Previously worked remotely in Canada while on an ETA, will this be a problem for spouse visa application?

[Idrissrafd]

First off, apologies to the OP - I seemed to have pulled us off topic with a bit drama...

Secondly, while the exact details of my friends experience aren't really mine to share here, I can assure you, it was a rather mundane issue. The CBSA agent was in an extremely bad mood when we first approached him, and he just kept pounding on my friend. All of the other agents nearby steered clear of our interaction, and occasionally gave us glances of condolences.

The odds are certainly in the favour of an honest person legitimately crossing the border. So, you're right, mine is an extreme example. It's rare. But it does happen.

That’s the problem when you give to someone a lot of power/authority.

Who knows, someone might face a Derek Chauvin. I had only good experiences with CBSA, except once, one « officer »(?) checked my passport and my wife’s passport (she’s Canadian) with a loupe, as if my passport was fake...We felt so humiliated. My wife cried a lot. He did that just after landing. Then we (or I might say I) were pulled into secondary. We told to the officer (a CBSA agent ) in charge what happened to us few minutes ago...she was shocked, and she apologised to us. A wonderful agent. So polite and professional, then she let us (I might say she let me) go. She was so embarrassed. I don’t know if it was a racial profiling from the first one, but I promised to myself that I’m going to find him one more time.
I traveled a lot, never felt so humiliated in my whole life. But thanks the last agent was so professional and nice.

 

[Underhill]

That’s the problem when you give to someone a lot of power/authority.

Who knows, someone might face a Derek Chauvin. I had only good experiences with CBSA, except once, one « officer »(?) checked my passport and my wife’s passport (she’s Canadian) with a loupe, as if my passport was fake...We felt so humiliated. My wife cried a lot. He did that just after landing. Then we (or I might say I) were pulled into secondary. We told to the officer (a CBSA agent ) in charge what happened to us few minutes ago...she was shocked, and she apologised to us. A wonderful agent. So polite and professional, then she let us (I might say she let me) go. She was so embarrassed. I don’t know if it was a racial profiling from the first one, but I promised to myself that I’m going to find him one more time.
I traveled a lot, never felt so humiliated in my whole life. But thanks the last agent was so professional and nice.

You dodged a bullet for sure! Good thing the first CBSA agent passed you on to Secondary to make a determination - he could have easily and quickly placed a flag on both of your accounts, and all future crossings would be an enormous hassle (until eventually removed by a CBSA investigation).

 

[AutumnSkies]

First off, apologies to the OP - I seemed to have pulled us off topic with a bit drama...

Secondly, while the exact details of my friends experience aren't really mine to share here, I can assure you, it was a rather mundane issue. The CBSA agent was in an extremely bad mood when we first approached him, and he just kept pounding on my friend. All of the other agents nearby steered clear of our interaction, and occasionally gave us glances of condolences.

The odds are certainly in the favour of an honest person legitimately crossing the border. So, you're right, mine is an extreme example. It's rare. But it does happen.

Oh definitely, there’s always that remote chance it could happen, but like you said for the majority of people it’s not an issue and I don’t like to see anybody stress unnecessarily!

 

[Tuxedosushi]

Thank you for your answers @armoured and @Underhill , and no worries about the discussion that followed. It was interesting to read. I'm basically done on my application but I've kind of left the hardest question/concern until last. Here goes, any advice much appreciated:

I have a bit of a pickle regarding our address histories. My permanent residence (incl. taxes) for the last 5 years has been in the UK, my wife's in Canada. We did however spend most of that time together, traveling and effectively not living anywhere. I was in a Canada a lot and we'd spend 6 months of the year in the US. I was probably in the UK for <2 months per year for a few years. As mentioned in the OP, this was made possible because I could work remotely.

