soft-landing questions

[swallace]

I was born in the US. I have a US passport and got my Canadian passport through my Canadian dad. I successfully sponsored my American wife and kids for permanent residency in Canada through family class sponsorship (outland). We live in the US.

As medicals for my wife and kids expire soon, we want to do a soft landing around Christmas now that they got COPR. We need to continue to live in the US for at least a few more years.

1) Do I need to accompany my wife and kids for their soft landing? Or could just the three of them fly to Canada (so as to save on airfare)? Same question for applying for the SIN.

2) Regarding the 'goods to follow' customs declaration, do we need to prepare the full document now? Or when we move to Canada, can we just say that everything is mine as I'm a Canadian citizen? I have never lived in Canada. Is there any benefit if I (the Canadian citizen) prepare a 'goods to follow' customs declaration for this soft landing visit at Christmas? Any tips on amendments (for example, if we sell one car and buy another)?

3) We will try to get one of the multi-year, multi-entry Permanent Resident Travel Documents. My wife has a cruise planned in May of next year that stops in Victoria. All fine if she presents that upon disembarking, explains she's just on a vacation, and hops back on the cruise ship? Has anyone ever had success getting more than one of these multi-year, multi-entry Permanent Resident Travel Documents after the first one expires?

4) To be clear, we will all live together (with me as a Canadian citizen) in the US for at least the next few years.

5) Under this plan, there's no reason to think we would need to file Canadian taxes, correct?

Thanks so much y'all

 

[Badge1]

I was born in the US. I have a US passport and got my Canadian passport through my Canadian dad. I successfully sponsored my American wife and kids for permanent residency in Canada through family class sponsorship (outland). We live in the US.

As medicals for my wife and kids expire soon, we want to do a soft landing around Christmas now that they got COPR. We need to continue to live in the US for at least a few more years.

1) Do I need to accompany my wife and kids for their soft landing? Or could just the three of them fly to Canada (so as to save on airfare)? Same question for applying for the SIN.

2) Regarding the 'goods to follow' customs declaration, do we need to prepare the full document now? Or when we move to Canada, can we just say that everything is mine as I'm a Canadian citizen? I have never lived in Canada. Is there any benefit if I (the Canadian citizen) prepare a 'goods to follow' customs declaration for this soft landing visit at Christmas? Any tips on amendments (for example, if we sell one car and buy another)?

3) We will try to get one of the multi-year, multi-entry Permanent Resident Travel Documents. My wife has a cruise planned in May of next year that stops in Victoria. All fine if she presents that upon disembarking, explains she's just on a vacation, and hops back on the cruise ship? Has anyone ever had success getting more than one of these multi-year, multi-entry Permanent Resident Travel Documents after the first one expires?

4) To be clear, we will all live together (with me as a Canadian citizen) in the US for at least the next few years.

5) Under this plan, there's no reason to think we would need to file Canadian taxes, correct?

Thanks so much y'all

Just don't forget that there are Permanent Residency Requirements for your Family to follow in order for them to remain as CA PRs.

"To keep your permanent resident status, you must have been in Canada for at least 730 days during the last five years. These 730 days don't need to be continuous."

Source: https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/new-immigrants/pr-card/understand-pr-status.html

 

[steaky]

I was born in the US. I have a US passport and got my Canadian passport through my Canadian dad. I successfully sponsored my American wife and kids for permanent residency in Canada through family class sponsorship (outland). We live in the US.

As medicals for my wife and kids expire soon, we want to do a soft landing around Christmas now that they got COPR. We need to continue to live in the US for at least a few more years.

1) Do I need to accompany my wife and kids for their soft landing? Or could just the three of them fly to Canada (so as to save on airfare)? Same question for applying for the SIN.

2) Regarding the 'goods to follow' customs declaration, do we need to prepare the full document now? Or when we move to Canada, can we just say that everything is mine as I'm a Canadian citizen? I have never lived in Canada. Is there any benefit if I (the Canadian citizen) prepare a 'goods to follow' customs declaration for this soft landing visit at Christmas? Any tips on amendments (for example, if we sell one car and buy another)?

3) We will try to get one of the multi-year, multi-entry Permanent Resident Travel Documents. My wife has a cruise planned in May of next year that stops in Victoria. All fine if she presents that upon disembarking, explains she's just on a vacation, and hops back on the cruise ship? Has anyone ever had success getting more than one of these multi-year, multi-entry Permanent Resident Travel Documents after the first one expires?

4) To be clear, we will all live together (with me as a Canadian citizen) in the US for at least the next few years.

