Curiosity : How long can you be away without losing PR
- Thread starter amazing21
- Start date
(same response given in the citizenship conference)
Compliance with the PR Residency Obligation:
A PR may be outside Canada for up to 1094 days within the immediately previous five years, so long as the PR can, of course, prove the time present in Canada (burden of proof is on the PR).
For a PR who became a PR less than five years previous, the PR can be outside Canada for up to 1094 days since the date of landing and becoming a PR.
It is worth keeping in mind that, obviously, the closer the PR cuts it to the minimum, the more risk there is CBSA or CIC will not be persuaded the PR was actually in Canada when the PR declares to have been in Canada.
Additional note: this obligation continues to apply to a PR who has applied for citizenship.
Technically one might say the calculation is 1095 rather than 1094 days, but the latter (again subject to being proven) meets the PR RO without having to do some fine-tuning calculations such as dealing with February 29 (when there is a February 29 -- remembering that February 29 essentially does not exist, either way, thus not counting as a day outside if the PR was outside Canada that day, and does not count as a day in Canada if the PR was in Canada that day).
Compliance with the PR Residency Obligation:
A PR may be outside Canada for up to 1094 days within the immediately previous five years, so long as the PR can, of course, prove the time present in Canada (burden of proof is on the PR).
For a PR who became a PR less than five years previous, the PR can be outside Canada for up to 1094 days since the date of landing and becoming a PR.
It is worth keeping in mind that, obviously, the closer the PR cuts it to the minimum, the more risk there is CBSA or CIC will not be persuaded the PR was actually in Canada when the PR declares to have been in Canada.
Additional note: this obligation continues to apply to a PR who has applied for citizenship.
Technically one might say the calculation is 1095 rather than 1094 days, but the latter (again subject to being proven) meets the PR RO without having to do some fine-tuning calculations such as dealing with February 29 (when there is a February 29 -- remembering that February 29 essentially does not exist, either way, thus not counting as a day outside if the PR was outside Canada that day, and does not count as a day in Canada if the PR was in Canada that day).
If the burden of proof is on the applicant then can the border officers really see how long a person has been out of the country?
They not only can, if they look, see a lot more than what many might anticipate, they are a lot, lot more sophisticated these days in discerning inconsistencies in the information provided by travelers.
And at minimum, the PR's last date of entry will be readily accessible to a CBSA officer at the POE, and if that was more than three years ago, none since, the odds of further screening elevate proportionately.
Main thing is that in the customs' declaration the PR is required to declare how long he or she has been outside Canada. Despite how many may have gotten away with fudging this in the past, or being evasive, these days the best approach is to be fully honest and prepared to make one's case the very best one can. Be sure to have in one's hands (carry-on, not checked baggage) any documents supporting one's reasons for not coming to Canada sooner.
Remember, misrepresentation made for the purpose of obtaining entry into Canada is not only a stand alone grounds for revocation of PR status, but grounds for exclusion from Canada (I think the duration of exclusion has increased to five years), and possibly even criminal prosecution.
And at minimum, the PR's last date of entry will be readily accessible to a CBSA officer at the POE, and if that was more than three years ago, none since, the odds of further screening elevate proportionately.
Main thing is that in the customs' declaration the PR is required to declare how long he or she has been outside Canada. Despite how many may have gotten away with fudging this in the past, or being evasive, these days the best approach is to be fully honest and prepared to make one's case the very best one can. Be sure to have in one's hands (carry-on, not checked baggage) any documents supporting one's reasons for not coming to Canada sooner.
Remember, misrepresentation made for the purpose of obtaining entry into Canada is not only a stand alone grounds for revocation of PR status, but grounds for exclusion from Canada (I think the duration of exclusion has increased to five years), and possibly even criminal prosecution.
In regards to the dichotomy between the burden of proof and what CBSA or CIC knows or can independently confirm, burden of proof is a procedural requirement and accomplishes a number of objectives for Canada. The biggest one, however, is that neither CBSA or CIC need to actually prove there was not compliance with the PR Residency Obligation. So, if CBSA or CIC identify reasons to question the PR's residency, it is up to the PR to then satisfy CBSA or CIC that they have complied with the RO.worriedanxious007 said:If the burden of proof is on the applicant then can the border officers really see how long a person has been out of the country?
Moreover, CBSA and CIC want to be able to compare the PR's declarations against what is known to CBSA or CIC, to assist them in assessing the veracity of the PR's reporting. This works best if the PR does not really know what CBSA or CIC knows . . . and they do indeed do their best to keep the public guessing, not really informed.
If they see it all easily please explain why a customs officer said this:
https://milepoint.com/forums/threads/former-canadian-border-services-officer-answers-questions-on-reddit.70811/
it seems they usually only investigate when they were suspicious. I'm a law abiding person, but lets pretend I say i left Canada three years ago instead of four... If I've no red flags on my passport why should an officer take me to secondary inspection if he cannot verify when I left?
I'm not looking to evade the system but your talk certainly tries to put the spooks into people, you are a little over the top.
Apologies for any spelling errors it's late here and my phone is dodgy!
https://milepoint.com/forums/threads/former-canadian-border-services-officer-answers-questions-on-reddit.70811/
it seems they usually only investigate when they were suspicious. I'm a law abiding person, but lets pretend I say i left Canada three years ago instead of four... If I've no red flags on my passport why should an officer take me to secondary inspection if he cannot verify when I left?
I'm not looking to evade the system but your talk certainly tries to put the spooks into people, you are a little over the top.
Apologies for any spelling errors it's late here and my phone is dodgy!
Probably true that there is elevated scrutiny (up to and including an investigation) primarily when something arouses suspicion. But being in breach of the PR RO will invite suspicion. And you are in denial if you believe CBSA cannot see far more than most people realize, relying on other people's past experience in easily getting away with not being totally honest at the POE or relying on the extent to which someone in CBSA reports there are holes in the system.worriedanxious007 said:If they see it all easily please explain why a customs officer said this:
https://milepoint.com/forums/threads/former-canadian-border-services-officer-answers-questions-on-reddit.70811/
it seems they usually only investigate when they were suspicious. I'm a law abiding person, but lets pretend I say i left Canada three years ago instead of four... If I've no red flags on my passport why should an officer take me to secondary inspection if he cannot verify when I left?
I'm not looking to evade the system but your talk certainly tries to put the spooks into people, you are a little over the top.
Apologies for any spelling errors it's late here and my phone is dodgy!
There are big holes in the system. Many exploit them. They are not "law abiding persons" however (a person cannot, for example, put misleading information in the customs declaration and consider themselves "law abiding"). And more and more they are getting caught.
How do you know more and more are being caught? Where are your sources?
You are implying I'm intending to not be honest which isn't right, I'm playing devil's advocate a little, I'm not actually going to lie so calm down!
You are implying I'm intending to not be honest which isn't right, I'm playing devil's advocate a little, I'm not actually going to lie so calm down!