View Full Version : how many times a year can i visit usa
i want to visit lots of freinds this year and dthey r in so many different parts of us i would want to spread the time over the year and visit maybe every 3 mths to a different area can i travel on a tourest visa any help please
florida4sun
10-02-2009, 18:25
As many times as you like. You may be asked to prove that you are not working and have the funds to support yourself.
<blockquote id="quote" class="ffs">quote:Originally posted by lynn56
i want to visit lots of freinds this year and dthey r in so many different parts of us i would want to spread the time over the year and visit maybe every 3 mths to a different area can i travel on a tourest visa any help please
[/quote]
steph_goodrum
10-02-2009, 19:57
As long as you are qualified to use Visa waiver then you can travel without a visa as many times as you want as long as no trip exceeds 90 days.
Katys Grandad
10-02-2009, 20:40
You'll have to complete the Visa Waiver (and ESTA) forms each time but that's no problem.
<blockquote id="quote" class="ffs">quote:Originally posted by florida4sun
As many times as you like. You may be asked to prove that you are not working and have the funds to support yourself.
<blockquote id="quote" class="ffs">quote:Originally posted by lynn56
i want to visit lots of freinds this year and dthey r in so many different parts of us i would want to spread the time over the year and visit maybe every 3 mths to a different area can i travel on a tourest visa any help please[/quote][/quote]I may be wrong - but it's not quite that straightforward. My undestanding is if you enter under the Visa Waiver Program (or ESTA - which is replacing it) you can stay for up to 90 days. Addtionally you can only stay for a maximum of 180 days in a (rolling) year. So while you could do several short stays of less than 90 days, you can only do 2 stays of 90 days in one year. Plus - if you go in and out for say one month in, one month out, one month in........ then you may well find immigration paying you a bit more attention!
<blockquote id="quote" class="ffs">quote:Originally posted by mistert
I may be wrong - but it's not quite that straightforward. My undestanding is if you enter under the Visa Waiver Program (or ESTA - which is replacing it) you can stay for up to 90 days. Addtionally you can only stay for a maximum of 180 days in a (rolling) year. So while you could do several short stays of less than 90 days, you can only do 2 stays of 90 days in one year. Plus - if you go in and out for say one month in, one month out, one month in........ then you may well find immigration paying you a bit more attention![/quote]Sorry but you are incorrect as you can use a visa waiver as many times as you like in a year (or any other period) but, as Martin has said, you might find yourself questioned if you use a visa waiver too often.
The 180/365-6 day rule is for B1/B2 visa holders.
Note that whether you have a visa or use a visa waiver, there are potential tax implications for staying more than 183 days in another country.
We have been talking about this very subject recently with friends who own a villa and go to the States often. They were telling us that you used to be able to go for 90 days come back and then return for a further 90 days as often as you want, but since the security clampdowns after 9/11 they say that everyone is subject to the 180 day rule.
steph_goodrum
12-02-2009, 19:11
These are the conditions that must be met to be able to enter under Visa waiver program. If they had applied a restriction (such as having travelled within xxx number of days prior to this trip) it would, imo, be listed as a requirement that had to be met eg have you entered the US under the Visa waiver program within xxxx number of days prior to this trip?
You will qualify for travel under the Visa Waiver Program (VWP) if you are a citizen of the United Kingdom, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium Brunei, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Monaco, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Singapore, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, or Switzerland:
• traveling on a valid, machine readable or e-passport with an electronic chip. Please check the validity of your passport by following this link. The date on which your passport was issued is an important factor in determining whether your passport will be acceptable for visa-free travel. The failure to determine that your passport qualifies for the VWP may result in you being denied boarding by the airline.