5) Under this plan, there's no reason to think we would need to file Canadian taxes, correct?

Thanks so much y'all

1) Up to you,
2) You can do this when you permanently move. Since both are first time settler, either your wife or yourself.
3) As US citizens, it's fine without PRTD.
5) no

 

[swallace]

Just don't forget that there are Permanent Residency Requirements for your Family to follow in order for them to remain as CA PRs.

"To keep your permanent resident status, you must have been in Canada for at least 730 days during the last five years. These 730 days don't need to be continuous."

Source: https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/new-immigrants/pr-card/understand-pr-status.html

Right, but since they're living with me (a Canadian) in the US, there should be no issue with the permanent residency status of my wife and kids.
source: https://ircc.canada.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?qnum=1466&top=10

You travel with a spouse or common-law partner

Your spouse or common-law partner needs to be:

• a Canadian citizen, or
• a permanent resident working outside Canada, full-time for:
  • a Canadian business, or
  • the Canadian federal, provincial or territorial government

You’re a dependent child and travel with your parent

Your parent needs to be:

• a Canadian citizen

 

[swallace]

1) Up to you,
2) You can do this when you permanently move. Since both are first time settler, either your wife or yourself.
3) As US citizens, it's fine without PRTD.
5) no

Ah thanks. So when she does her cruise, she can do everything just on her American passport and not mention the Canadian permanent residency? Using the American passport won't alert immigration that she's actually a Canadian permanent resident?

Ok roger so no need to compile a list of everything for 'goods to follow' for this trip? That's good to know.

Thanks y'all

 

[armoured]

Right, but since they're living with me (a Canadian) in the US, there should be no issue with the permanent residency status of my wife and kids.
source: https://ircc.canada.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?qnum=1466&top=10

You travel with a spouse or common-law partner

Short form: not the best idea to rely upon this, they may or may not accept. Issue is basically that the idea is your spouse/children (minor only) travel and or accompany you when you travel from/move from Canada. Since your spouse and children - after soft landing - will have never resided in Canada, IRCC may choose not to accept these as valid for the purposes of meeting the residency obligation.

Potentially this goes all the way up to losing the PR status.

Note there are also related potential issues if no PR card, like getting health/driver's licenses/etc.

In long term, of course, for your US spouse, you can always re-sponsor her should she lose it or decide to renounce because of issues. But note a few things:
1) The complications or minor issues can still add up to significant inconvenience or more serious issues (cumulatively).
2) Children over the age of 21 can't be re-sponsored.
3) Should you and your spouse split or you pass away, well, that's it. (Also potentially for the children).

These all might be manageable, esp in case of US passport holders (PRTD issues not really there) - but are collectively why 'advice' or best practice is to apply for and get the PR status close to the time when the spouse and family are ready to actually move to Canada. Yes, nothing wrong with soft landing on its own, and of course, 'things happen' - reasons why people end up not moving exactly when they first become PRs.

But likewise, a lot of the issues and sob stories that come up (int he PR residency obligation forum, for example) start with people with extended stays abroad at the beginning of their PR-hood and then ... other things happen.

Up to you ultimately how to handle, just flagging the issues (incl potential).

 

[armoured]

Ah thanks. So when she does her cruise, she can do everything just on her American passport and not mention the Canadian permanent residency? Using the American passport won't alert immigration that she's actually a Canadian permanent resident?

They've had these things at the border called 'computers' for a while now, they'll figure it out. Hiding it or pretending not a PR is basically not going to work.

 

[swallace]

They've had these things at the border called 'computers' for a while now, they'll figure it out. Hiding it or pretending not a PR is basically not going to work.

Right. So what would you recommend in this situation?

 

[swallace]

Short form: not the best idea to rely upon this, they may or may not accept. Issue is basically that the idea is your spouse/children (minor only) travel and or accompany you when you travel from/move from Canada. Since your spouse and children - after soft landing - will have never resided in Canada, IRCC may choose not to accept these as valid for the purposes of meeting the residency obligation.

Potentially this goes all the way up to losing the PR status.

Note there are also related potential issues if no PR card, like getting health/driver's licenses/etc.

In long term, of course, for your US spouse, you can always re-sponsor her should she lose it or decide to renounce because of issues. But note a few things:
1) The complications or minor issues can still add up to significant inconvenience or more serious issues (cumulatively).
2) Children over the age of 21 can't be re-sponsored.
3) Should you and your spouse split or you pass away, well, that's it. (Also potentially for the children).