Including the perfectly true address history gives me a few concerns:

1. It's complicated and feels like it would raise questions i.e. many different locations per year
2. My wife will look like she didn't really live in Canada, causing issues (also, I think she's meant to stay in province a certain amount to keep health coverage)
3. It might look like Canada/US was my main residence rather than the UK

Possible solution: 'Simplify' by putting our respective permanent addresses in address history, then use an addendum to detail my visits to Canada and her visits to the UK but doesn't mention us mutually being in the US/Australia/Thailand/Other.

Thoughts?

 

[Underhill]

Thank you for your answers @armoured and @Underhill , and no worries about the discussion that followed. It was interesting to read. I'm basically done on my application but I've kind of left the hardest question/concern until last. Here goes, any advice much appreciated:

I have a bit of a pickle regarding our address histories. My permanent residence (incl. taxes) for the last 5 years has been in the UK, my wife's in Canada. We did however spend most of that time together, traveling and effectively not living anywhere. I was in a Canada a lot and we'd spend 6 months of the year in the US. I was probably in the UK for <2 months per year for a few years. As mentioned in the OP, this was made possible because I could work remotely.

Including the perfectly true address history gives me a few concerns:

1. It's complicated and feels like it would raise questions i.e. many different locations per year
2. My wife will look like she didn't really live in Canada, causing issues (also, I think she's meant to stay in province a certain amount to keep health coverage)
3. It might look like Canada/US was my main residence rather than the UK

Possible solution: 'Simplify' by putting our respective permanent addresses in address history, then use an addendum to detail my visits to Canada and her visits to the UK but doesn't mention us mutually being in the US/Australia/Thailand/Other.

Thoughts?

As long as you had legal visitor status in all those countries you should be fine. IRCC shouldn't hold a nomadic (and gainfully remotely-employed) life against you. I suggest you fill out the 'previous addresses' section as best as you can, showing the dates as best you can remember. Then include a separate note unpacking the story. Keep it brief and stay on topic - don't let your story wander.

Likely the worst you can expect is a request for police records in any place you stayed put in for awhile.

 

[armoured]

Including the perfectly true address history gives me a few concerns:

1. It's complicated and feels like it would raise questions i.e. many different locations per year
2. My wife will look like she didn't really live in Canada, causing issues (also, I think she's meant to stay in province a certain amount to keep health coverage)
3. It might look like Canada/US was my main residence rather than the UK

Possible solution: 'Simplify' by putting our respective permanent addresses in address history, then use an addendum to detail my visits to Canada and her visits to the UK but doesn't mention us mutually being in the US/Australia/Thailand/Other.

Thoughts?

I'm largely in agreement with the points by underhill. You're also not the first to have a complicated travel history, not that unusual.

Simplifying is fine; the Canadian spouse does not need to provide a travel history. My suggestion would be to use your address history where you lived in one place for more than, say, three months as your address, and explain this in a note. You can note you travelled to other places (note, I'm not clear whether you need to provide a travel history separately; I think it depends on nationality). But don't "leave things out." In that note you can provide brief factual 'also travelled to [places] at [dates].

I believe where your spouse was with you is included in the relationship support? Include as needed to show your relationship.

 

[armoured]

Secondly, while the exact details of my friends experience aren't really mine to share here, I can assure you, it was a rather mundane issue. The CBSA agent was in an extremely bad mood when we first approached him, and he just kept pounding on my friend. All of the other agents nearby steered clear of our interaction, and occasionally gave us glances of condolences.

The odds are certainly in the favour of an honest person legitimately crossing the border. So, you're right, mine is an extreme example. It's rare. But it does happen.

Without details it's obviously impossible to say what was going on beyond the CBSA agent's mood. You say a mundane issue, but no way to know if it's an issue that

But I'd repeat the point above: PRs have a right to enter; it's not just "the odds are in favour." But if there are cases where some other pretext is used, they seem to be quite rare, and I don't think PRs should generally be worried. And indeed they should be aware that the law is clear - they 'shall be allowed to enter' if they can satisfy the agent that they are a PR (which is mostly an identification issue).