Note: A passport indicating that the bearer is a British Subject, British Dependent Territories Citizen, British Overseas Citizen, British National (Overseas) Citizen, or British Protected Person does not qualify for travel without a visa. A passport which states holder has Right of Abode or indefinite leave to remain in the United Kingdom does not qualify for visa free travel;
• For business, pleasure or transit only;
• Staying in the United States for 90 days or less;
Plus, if entering the United States by air or sea is,
• Holding a return or onward ticket. If traveling on an electronic ticket, a copy of the itinerary must be carried for presentation to U.S. immigration at the port of entry. Note: Travelers with onward tickets terminating in Mexico, Canada, Bermuda or the Caribbean Islands must be legal permanent residents of these areas;
• Entering the United States aboard an air or sea carrier that has agreed to participate in the program. This includes aircraft of a U.S. corporation that has entered into an agreement with the Department of Homeland Security to carry passengers under the Visa Waiver Program. Note: Other private or official aircraft or vessels do not meet this requirement; and
• In possession of a completed form I-94W, obtainable from airline and shipping companies;
Or, if entering the United States by land from Canada or Mexico,
• Is in possession of a completed form I-94W, issued by the immigration authorities at the port of entry, and a $6.00 fee, payable only in U.S. dollars.
To assist you in determining if you may travel under the Visa Waiver Program we have constructed a Visa Waiver Wizard.
Important: Some travelers may not be eligible to enter the United States visa free under the VWP. These include people who have been arrested, even if the arrest did not result in a criminal conviction, those with criminal records, (the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act does not apply to U.S. visa law), certain serious communicable illnesses, those who have been refused admission into, or have been deported from, the United States, or have previously overstayed on the VWP. Such travelers must apply for special restricted visas. If they attempt to travel without a visa, they may be refused entry into the United States.
Robert5988
12-02-2009, 23:30
<blockquote id="quote" class="ffs">quote:We have been talking about this very subject recently with friends who own a villa and go to the States often. They were telling us that you used to be able to go for 90 days come back and then return for a further 90 days as often as you want, but since the security clampdowns after 9/11 they say that everyone is subject to the 180 day rule.[/quote]
Blott is correct. There is no restriction on how many times. or for how long, you may enter the USA on a waiver.(obviously as long as each trip is 90 days of less) In fact in the guidance on the Embassy websites it states exactly that.
They have stopped the trip across the border to Canada, Mexico, Carribean etc and then re- enter. However in theory you could fly back to UK and catch the same plane back to the USA for a further 90 days.
It isn't anything to do with security, the important thing is to satisfy the immigration officer that you intend to abide by all the rules of a visa waiver - no working etc and you must satisfy the immigration officer that you intend to return to UK and not 'settle' in USA.
<blockquote id="quote" class="ffs">quote:Originally posted by blott
Originally posted by mistert
The 180/365-6 day rule is for B1/B2 visa holders.
That's not exactly true either. It is a grey area as so whether its 180 days in one rolling year or 180 days per visit.
I know many people who spend more than 180 days a year in Florida, they do get questioned by immigration but so far have been allowed in without too much hassle.
Robert5988
13-02-2009, 22:50
<blockquote id="quote" class="ffs">quote:It is a grey area as so whether its 180 days in one rolling year or 180 days per visit.
I know many people who spend more than 180 days a year in Florida, they do get questioned by immigration but so far have been allowed in without too much hassle.[/quote]
Certainly is a grey area.
It would be totally illogical for someone using a visa waiver to be allowed to spend(in theory) 361 days in every 365 in the USA and yet a someone with a visa be restricted to 6 months in a year.
IMO if a visitor on a Visa waiver can leave the USA afer 90 days and return the next day for a further 90 days, then a visa holder can do the same after a stay of 6 months.
However stand by for close questioning by immigration.
That said, personally I cannot see why they would be bother how long you stayed in the USA. The US Government actively encourages visitors who spend money, pay taxes etc.
Surely the only concern would be that someone intended to settle and eventually become a burden to Uncle Sam.
We have friends who basically stay permanently in the US. They have a 6 month visa, as we do, and they go to stay with their son in Canada for a couple of weeks and then return or go off on a cruise and then return.
They have never had any problems and have been doing this for about 8/9 years now. They are retired and have no intention of working. They also keep a home, albeit a mobile home, in the UK so that they have a permanent address in the UK. They tell me that many others do the same and I have no reason not to believe them.
Andrena
My friends also do this and keep a mobile home in UK so they have a permanent address and on the electoral roll.
Sandra
jimiansville
23-02-2009, 13:53
In theory there are no restrictions on the number of times you can enter the US under the Visa Waiver system. However in practice you have to be prepared for detailed questioning and close scrutiny on arrival and as we were told by by immigration officers on two occasions, could run the risk of being refused entry.
