Impact on citizenship application processing when applicants report periods of unemployment, self-employment, or employed as consultant:
Short version: A lot has changed over the years, and especially so since I applied for citizenship. And continues to change. Basically, the increased capacity of IRCC to verify presence without employing RQ has drastically reduced the extent of RQ-related non-routine processing.
So, @scylla and @Seym effectively answered concerns about the impact of a citizenship applicant reporting periods of unemployment, self-employment, or employed as a consultant, which comes down to there being little or no significantly greater risk of lengthy delays due to RQ-related non-routine processing as long as:
Note, however, the actual risk (likelihood of significantly elevated screening causing lengthy processing time line) depends on the totality of the applicant's information and other information known to IRCC.
Note: Not All Non-Routine Processing is Created Equal:
The label "non-routine" only means that there is some additional step or action taken in regards to an application, a step or action that is not part of the standard processing. A fingerprint request, for example, means the application is then considered "non-routine," but as long as the applicant timely and appropriately responds this has little impact on the overall processing timeline. Many of the things that can happen in processing that make the application non-routine will have rather little impact on the overall processing timeline -- again, so long as the applicant timely and appropriately responds.
In particular, not all non-routine processing is created equal. Most non-routine processing only adds a few weeks to a few months to the processing time line.
For years now there has been rather little reporting indicating applicants are getting bogged down in lengthy RQ-related non-routine processing these days . . . EXCEPT the usual suspects one might say:
Risk Indicators or the Triage Criteria:
The criteria IRCC employs in screening citizenship applications is confidential; this is information the public does not have access to. It has now been over a decade since the forum has seen any leaked copies of the File Requirements Checklist which included a list of the triage criteria, nothing comparable to the 2012 leak of the FRC that the Harper-era government implemented back in 2012.
In that version of the FRC, applicants reporting periods of unemployment, self-employment, or employed as a consultant were flagged for RQ. The triage criteria in that FRC was resulting in RQ for more than one in four applicants and CIC/IRCC got buried in a massive backlog. By late 2013 it was clear that CIC (before the name change to IRCC) had backed way down with this.
The Biggest Change; the physical presence rather than residency requirement:
The biggest change that has resulted in way fewer "residency cases," and the need for RQ-related processing generally, was the 2015 change in the law that implemented a physical presence requirement rather than a residency requirement. This has greatly simplified the process of verification. It is mostly arithmetic now, counting days, which in conjunction with more reliable CBSA travel history has vastly reduced the number of questionable applications.
Improved, Enhanced Screening:
Even though periods of self-employment or being a consultant may still be factors that are considered in discerning reasons to question an applicant's residency, a lot has changed in the last decade dramatically increasing IRCC's ability to corroborate if not solidly verify the particular information an applicant provides, and just in general IRCC has greater access to information and better tools to substantiate the applicant's information on one hand while also facilitating, on the other, identifying potential reasons to question the applicant's veracity. This ranges from the much expanded capacity of CBSA to capture an immigrant's travel history, to greatly expanded comparison and cross-checking capacity. While we do not know for certain, it readily appears, for example, that IRCC now compiles data that facilitates screening for suspicious telephone numbers, addresses, or employers, including the use of machine learning and other AI components.
Moreover, a dozen years ago the extent to which an immigrant was actually living a life in Canada was still largely documented by a paper trail. Paper-based information is not easily searchable, not easily compared. But even then, and very much so in the following years, not only was there a huge increase in the extent to which we leave a digital trail documenting a life being lived in Canada, CIC/IRCC aggressively expanded its capacity to search and compare this information.
That is, the greatly expanded ability of IRCC, now, to check, compare, and verify the information in a citizenship application, has drastically reduced the need for RQ-related non-routine processing. It is quite likely that those engaging in fraudulent schemes have also adapted and are employing more sophisticated schemes to evade detection. But the good news is that the better screening tools means way fewer legitimate, qualified applicants are dragged into RQ.
Short version: A lot has changed over the years, and especially so since I applied for citizenship. And continues to change. Basically, the increased capacity of IRCC to verify presence without employing RQ has drastically reduced the extent of RQ-related non-routine processing.
So, @scylla and @Seym effectively answered concerns about the impact of a citizenship applicant reporting periods of unemployment, self-employment, or employed as a consultant, which comes down to there being little or no significantly greater risk of lengthy delays due to RQ-related non-routine processing as long as:
-- the applicant completely and accurately, and honestly, provides information in the application and physical presence calculation, and
-- the applicant applies with a good buffer over the minimum physical presence requirement, and
-- there are no credibility red flags (no discrepancies or suspicious incongruities for example; no previous suspicion of misrepresentation in the applicant's immigration history)
Note, however, the actual risk (likelihood of significantly elevated screening causing lengthy processing time line) depends on the totality of the applicant's information and other information known to IRCC.
