oh ok.. got it. Report means they'll send back to the home country and has to redo all the PR process or they allow in the country but they keep an eye etc.?
PS: I am talking about the person who lives in Canada and bought a house, paying the taxes etc not someone living for some benefits.
Most of your questions have been answered by others.
I am adding to the other responses to clarify with some emphasis the procedure when a 44(1) Report is prepared in regards to enforcement of the Residency Obligation, and that in the Port-of-Entry context, in particular, "
Report" means Inadmissibility proceedings have been initiated. The outcome of this will vary, mostly depending on whether there are sufficient H&C reasons to allow the PR to keep PR status despite being in breach, despite the PR meeting the definition "
inadmissible."
Note that if the Report is prepared during a Port-of-Entry examination, when the PR is arriving in Canada, the process (the inadmissibility proceeding) is ordinarily completed while the PR is still in the PoE, a separate officer reviewing the Report and evaluating the PR's explanations, then deciding whether to issue a Removal Order or set aside the Report for H&C reasons.
Even if there is a Removal Order issued, the PR is still allowed to enter Canada and stay as long as the right of appeal is pending. If the PR appeals the Removal Order, whether the PR gets to keep status for H&C reasons will be decided anew months later by the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD).
So, "
Report" does NOT necessarily mean the PR loses PR status. It depends on what happens in the subsequent process.
Not sure what you mean in referencing "
they allow in the country but they keep an eye etc.," but to be clear, there is no surveillance of PRs in regards to RO enforcement. All PRs MUST be allowed into Canada, even if an inadmissibility report has been prepared and a Removal Order issued. In particular:
-- Those who have been issued a Removal Order who want to keep PR status must appeal (and do so within 30 days) and win the appeal, in order to save their PR status. They can remain in Canada, NOT under surveillance, pending the outcome of the appeal.
-- Those who have been issued a Removal Order who do not appeal will lose their PR status as of 30 days after the Removal Order was issued, and then have up to an additional 30 days to leave Canada.
-- Those PRs who are the subject of a 44(1) Report that is set aside for H&C reasons, keep their PR status, and will not be subject to surveillance.
-- Those PRs who appear to be in breach of the RO but allowed to enter Canada without a 44(1) Report being prepared likewise keep their PR status and will not be subject to surveillance.
Otherwise, a PR's compliance with the RO is not reviewed or questioned (not subject to surveillance) UNLESS the PR engages in another transaction which triggers a Residency Determination. The transactions which either require a Residency Determination, or which can trigger a Residency Determination, include (1) application for PR card; (2) application for a PR Travel Document; (3) application to enter Canada (such as arriving at a PoE in returning to Canada); and (4) application to sponsor a family member's PR.
Some Further Observations in Particular:
"I am talking about the person who lives in Canada and bought a house, paying the taxes etc not someone living for some benefits."
This is NOT relevant in calculating whether a PR is in breach of the RO. Not at all. RO compliance is about days IN Canada within the previous five years. A PR with major assets in Canada and paying six figures in taxes, even seven figures, is given NO more leeway or credit than a PR who relies on public benefits.
Home ownership and other indications of Canadian ties (including payment of taxes) can be considered if there is conflicting information about the number of days in Canada, but that is just circumstantial evidence a PR can cite to corroborate other evidence that they were in Canada, to the extent such evidence shows presence in Canada, which is not a lot.
Home ownership and other indications of Canadian ties (including payment of taxes) will also be considered in weighing H&C factors, if it comes to that, BUT this will probably carry little weight. Main consideration in H&C analysis is again the numbers (days IN Canada within five years) plus the reasons for being abroad so long, and impact on minor children. Among other considerations, home ownership in Canada is down the list, down the list enough it is not likely to sway the outcome much if at all.
One last thing on the PRTD. what is PRTD and how we get it if need be. what's the fee, process to apply and timeline?
A PR TD is a particular type of Travel Document issued to PRs outside Canada, which will allow them to board a flight to Canada if they do not have a valid PR card.
As
@armoured suggests, it appears you may not have done enough homework to pose reasonable questions. Rather than google, however, the best place to start doing the homework is the IRCC website itself,
which should be the FIRST source consulted for any questions about PR status in Canada. Not here.
For information about PRs in particular, the IRCC website is quite easy to navigate. In particular, see the IRCC information for "New immigrants," which is easily reached by link from IRCC's main webpage, and is also here:
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/new-immigrants.html
There is a prominent link there, for example, titled "
Apply for a permanent resident travel document," where information as to the "
eligibility requirements and application steps for permanent resident travel documents" can be found.
Boarding Commercial Transportation to Travel to Canada; Presentation of Documents Demonstrating Authorization to Enter Canada:
Even a U.S. passport holder/PR is not guaranteed to be able to board without a valid PR card, IF the airline is privy to the person being a PR. They should allow them to board, but not all airline staff understand that a valid U.S. passport (wait for it...) `Trumps' anything else in terms of a valid travel document. LOL!
Yes, as I noted, the airlines tend to interpret more strictly (or at least if-in-doubt, deny) - because it can cost them money if they screw up.
Other than
stuff-happens and isolated anomalies, is there much evidence or indication of this, of U.S. citizens who are Canadians (PRs or citizens) being denied boarding flights coming to Canada? (Noting that in addition to working for a PR, a U.S. passport also suffices for Canadian citizens who, otherwise, must present a Canadian passport or special travel document to board a flight to Canada.)
It took nearly a decade or so for Canada to fully develop and implement an electronic travel authorization system, administered by CBSA, to screen passengers prior to the passenger being approved for boarding. It has gaps of course. And there are the usual system failures. But generally, ordinarily, and in regards to the issuance of boarding passes to passengers on commercial airlines flying to Canada especially, the traveler's information (from respective document) is entered into the CBSA system and the system generates an approved or not approved response. That is, generally it does not require or involve the exercise of any personal judgment, by airline personnel or otherwise.
Of course, typically there is also a separate, additional screening of passenger travel documents, presented attendant the actual boarding process (in contrast to issuance of a boarding pass), with a focus on positively identifying the passenger actually proceeding to board a flight. This is primarily about meeting security screening rules in contrast to verifying documents authorizing entry into Canada, but for purposes of positively identifying the traveler the policy/practice might require presentation of the same document(s) used to obtain approval to be issued a boarding pass.