We tend to visit around 4 times per year for 3 or 4 weeks at a time. On arrival at Orlando on one trip the immigration officer looked at all the stamps in our passports (not the information on her screen) and said we were only allowed to stay for a total of 90 days in any one year. We stated that we thought it was 90 days per trip to which she replied yes, we could not stay more than 90 days at any one time but that we could not stay more than a total of 90 days in a year. She looked at the stamps in our passport and asked how long we had stayed on some recent trip dates she picked from our passports and said we had been for a total of 70 odd days in the year already and that we could not continue to do that. We didn't argue but explained we had a vacation home and liked to spend time in the nice Florida climate. She stamped our passports for a 90 day stay as normal and let us through.
On another visit we arrived at Sanford Orlando were told we were visiting too often (2 month gap since previous visit) and we could be suspected of working. We explained we had a vacation home and this made things even worse! The immigration officer said as we owned real estate in the US and visited often there was a suspicion that we may be planning to settle in the US. It was all very uncomfortable but we were let through only to be met by another immigration officer at the entrance to the baggage hall who was stopping people at random. He flicked through our passport and told us we could not visit as often as we were doing as we could be refused entry for visiting too often. We asked what the regulations were and he basically said that under the Visa Waiver system we had no rights and if they thought we were visiting too often it raised the suspicion that we could be working and could be refused entry.
These experiences have made us very uncomfortable with the whole process and we now take care to leave a 2 - 3 month gap between visits.
Robert5988
23-02-2009, 16:14
Jim,
That seems to be down to individual officers; it contrasts with the 2 posts above yours where people are virtually permanant 'residents'.
I have visited 6 times a year for the past 6 years with stays of around 3 weeks(up to 6 weeks on one trip)
You have highlighted the problem with the Visa Waiver. in that you sign away your rights to any form of appeal. However even if you have a visitor's visa that allows 6 months you still face the same problem if the immigration officer believes you might breach the conditions for entry.
However IMO, whatever the individual officers might threaten(bad day in the office?), I don't believe that anyone will ever be refused entry unless you cannot prove to them that you have sufficient funds for your visits and meet all the other conditions.
Has anyone any first hand knowledge of entry denied for 'too many visits?'
jimiansville
23-02-2009, 17:35
I can only report on our personal experiences on arrival in the US having visited regularly for over 25 years and must admit our treatment in recent years has made us very cautious not to visit too often. We were were there from mid August last year until the end of September and went back in on December for four weeks and will not be returning for a few weeks to try and lave adequate space between our visits.
I must admit I'm really surprised at the reports of people who can stay there on an almost permanent basis. It is my understanding that a side trip to Canada, Mexico or the Caribbean islands did not constitute a departure from the US as the authorities regard this as still being within North America. Indeed I understood that if you entered the US then went to Canada this did not qualify you for a new start to your 90 days under the Visa Waiver or 180 days for the Tourist Visa as the clock was still ticking from your origial entry into the US. The closest place on the mainland to exit and renter the US to be able to gain a fresh start to the 90 or 180 days would be to go to Guatamala which isn't really very convenient for most people.
Robert5988
23-02-2009, 18:39
Certainly the regulations for Visa waiver now preclude a trip to a neighbouring country to 'reset the clock' for a further 90 days; that is a fairly recent change. However not sure if that applies to a visitor's visa for the 180 days????
My personal opinion is that sometimes the individual immigration officers are simply being mischeivious and exceeding their brief. To deny entry they surely would have to have very strong suspicions that someone intended to breach the visa waiver or visa conditions; obviously seeking work would be the main factor.
The USA spends $millions to encourage tourism and the longer we stay the more we spend; so why discourage us? - as long as we are not going to be a burden on Uncle Sam.
Certainly it will not stop me coming as often as I wish.
I have first hand knowledge of someone being turned back when they attempted to get back to Florida on their 90 day visa waiver. They used to return to UK but not for long and then come back to their vacation home. Result, they are banned from entering USA for ?? years. They have lost their home which is now in foreclosure and a bargain for someone. They picked themselves up and now live in Winnepeg, Canada in a superb huge house, but are still barred from USA 3 years later.