These all might be manageable, esp in case of US passport holders (PRTD issues not really there) - but are collectively why 'advice' or best practice is to apply for and get the PR status close to the time when the spouse and family are ready to actually move to Canada. Yes, nothing wrong with soft landing on its own, and of course, 'things happen' - reasons why people end up not moving exactly when they first become PRs.

But likewise, a lot of the issues and sob stories that come up (int he PR residency obligation forum, for example) start with people with extended stays abroad at the beginning of their PR-hood and then ... other things happen.

Up to you ultimately how to handle, just flagging the issues (incl potential).

Thanks for your input. I read pages 16 to 20 of this and I think we'll be ok.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/enf/enf23-eng.pdf

Specifically this:

If a permanent resident can establish having met this 730 day in a five-year period requirement, then it is not necessary to examine or assess any other factor concerning the reasons for any absence from Canada during the five-year period under examination: the permanent resident will have complied with the residency obligation contained within the Act.

Which, as they'll continue to live with me, a Canadian citizen, should make things fine.

I've searched the Permanent Residency Obligation forum and can't find anything that's close enough to our situation to make me sweat, but if you're thinking of a specific post from that part of the forum that I missed, I'd love to see it.

many thanks and all the best

 

[armoured]

I've searched the Permanent Residency Obligation forum and can't find anything that's close enough to our situation to make me sweat, but if you're thinking of a specific post from that part of the forum that I missed, I'd love to see it.

We have seen cases where they've pursued when the PR has never established any kind of residence in Canada.

I'm too lazy to look it up.

But I will make one small note: relying on one's own interpretation of the manual, including what seems to be plain language, is not so very reliable. Even if it seems clear.

The text you've cited is axiomatic, though - meet the 730 days and you're fine. (Easier way to count is actually days outside Canada < 1095 days but is the same calc). The question in your scenario is whether the days outside of Canada will count for PR purposes, and that part requires an officer to examine - which will involve subjective judgment. There is no guaranteed way in advance to know that such days will count. (All days in Canada count, unambiguously). Repeat, I'm not saying they won't, but that the risk does exist.

Easiest low/no risk way is to simply ensure 730 days + in Canada from the day of landing (soft or otherwise) to fifth anniversary of that landing.

Good luck.

 

[armoured]

Right. So what would you recommend in this situation?

Just don't hide it. Whether she declares as a PR when crossing, or simply responds truthfully when asked, either should be fine.

Personally I'd recommend declaring it when presenting passport because they'll find out as soon as they run the passport anyway, and that might appear is if one is hiding something. But up to you.

[I'm sure there are cases where someone has not been flagged as a PR, but increasingly exceedingly rare.]

 

[canuck78]

Right, but since they're living with me (a Canadian) in the US, there should be no issue with the permanent residency status of my wife and kids.
source: https://ircc.canada.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?qnum=1466&top=10

You travel with a spouse or common-law partner

Your spouse or common-law partner needs to be:

• a Canadian citizen, or
• a permanent resident working outside Canada, full-time for:
  • a Canadian business, or
  • the Canadian federal, provincial or territorial government

You’re a dependent child and travel with your parent

Your parent needs to be:

• a Canadian citizen

In order to actually count time residing with a Canadian you normally have to have resided in Canada for with your family first. It is very unlikely that you would be able to count time toward residency obligation if your family never moved to Canada first. You also typically have to show concrete proof that you will be relocating to Canada to sponsor your family if you are living abroad to ensure that Canadian living abroad do move to Canada if they sponsor their family. There was no point in sponsoring your family until you had plans on moving to Canada.

 

[canuck78]

Thanks for your input. I read pages 16 to 20 of this and I think we'll be ok.

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/enf/enf23-eng.pdf

Specifically this:

If a permanent resident can establish having met this 730 day in a five-year period requirement, then it is not necessary to examine or assess any other factor concerning the reasons for any absence from Canada during the five-year period under examination: the permanent resident will have complied with the residency obligation contained within the Act.

Which, as they'll continue to live with me, a Canadian citizen, should make things fine.

I've searched the Permanent Residency Obligation forum and can't find anything that's close enough to our situation to make me sweat, but if you're thinking of a specific post from that part of the forum that I missed, I'd love to see it.

many thanks and all the best

@dpenabill is a great resource so hopefully they can clarify with concrete evidence. Believe the terminology is “accompany the Canadian citizen”. If your family remains in the US they have not accompanied you anywhere you have remained in the US and possibly in the same home.

Too many Canadians abroad were also not actually following through and moving with their family abroad so now one must provide some significant proof to get approved. Given that you have never lived in Canada I would have expected that your family would have had to show significant proof that you would be relocating to Canada once approved for PR for sponsorship to be approved. If that was the case and you don’t actually relocate that is misrepresentation. You don’t seem to have done adequate research before applying or PR for your family. You were able to add an additional citizenship easily but it is much more complex when it comes to sponsoring family members and obtaining PR not citizenship.

