Bigfoot3 said:
If you don't mind me asking, how big was your buffer?
I applied when the requirement was 1095 days of residence and the relevant time period was four years, total 1460 days. I applied with
over 1400 days of actual physical presence (buffer well over 300 days), but that was also well over a year and a half beyond the date I initially passed the 1095 day threshold, just that I continued to travel abroad. (In other words, I was eligible and could have applied more than 500 days sooner than I did. But my margin at the time of applying was around 320 or so days.)
That is NOT a good example for how long anyone else should wait. Indeed, how long to wait is a very personal decision which is best made depending on the particular circumstances, including history, for the specific person applying.
The risk of RQ in my situation appeared to be high, and due to the nature of my business (self-employed; all customers/clients being abroad) I apprehended that if issued RQ it could be a long, difficult case. Thus, basically, I waited until a full four years passed beyond the date my business was fully established in Canada (even though it still consisted of exporting what I do to customers/clients abroad), so that if issued RQ my business records would definitively show my place of business only in Canada. Then I simply procrastinated a few more months before sending off the citizenship application. Which was fortuitous since in those few months CIC modified its approach to issuing RQ, and my risk of RQ dropped considerably, and indeed I did not get RQ.
Not all that was known or understood at the time (summer of 2013). Even when I applied it still appeared that an applicant who was self-employed was at elevated risk for RQ, but as was eventually revealed by internal memos obtained in further ATI responses (not ATIP but general access to information requests), and anecdotal reports in the forums, sometime earlier in 2013 the fact of self-employment was no longer an automatic RQ trigger.
Basically I waited until I was certain my application would be RQ bullet proof, which is to say I would have no problem responding to RQ, if necessary, with a submission solidly documenting a paper trail of my life and business
IN Canada. And by then, my application sailed through, no RQ, took the oath of citizenship in early 2014.
Actually, the only thing I had leaning against me was the fact that I was self-employed, continuing to do the very same business, for the very same clients I had before coming to Canada . . . change was moving the place I physically did business to Canada. I had lots of other positive factors.
Some people believe that the fewer trips abroad the better. I am not among those. Like almost all other factors, the applicant's travel history is a highly variable factor, and the pattern of travel varies for different people in different circumstances. More than a few applicants have discovered, to their surprise, that declaring
no travel abroad sometimes can be more a red flag than frequent travel would be. What makes sense for one person is often very different than it is for another.
In my case, for example, I made regular brief trips abroad throughout the year, each year, and the pattern was perfectly consistent with a person living and working in Canada, consistent with all aspects of who I was . . . and I am confident this sort of pattern is readily recognized by most CIC/IRCC officers . . . which worked in my favour. An incongruous pattern, in contrast, will elevate the risk of at least some additional scrutiny (this could work against some applicants despite the fact their presence declarations are complete and accurate).
If a university professor takes a holiday abroad for three months during summer break that should not cause any concern at all, but if a welder or machine operator working the sort of job where typically employees only get from two to six weeks off total per year reports ten week holidays abroad, that is almost certain to draw attention.
ALL of which emphasizes that when-to-apply varies from person to person.
The only general guideline is that it is better to have a margin for at least a couple weeks. I would suggest more, but I approach these sorts of decisions conservatively . . . and cognizant that waiting a month up front might mean becoming a citizen many months or a year sooner. I tend to avoid playing long odds.
But again, some prospective applicants would be wise to wait even longer. And this is particularly so for an applicant whose first year or so in Canada might not be easily documented if RQ is issued. Indeed, it would be prudent for most prospective applicants to assess how strong a case they will be able to make if they are issued RQ . . . kind of hope for the best but plan for the worst . . .
before sending off the application.
Example for prospective applicant who could confidently submit an application with a relatively minimum margin:
-- applicant is absolutely certain about the completeness and accuracy of travel history (which means, for anyone who traveled abroad more than a couple times, the PR who kept an ongoing, complete and up-to-date log of all travel, not relying on any other sources for completing the presence calculation)
-- applicant had a full-time job working at a facility in Canada for a readily recognized Canadian employer
for at least nearly the entire time the applicant declares he or she was in Canada
-- immediate family also living full time in Canada
In that scenario, applying with a ten day margin will have very good odds of no problem. I'd suggest a twenty or thirty day margin, but one or two days should slide through, so many would probably feel confident with a mere ten day margin.
In contrast, anyone with significant periods of unemployment, anyone self-employed, and anyone who has members of his or her immediate family still living primarily abroad, should probably wait to have longer margin.
What will work for you, or any other particular person, is again a very personal decision to be made depending on all the relevant factors.