I have also experienced the same as Jim. I have a B1/B2 but it needed renewing 3 years ago. I made the appointment to go to the US Embassy in October to renew it. It was the same year as we bought this particular home in Orlando and I had visited quite a bit. I needed to return to Florida so went in on the 1-94. I was told in no uncertain terms that as I had already exceeded 90 days during that year, they could refuse me entry. I showed them my out of date B1/B2 which had been used for the previous 3 trips earlier that year, and she said that was okay, but make sure I renewed as if I came in again that year on 1-94 I would be refused entry as one can only stay 90 days in one year!!
When I visited the US Embassy to renew, the US guy asked me had I ever had problems with immigration officers. I told him what had happened, and asked him what the actual ruling was. His words 'it depends on the individual IO and if he is having a bad day, you may get refused'. Wonderful. Just about sums up the ridiculous farce we need to go through which is being made more difficult each year.
As far as going out of the US to a different country on a B1/B2 - we recently went on a cruise, and whereas they used to issue you with another 180 days, they no longer do that. Fortunately it was not why we went on the cruise, but I know some people who have often gone down that route.
So, whatever anyone says, quotes etc., about visas and how many times you can go in and out of the US, we all have different experiences, and you will never know what is going to happen to you at immigration until it does. Hopefully it won't!!
Sandra
Robert5988
23-02-2009, 19:33
Sandra,
What was the official reason for the visa waiver people(now in Canada)being banned?
It simply cannot be for spending more than 90 days in the USA as there is no such regulation, despite what an individual immigration officer might mistakenly state.
The rules specifically state that there is no restriction on the number of times you can enter, or the length of stay as long as this doesn't exceed 90 days.
They presumably must have had suspicions that they were breaching the conditions of the waiver. Working? No ties to UK? Children of school age?
However I certainly agree with you that the whole process is a farce and we just shouldn't be faced with individual officers making statements that are simply wrong.
Katys Grandad
23-02-2009, 20:06
Not right on the point here but I've long thought that there is an awful lot of bluff going on at the Immigration desks and, in reality, the officers don't carry that much authority. They really do need a good valid reason to refuse entry, which continues to be a very rare event.
As Robert points out, a lot of these things aren't backed up by regulations and I honestly think that a lot of the officers aren't that knowledgable on the finer points and just try it on. While this is purely based on my personal experience from a lot of transatlantic travel, I try to avoid the younger officials who seem to 'enjoy' the authority a bit more that the more mature people.
Robert5988
24-02-2009, 00:07
Certainly agree with that KG, the immigration officer at the desk is a 'first point of contact filter'. If he has any suspicions about anyone he refers them to his superiors who will interview/interogate as required.
I have in writing from the US embassy a very clear statement that the conditions for entry under the Visa waiver scheme are laid down in the US Government regulations to be found on their website, and these very clearly allow unlimited visits of less than 90 days as long as the conditions of entry under a waiver are met.
Despite the 'no right of appeal' clause on the waiver, IMO it is inconceivable that anyone would be denied entry for, as quoted, spending more than 90 days in a year - which is in direct contravention of their own regulations.
Robert, I was told myself that I would not be allowed back in that year with an 1-4 as I had stayed more than 90 days during that year. I am just glad that I had my passport with my out of date (by one month with appointment arranged) to prove I had not broken any rules.
I don't have any 'official' line for my friends, but I dare say they suspected them of working. The guy was working running a home internet based business which I suppose you can do anywhere in the world, (I certainly run my internet business trying to get bookings whilst I am in Florida) the girl had been doing modeling promotions for coffee so I suppose the authorities had been watching them.
Sandra
<blockquote id="quote" class="ffs">quote:Originally posted by Robert5988
They have stopped the trip across the border to Canada, Mexico, Carribean etc and then re- enter. However in theory you could fly back to UK and catch the same plane back to the USA for a further 90 days.
Sorry this is a little off topic of original.
Robert, what do you mean by this?
I have a friend who is intending to go to the Bahamas from here (FL) so that they can extend their E2 I94 for a further 2 years to give them some breathing room before they go for renewal.