 

[armoured]

I believe where your spouse was with you is included in the relationship support? Include as needed to show your relationship.

To clarify this point: you didn't mention how long you've been married or other aspects of your relationship. You will need to check the relevant form about 'times you have visited each other' (resided together) and the guide - but I don't believe it is required to list all visits to each other (but absolutely check the form and guide/instructions to be certain).

Many applicants should because it strengthens their case, especially those with shorter relationship histories - but if you've been married for several years and visiting/living with each other frequently, it may not be as important. That's where your travel history in the abbreviated form and specifying spouse was with you for many of these trips (ideally the longest/most important ones) as well as spouse time in your home country may be sufficient.

Do check though. And note, it is important not to mislead or omit anything material. But as long as you're truthful and lay out your history in a logical way, it should be okay. (Note, again, I'm assuming your package does not require the detailed travel history).

 

[Tuxedosushi]

Thank you for your detailed replies again @Underhill and @armoured . I feel better about the situation. oh, and we've been together 8 years, married for 6.

My current solution is as follows:

• 5569e
  • Personal history section (10 years)
    • Detail my employment/unemployment history here. List the trips I made to Canada here.
  • Address history section (10 years)
    • Use my permanent residence in the UK (where mail goes / tax address)
  • Appendix/letter
    • Explain that we traveled together during the years in question and provide a table with dates for the longer periods we were outside Canada together (including her visits to the UK)
    • e.g.
      • 04/2018 - 07/2018: San Francisco, USA
      • 09/2018 - 11/2018: Thailand
• 5532e
  • Address history section (5 years)
    • Use my wife's permanent residence in Canada (where mail goes / tax address)
  • Appendix/letter
    • Briefly reiterate explanation of us traveling together and point them to the appendix attached to the 5669e

Does this seem like the best course of action? I would technically be omitting certain trips/addresses, but they would be short and we wouldn't have been together i.e. more like vacations (which from reading the forum, people tend to omit)

 

[armoured]

Does this seem like the best course of action? I would technically be omitting certain trips/addresses, but they would be short and we wouldn't have been together i.e. more like vacations (which from reading the forum, people tend to omit)

I don't see any obvious issues with the approach, but only you can decide.

 

[Tuxedosushi]

In the note preceding the travel appendix, do you think I should directly mention that I was working during that period (including while in Canada). And that it was a remote position for a company was based outside Canada?

I can't decide whether it's better to openly acknowledge it or not.

 

[armoured]

In the note preceding the travel appendix, do you think I should directly mention that I was working during that period (including while in Canada). And that it was a remote position for a company was based outside Canada?

I can't decide whether it's better to openly acknowledge it or not.

I think your employment history and address of the employer is sufficient. Lots of people work remote and on business trips for months at a time.

In other words I don't think it's necessary to explicitly mention it.

 

[armoured]

5569e

• Personal history section (10 years)
  • Detail my employment/unemployment history here. List the trips I made to Canada here.

Reverting to this, I'm not entirely clear on how you will list your trips to Canada in this section. It asks for 'activity' ie. employed / studying / unemployed / homemaker etc. "Visiting or travelling" is a bit distinct, no specific rules on how to define (that I'm aware of).

Personally I'd just list the employment here and separately add an LOE that you spent time in Canada with spouse. If you think explaining 'working remotely' makes sense I don't think that will hurt or help. These are separate 'background' items in your context - employment shows what you were 'doing', the question of where you were based (residential address) is slightly different, and the time in Canada is mainly in support of your relationship. Working remotely is generally okay if you are in compliance with tax rules.

But again, you have to consider how to present logically.

 

[Underhill]

In the note preceding the travel appendix, do you think I should directly mention that I was working during that period (including while in Canada). And that it was a remote position for a company was based outside Canada?

I can't decide whether it's better to openly acknowledge it or not.

You could mention it in a residency note, sure. But keep it brief, explaining that you were working remotely and fully complying with all related local laws. They'll ask you to unpack that if they need more information from you later.