 

[dpenabill]

Introduction:

I offer the long read: detailed explanation, citation, links, and discussion of sources, recognition of conflicting views. But this still does not come close to fully covering questions about Residency Obligation credit for PRs who were not living in Canada with their citizen spouse prior to moving outside Canada.

Your situation, or to be more precise your spouse's situation, which is never having lived in Canada, fits a pattern of cases in which credit toward the Residency Obligation has been denied based on the view the PR did not accompany the citizen spouse in moving abroad from Canada, denying credit for days the PR and citizen spouse were together abroad. However, it is worth noting that how such decisions have fared on appeal has varied, in some the denial of RO credit is upheld, in others it is not upheld. And we do not know how many times officers have allowed the credit despite circumstances suggesting the PR did not go or move abroad (from Canada) with their citizen spouse.

What we know is that in similar circumstances IRCC has denied RO credit and the IAD has agreed with that, but again, that's not how it always goes.

So, as some of what @armoured posted alluded, this is something that could be a problem, but might NOT be a problem, no guaranteed way to be sure. It is not even reasonably possible to roughly estimate the risk (with some exceptions).

But there is a real risk. Again, I offer the long read: detailed explanation, citation, links, and discussion of sources, recognition of conflicting views.

I was born in the US. I have a US passport and got my Canadian passport through my Canadian dad. I successfully sponsored my American wife and kids for permanent residency in Canada through family class sponsorship (outland). We live in the US.

. . . I have never lived in Canada.

There are two groups of questions/issues in your "situation." Both @armoured and @canuck78 have alerted you to one, which frankly might be a rather more important one, regarding reliance on an exception to the Residency Obligation, credit for days abroad "accompanying a Canadian citizen spouse," to meet the RO, when it is rather obvious that your spouse did NOT move or travel abroad with you (that is, your spouse did not leave Canada with you to live outside Canada). Moreover, it appears you have no current, concrete plan to move to Canada, at least not in the near future. I will address these further. Yeah, this part gets complicated.

And as noted by way of introduction: The caveat is there may be NO PROBLEM at all.

The other group, about traveling to Canada, whether for the landing or to visit (however temporarily, including a cruise ship stop), I'll mostly leave that to others. I will note that generally a U.S. citizen who is a PR does not need a PR card or a PR Travel Document when traveling to Canada, regardless the mode of transportation. As @armoured noted, there is no reason they should conceal PR status if presenting a U.S. passport at the Port-of-Entry. Additionally, if they do not indicate their PR status upfront, it is nonetheless likely, if not very likely, the border officials will readily see the U.S. traveler is also a Canadian PR. But that should not be a problem. Perhaps some questions about not presenting a PR card, but for at least a couple years, approaching three years after landing (approaching when compliance with the Residency Obligation might become an issue), that's likely to be the extent of it. Again, I'll leave this mostly to others.

In any event, the fact you and your spouse have never lived in Canada, followed by not relocating to Canada within three years (roughly) of your spouse's landing, could pose a problem for your spouse in regards to complying with the Residency Obligation, or raise questions about whether there was misrepresentations made in the sponsorship application (where you had to detail plans to relocate to Canada WHEN the sponsored family member is issued PR status).


Who-accompanied-whom can matter for PRs living with citizen spouse abroad:

This is about qualifying for RO credit for days outside Canada accompanying a citizen spouse . . .

Short form: not the best idea to rely upon this, they may or may not accept. Issue is basically that the idea is your spouse/children (minor only) travel and or accompany you when you travel from/move from Canada. Since your spouse and children - after soft landing - will have never resided in Canada, IRCC may choose not to accept these as valid for the purposes of meeting the residency obligation.

Potentially this goes all the way up to losing the PR status.

Yep. A fair heads-up.

It appears, after all, that you (well your spouse to be more precise) will be relying on an exception to the RO (which requires PRs to spend at least 730 days per five year period IN Canada), relying on the exception that will allow credit toward the RO for days abroad "accompanying" a Canadian citizen spouse.

To be precise this is the credit stated in Section 28(2)(a)(ii) IRPA for days "outside Canada accompanying a Canadian citizen who is their spouse or common-law partner." This is in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act; see https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/I-2.5/page-5.html#h-274598

The relevant Regulation is Section 61(4) IRPR, which is here: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2002-227/page-9.html#h-686425 . . . which is the provision cited and relied on in the operational manual you refer to (noting there is more relevant information on page 25, not just between 16 and 20), which states that the PR is "accompanying outside Canada a Canadian citizen" spouse days the PR "is ordinarily residing with the Canadian citizen."