Are you saying this won't work now?
florida4sun
25-02-2009, 00:32
No it does not work any longer, we got copped trying this one. They now just put a circle around your existing stamp and you carry on with the balance of your visa days. They really want you to go back to your home country.
<blockquote id="quote" class="ffs">quote:
Sorry this is a little off topic of original.
Robert, what do you mean by this?
I have a friend who is intending to go to the Bahamas from here (FL) so that they can extend their E2 I94 for a further 2 years to give them some breathing room before they go for renewal.
Are you saying this won't work now?
[/quote]
Robert5988
25-02-2009, 02:00
<blockquote id="quote" class="ffs">quote:Robert, what do you mean by this?
I have a friend who is intending to go to the Bahamas from here (FL) so that they can extend their E2 I94 for a further 2 years to give them some breathing room before they go for renewal.
Are you saying this won't work now?[/quote]
My statement was about the Visa Waiver - hence my reference to 'returning for a further 90 days'. That is now in the regulations and it lists the countries that do not count as 'leaving the USA' for this purpose. - essentially they are any bordering country and the caribbean islands.
I haven't really looked at Visa regulations, but obviously Martin has first hand knowledge, and I suspect that it is the same list of countries.
Friends of mine visited the US year before last and flew into San Fransisco to visit friends who they hadn't seen for years. The immigration officer asked why they were there, they said to visit friends and he told them he didn't believe them and wouldn't let them into the US. They collect stamps in their passports of all the places they've visited and he showed a great deal of interest in this.
They asked to complain and were placed in a room and at a point much later in the day two officers came in with their luggage and proceeded to search it. Friend's husband objected and was taken to a seperate room and strip searched, the children were put into the care of a social worker who was called and my friend and her husband proceeded to be interogated for the next few hours about their trip, the purpose of it, where they had travelled in recent months etc etc.
They were then told that they would not be allowed to enter the US (still no information given as to why) they asked to see someone from the British consulate and they were told that someone would be contacted. At six AM the following morning an official from the consulate arrived and discussed the matter with them. They were reunited with their children who had been brought to the airport by a social worker and the consulate officer stated that he had no reason why they were being denied access but that they had to pay for and board the next available flight home. They stayed at the airport for several more hours until a flight was found and then they were escorted onto the plane. They arrived back in Britain the following day, friend had time off work as she was so traumatised.
So be wary of what you ask, as Homeland Security have the power to do just what they want, when they want without recourse if you are not a US citizen.
<blockquote id="quote" class="ffs">quote:Originally posted by karenk
Homeland Security have the power to do just what they want, when they want without recourse if you are not a US citizen.
[/quote]
As do the Immigration officials of all countries, including the UK.
Robert5988
23-05-2009, 23:15
In the case above, US immigration considered that their presence in the USA undesirable; no point in speculating on the reason.
In support of Keith statement.
<blockquote id="quote" class="ffs">quote:The names of some of the people barred from entering the UK for fostering extremism or hatred have been published for the first time.
Islamic extremists, white supremacists and a US radio host are among the 16 of 22 excluded in the five months to March to have been named by the Home Office.
Since 2005, the UK has been able to ban people who promote hatred, terrorist violence or serious criminal activity.
Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said coming to the UK should be a privilege.
Ms Smith said "the public interest was against naming" the remaining six, for example on the grounds it could reveal the type of information being held about them.
The Muslim Council of Britain says the government should not act against people - whatever their views - unless they have broken the law.
'Against our values'
However, Ms Smith said granting free speech did not provide a licence to preach hatred and that those banned had "clearly overstepped the mark" with the attitudes they had expressed.
Pastor Fred Phelps had planned a protest in the UK before his ban
"[Naming them] enables people to see the sorts of unacceptable behaviour we are not willing to have in this country.
"Coming to this country is a privilege. We won't allow people into this country who are going to propagate the sort of views... that fundamentally go against our values."
Ms Smith had announced in October the tightening of rules determining who could come to the UK.
A "presumption in favour of exclusion" was introduced that meant it would be up to the individual concerned to prove they would not "stir up tension" after arrival.
On the list of those banned between October and March are Hamas MP Yunis Al-Astal and Jewish extremist Mike Guzovsky.
