Hi Please reply who successfully completed their citizenship dream from Windsor commuting for work with H1b to USA and finally got the Canada Citizenship , if so please share your experiences and documents you should have and few people mentioned in the same forum that we need to have FAOI entry exit records but I have CBSA entry exit records, which one I need to take to the interview and how much time is taking currently, I just finished my RO with 1090 days by today, so planning to send all application next week or so, please guide me step by step, because there will be extra scrutiny for me as am a regular commuter to USA for work, and this will effect in interview as well. Thank you in advance
I am NOT a naturalized citizen who was commuting to work in the U.S. prior to applying for citizenship (well, in a sense I was, but it was telecommuting pursuant to contract, thus technically self-employed working in Canada and not an "employee" of the American business paying me for my services, and it involved minimal physical travel to the U.S., which happens to be one of my least favourite countries even though employment there tends to be financially advantageous).
I have, however, watched for reports from Canadian citizenship applicants who were cross-border commuters in addition to closely following many other tangents related to potential residency or presence issues (both for citizenship applicants and PRs with Residency Obligation concerns). Based on this I can offer some observations.
Obviously, an applicant with such extensive ties to a foreign country, in addition to a history of very frequent travel, is WAY more at RISK for elevated scrutiny, thus far more likely to encounter non-routine processing, with a risk that the total stranger bureaucrats who will make decisions in their case might approach that decision-making with overt skepticism. You appear to be aware that you are likely to encounter such elevated scrutiny.
Because of this, the prudent cross-border commuter will WAIT to apply with a very strong case, an extra-strong case, and thus take extra if not extreme care to get everything right. Two looming keys to this are:
-- submitting a very near if not perfect travel history using the online presence calculator, and
-- a good, bigger than usual MARGIN of actual presence significantly GREATER than the minimum required
Frankly, if you are just now at the 1090 days of actual presence within the prospective eligibility period (the five years preceding the day the application is made), it would be FOOLISH to not wait to apply at least another MONTH. Sure, 1095 days credit within the eligibility period meets the requirement. But the applicant bears the burden of proving this as a matter of fact, proving it to the satisfaction of a total stranger bureaucrat. And while that burden of proof is technically the same for all applicants, as a practical matter applicants in situations likely to trigger stricter scrutiny if not outright skepticism would be wise to
pad the stats, so to say, building up a margin over the minimum requirement which will readily satisfy even the more skeptical bureaucrats.
More In-Depth Observations As to Some Particulars:
" . . . few people mentioned in the same forum that we need to have FAOI entry exit records but I have CBSA entry exit records, which one I need to take to the interview . . . "
Even though IRCC explicitly encourages applicants to NOT obtain their CBSA travel history (indeed, item 14 in the application itself includes the note "Please do not contact the CBSA to request your history of travel"), it is possible that bringing your CBSA travel history to the interview, along with a relevant record of movement or border control records from other countries, such as the U.S., could help in the interview.
HOWEVER, the interview is NOT a hearing. It is NOT, not generally, an opportunity for applicants to present additional evidence or otherwise make their case. If IRCC is not satisfied the applicant meets the requirements, and should be granted citizenship, based on the application itself subject to their *verification* procedures, including reviewing documents and asking some questions in the interview, there are separate non-routine processing procedures for that.
For concerns or questions about meeting the actual physical presence requirement, in particular, there are the non-routine procedures attendant what is typically referred to as "RQ." RQ itself simply means "Residence Questionnaire." Depending on the nature and scope of IRCC's questions or concerns, the applicant may be asked to provide additional information or documents, pursuant to which the applicant will be given CIT 0520, sometimes called RQ-lite, or CIT 0171, the traditional "RQ" which is also referred to as "full-blown RQ." Obviously the latter asks for a lot more than RQ-lite. And, actually, the RQ-lite has a checklist of requests, and for the individual applicant what is actually requested can vary from just one or two of the items listed, or to the full list.
There may be some instances in which applicants have presented additional information or documents at the interview, and by doing that avoided being issued either type of RQ. But generally it appears that if IRCC has questions or concerns, it will proceed to make the request formally, which may be given to some applicants in the interview or sent to the applicant after the interview. Regardless what the applicant has to show the interviewer.
For applicants with extensive ties in the U.S., especially work history in the U.S., yes the U.S. entry records are one of the things commonly asked for. And having those to present at the interview may suffice. Maybe. But my sense is not usually.
And the reason WHY presenting U.S. and even the Canadian travel history records is not likely to suffice is that if and when IRCC has a "
reason-to-question-residency/presence," IRCC will typically want more than documentation of travel history dates. It is likely to want supporting evidence to prove actual presence IN Canada for days in-between the known travel history dates.
Which leads to the particular challenges applicants with extensive ties abroad might encounter, especially if their employment history does not constitute supporting evidence the applicant was IN Canada, based on being employed in Canada tending to show being actually present in Canada to attend to that employment.
In a way, what I am describing is some underlying cause for more scrutiny when a cross-border commuter makes a citizenship application. But the point is that the travel history only goes so far in making the case. Such applicants should be prepared to offer additional evidence to document they were, in fact, actually present in Canada during those periods of time they report being in Canada.
To some extent this aspect of processing citizenship applications is evolving, given the extent to which government records of cross-border travel are increasingly more thorough and reliable. Processing agents and Citizenship Officers can generally rely more on government travel history records, today, than they could even just a few years ago. They still will NOT rely on such records entirely. If there is much of any reason to question the applicant's actual presence in Canada, then other evidence is typically required to meet the burden of proof.
For prospective applicants apprehending elevated or even skeptical scrutiny, building a bigger margin of presence over the minimum tends to offer better insurance of success and better odds of smooth sailing through the process, or at least smoother (and faster) sailing than applying with a small margin all too easily challenged..
