjudging how things should go. So, yeah,
beyond that . . .
What's the risk of CBSA concluding a PR complying with the Residency Obligation is nonetheless inadmissible for failing to comply with the RO?
What is the risk of being sued on a contract you didn't make?
What is the risk of being held liable for someone's injury in a car crash that was not your fault?
What is the risk of being charged with a crime you have not committed?
It is glib, inaccurate, and misleading, to assure someone their innocence (not just claims of innocence) eliminates the risk of a criminal conviction, let alone prosecution, let alone arrest, let alone the risk of being held for questioning. Helps to be innocent. By a lot. Big time. But if you are in the living room having a beer and watching this or that streaming device on a big screen while your friend, the guy who owns the place, who you had no idea ever messed with illegal drugs, is in the kitchen selling a big pile of dope to an undercover cop, yeah there is a risk of being arrested, charged, and perhaps convicted for being involved in drug trafficking . . . enough of a risk that even a good lawyer might strongly encourage taking a plea bargain.
And to further illustrate the point, compare that to the risk of being in a house a block away watching Netflix and some guy you never met, in a house you have never been in, is selling a big pile of dope to an undercover cop. Very remote risk (at most some very remote risk, maybe the cops get names confused, and later think the guy a block away was the deal-security guy who was in the living room, plausibly claiming ignorance and innocence).
Sorry for the lengthy digression and I understand what I am saying is news to no one. I'm kind of like the grand parent reminding you to brush your teeth. "
Yeah, we know."
And yeah, I know you know.
Which means it should be well understood, no need to say it actually,
NO ONE can forecast the risk but everyone can easily recognize that the extent of risk depends mostly on actual facts but also a lot on what appears to be the facts. Which no one in a forum will know much about in anyone else's case. Which the person arriving here, and applying for entry at a Port-of-Entry into Canada, knows more about than anyone else in the whole world.
As I previously noted, I totally agree with the observation made by
@armoured, that "
factual disagreements about absences are rather rare."
In comparison, we do not know how common (or not so rare) it is for a Visa Office to take 46 days to process a PR TD application from a PR who only recently left Canada, who has a PR card application made in Canada in process, and who is in compliance with the PR RO based on days IN Canada.
Not for sure, not at all, but smells a bit like something's up, something is concerning someone. Maybe not. Maybe just
cutting-it-close overlapping a non-routine question or two needing resolution, to be resolved in due course, no real problem, not at a big problem. Quite possibly the PR TD will be issued soon.
Regardless:
YOU know your situation far better than anyone (including better than officers reviewing your respective applications), so YOU are in the best position to evaluate your risks.
So here's where the plot twists:
I really don’t want to get reported at all even if I know I can win an appeal.
First from the curious angle: if someone who knows the details of your situation as well as YOU know them, and based on that apprehends a very significant probability that CBSA will proceed with processing a 44(1) Report against you upon your arrival at the border . . . would you choose to not return to Canada?
If the reason for your question is about preparing, there's enough risk just given how long the PR TD application has been pending to know you should be prepared to make the case you comply with the RO.
So, regardless what the forecast is, you know you should be prepared to support the claim of RO compliance with concrete, accurate details. You have precise entry and exit dates, as you have reported in your respective applications, and that bolstered by some evidence to show you have been living in Canada these last couple of years should easily, very easily, satisfy border officials, reducing the risk of any action based on non-compliance . . .
UNLESS . . . unless there are facts and circumstances in your case (which you know) raising cause to doubt your version of the facts.
Leading to the plot twist: statistically the odds of successfully making the case at the border, to officers in a PoE, are way, way higher than the odds of succeeding in an appeal. Anyone who is very confident of winning on appeal should be even more confident that border officials will be sufficiently satisfied of RO compliance to allow entry without issuing a Removal Order.
Which raises the question, sorry but there's no way round it:
what's the reason for worry?
Not that I am asking you to give an answer here. No need to go there; no need to get into the details. No amount of more detail will enable anyone here to offer a quantitative forecast, nothing reliable anyway.
In any event, hopefully the PR TD is on its way. If you do return to Canada without a PR TD, via the U.S., you should be sure to follow-up with that application. Remember, if the Visa Office denies that PR TD application that is a decision terminating PR status, so that would be a decision you need to appeal. If more than sixty days pass and you fail to appeal the decision denying a PR TD, PR status is gone, terminated. Even if you are in Canada. Even if in the meantime a new PR card has been sent to your address. 