Also excluded are two leaders of a violent Russian skinhead gang, ex-Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard Stephen 'Don' Black and neo-Nazi Erich Gliebe.
EXCLUSIONS
Abdullah Qadri Al Ahdal
Yunis Al Astal
Samir Al Quntar
Stephen Donald Black
Wadgy Abd El Hamied Mohamed Ghoneim
Erich Gliebe
Mike Guzovsky
Safwat Hijazi
Nasr Javed
Abdul Ali Musa
Fred Waldron Phelps Snr
Shirley Phelps-Roper
Artur Ryno
Amir Siddique
Pavel Skachevsky
Michael Alan Weiner
UK 'least wanted' list in detail
Send us your comments
Fred Waldron Phelps Snr, a 79-year-old American Baptist pastor, and his daughter Shirley Phelps-Roper are barred for their anti-gay comments.
Both have picketed the funerals of Aids victims and celebrated the deaths of US soldiers as "punishment" for US tolerance of homosexuality.
Talk show host Michael Savage - real name Michael Weiner - is also excluded. His views on immigration, Islam, rape and autism have caused great offence in America.
Inayat Bunglawala, of the Muslim Council of Britain, told BBC Radio 5 Live that people should be free to enter the country, regardless of their views.
"If they step over the line and break the law, it's at that moment the law should be enacted, not beforehand.
"If people are keeping their odious views to themselves, that's their business. We should not be in the business of policing people's minds."
He added that internet broadcasts meant that speeches could be screened from abroad into UK meetings anyway.
In recent years, individuals from a range of backgrounds have been prevented from entering the UK.
They have included animal rights activists, rap singers such as Snoop Dogg and even a lifestyle "guru" - Martha Stewart.
She was kept out after being jailed in the US for lying to investigators about a share sale.[/quote]
I would just like to point out that we at least tell people who are undesirable that they are just that before they try to get into the UK and there is an escalation procedure, the immigration officer who is questioning entry has to make reasonable enquiries and it must be signed off by a supervisor before a final decision on entry into the UK is made.
If you assert your rights (if you had any, you don't) with Homeland Security as has been suggested, the person doing that may just find themselves on the next flight home without any further consultation.
So really, best to be pleasant, keep smiling and as in the vast majority of cases, all will be well[msnsmile2]
We went on a cruise to Jamaica and Grand Cayman and Mexico, and had our visas stamped with a further 6 months from the date of arrival back from the cruise. We have B1/B2 visas allowing us to stay a maximum of 6 months on any visit. That effectively gave us a further 2 months as against the original date of departure.
<blockquote id="quote" class="ffs">quote:Originally posted by karenk
I would just like to point out that we at least tell people who are undesirable that they are just that before they try to get into the UK and there is an escalation procedure, the immigration officer who is questioning entry has to make reasonable enquiries and it must be signed off by a supervisor before a final decision on entry into the UK is made.
If you assert your rights (if you had any, you don't) with Homeland Security as has been suggested, the person doing that may just find themselves on the next flight home without any further consultation.
So really, best to be pleasant, keep smiling and as in the vast majority of cases, all will be well[msnsmile2]
[/quote]
I don't think that's true at all. Perhaps in the case of 'high profile' people (such as those in the list posted by Robert, who are known to be 'agitators' in their own country) then the UK government makes it clear that if such people attempt to enter the UK then they will be denied entry. But that's the ones that make the news.
My BiL works for UK Immigration services (or UK Border Agency as I think they are more properly known now) and he frequently (ie several times a week) refuses entry to the UK simply because he does not believe that the person concerned intends to leave the UK. People with one-way tickets are obvious, people coming for 'just one week' but with 10 suitcases, or just where their 'visiting relatives' or 'holiday' story simply does not sound convincing. He doesn't have to make 'reasonable enquiries', the burden of proof is on the individual trying to enter, and I am not sure there is any right of appeal.
It's easy for us (as EU citizens) to think that getting into the UK is easy. It's not. For non-EU citizens it's just as difficult as it is for non-US citizens to get into the USA, and the powers of both immigrations services are similar, and exercised regularly. We are probably just more aware of it when we go to the USA because then it's directed at us.