Note: Not All Non-Routine Processing is Created Equal:
The label "non-routine" only means that there is some additional step or action taken in regards to an application, a step or action that is not part of the standard processing. A fingerprint request, for example, means the application is then considered "non-routine," but as long as the applicant timely and appropriately responds this has little impact on the overall processing timeline. Many of the things that can happen in processing that make the application non-routine will have rather little impact on the overall processing timeline -- again, so long as the applicant timely and appropriately responds.
In particular, not all non-routine processing is created equal. Most non-routine processing only adds a few weeks to a few months to the processing time line.
Even in regards to non-routine processing involving questioning residency or physical presence, which can include some version of RQ (Residence Questionnaire), for many years now what we mostly see is a minimal version requesting a few specific documents, NOT the full blown RQ (CIT 0171) that was so commonly seen a decade and longer ago.As a super majority conservative is pretty much imminent, I am worried that my application can be selected for non-routine processing which takes years.
For years now there has been rather little reporting indicating applicants are getting bogged down in lengthy RQ-related non-routine processing these days . . . EXCEPT the usual suspects one might say:
-- applicants applying with little or no buffer in conjunction with red flags, like discrepancies between the applicant's account of travel history and what CBSA records reflect
-- applicants who report information in their application that raises credibility concerns, ranging from using an address or telephone number that has been flagged as suspicious in other cases, to significant discrepancies in the applicant's information (reminder: IRCC can and sometimes does compare address and employment history with the applicant's information as posted in open sources, like LinkedIn or social media)
Risk Indicators or the Triage Criteria:
The criteria IRCC employs in screening citizenship applications is confidential; this is information the public does not have access to. It has now been over a decade since the forum has seen any leaked copies of the File Requirements Checklist which included a list of the triage criteria, nothing comparable to the 2012 leak of the FRC that the Harper-era government implemented back in 2012.
In that version of the FRC, applicants reporting periods of unemployment, self-employment, or employed as a consultant were flagged for RQ. The triage criteria in that FRC was resulting in RQ for more than one in four applicants and CIC/IRCC got buried in a massive backlog. By late 2013 it was clear that CIC (before the name change to IRCC) had backed way down with this.
The Biggest Change; the physical presence rather than residency requirement:
The biggest change that has resulted in way fewer "residency cases," and the need for RQ-related processing generally, was the 2015 change in the law that implemented a physical presence requirement rather than a residency requirement. This has greatly simplified the process of verification. It is mostly arithmetic now, counting days, which in conjunction with more reliable CBSA travel history has vastly reduced the number of questionable applications.
Improved, Enhanced Screening:
Even though periods of self-employment or being a consultant may still be factors that are considered in discerning reasons to question an applicant's residency, a lot has changed in the last decade dramatically increasing IRCC's ability to corroborate if not solidly verify the particular information an applicant provides, and just in general IRCC has greater access to information and better tools to substantiate the applicant's information on one hand while also facilitating, on the other, identifying potential reasons to question the applicant's veracity. This ranges from the much expanded capacity of CBSA to capture an immigrant's travel history, to greatly expanded comparison and cross-checking capacity. While we do not know for certain, it readily appears, for example, that IRCC now compiles data that facilitates screening for suspicious telephone numbers, addresses, or employers, including the use of machine learning and other AI components.
Moreover, a dozen years ago the extent to which an immigrant was actually living a life in Canada was still largely documented by a paper trail. Paper-based information is not easily searchable, not easily compared. But even then, and very much so in the following years, not only was there a huge increase in the extent to which we leave a digital trail documenting a life being lived in Canada, CIC/IRCC aggressively expanded its capacity to search and compare this information.
That is, the greatly expanded ability of IRCC, now, to check, compare, and verify the information in a citizenship application, has drastically reduced the need for RQ-related non-routine processing. It is quite likely that those engaging in fraudulent schemes have also adapted and are employing more sophisticated schemes to evade detection. But the good news is that the better screening tools means way fewer legitimate, qualified applicants are dragged into RQ.
Hey guys,
I still have around 8 months left in my eligibility period, but I am already worried. I am working as a subcontractor delivery driver and I do deliveries for a major firm in Canada but I have been binge reading a lot of these threads, and apparently self-employment or "non regular" employment invites non-routine processing very often. Do I have to worry about it and start gathering more proof of my stay in Canada? On the positives: I didn't travel outside of the country ever since I landed and filed my tax returns every year and have my T4As. I saw many on threads that self-employment invites RQ.
What can I do to make sure that this doesn't happen to me? Also, does it matter that what type of job you are doing for citizenship applications? I used to work in IT back in my country but I hated that atmosphere and find much more peace in this job. Is that something that will be used against me?
As a super majority conservative is pretty much imminent, I am worried that my application can be selected for non-routine processing which takes years. Would appreciate your responses!