Many interpret the Regulation to suggest that as long as the PR is living (cohabitating) with their Canadian citizen spouse, those are days the PR is accompanying their citizen spouse and will be allowed credit toward the RO, and that is what the first paragraph in Section 7.5 (page 25) in the ENF 23, the manual you reference, seems to say as well.

PROBLEM is the Minister of IRCC appears to interpret the statute and regulation more strictly; in particular, the minister of IRCC argues the credit only applies if the PR accompanies their citizen spouse, not the other way around (that is, who-accompanied-whom matters), and the intent of the language in the regulation more or less further requires, for days "accompanying" the citizen spouse to count, that they are ordinarily residing together. In the IAD decision Wu v Canada, 2020 CanLII 68406 (CA IRB), https://canlii.ca/t/j9q9x in particular, counsel for IRCC argued:

In the Minister’s view . . . each day a permanent resident is outside of Canada accompanying a . . . Canadian citizen is deemed a day of physical presence in Canada, provided that the person accompanied is a spouse, common-law partner or parent with whom he or she ordinarily resides . . .​

after having argued "the legislation requires the appellant to accompany [their] Canadian citizen spouse outside of Canada and not the other way around . . . "

That is, to get credit, first the PR must have accompanied the citizen spouse in the move abroad, and secondly be ordinarily residing with the citizen spouse.

In another case, in the Ibrahim case at http://canlii.ca/t/hst3d the Minister's representative similarly argued:

. . . subparagraph 28(2)(a)(ii) requires more than cohabitation. The term “accompanying” requires the appellant to follow his Canadian-citizen spouse and not the reverse.​

That is, the Minister appears to take the view that being-with is not enough to constitute accompanying. The PR more or less needs to have moved abroad, from Canada, with the citizen spouse.

The IAD panel in the Wu case did NOT apply the Minister's view. That IAD panel interpreted "accompanying" as meaning "existing together in time and space" and it does not matter who followed whom; there are numerous other decisions similarly allowing credit more or less based on the couple being together. In contrast, in the Ibrahim case the IAD panel, like several other IAD panels, decided that the officer's decision to deny the RO credit was valid in law, more or less rejecting the view that being-with is enough.

So, again, it goes both ways. It can go either way. Hard to predict in individual cases.

. . . and there is more . . . did I mention I offer the long read?

 

[dpenabill]

Do You Really Want to Know Tangent:

Appears you may have been a bit selective in what you read and pay attention to.

I've searched the Permanent Residency Obligation forum and can't find anything that's close enough to our situation to make me sweat, but if you're thinking of a specific post from that part of the forum that I missed, I'd love to see it.

How about entire topics?

It appears you overlooked, in particular, the topic titled Who-accompanied-whom can matter for PRs living with citizen spouse abroad: an update . . . https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/who-accompanied-whom-can-matter-for-prs-living-with-citizen-spouse-abroad-update.579860/

. . . among others:
About the definition of "accompanying" a citizen . . . https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/about-the-definition-of-accompanying-a-citizen.475949/
PRTD Approval - Accompanying a Canadian citizen requirement . . . https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/prtd-approval-accompanying-a-canadian-citizen-requirement.772796/
Proof of accompanying Canadian citizen . . . https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/proof-of-accompanying-canadian-citizen.672562/

. . . among numerous other occasions when this was addressed in other topics not necessarily oriented to the subject of this credit in particular.

You also refer to reading one of the relevant operational manuals, the ENF 23 Loss of permanent resident status,

I read pages 16 to 20 of this and I think we'll be ok. http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/enf/enf23-eng.pdf

although a key part is on page 25 (section 7.5), and you also reference the FAQ about the possibility of time abroad counting toward the RO.

In regards to the latter, like many others, it appears you read what is set out there as if it states "Your time outside of Canada WILL count toward your permanent resident status if you . . ." travel with a Canadian citizen spouse.

What it actually says is "Your time outside of Canada MAY count toward your permanent resident status if you . . ." travel with a Canadian citizen spouse. "May" means (and I assume this is consistent with its use in the U.S.) something might or it might not apply, not that it necessarily will, which inherently suggests there are additional conditions or criteria, suggesting this is something to consider more carefully before RELYING on days outside Canada counting as if they were days in Canada.

As @armoured also alluded, best to exercise some caution before relying on one's own interpretation of the manual.

A better source is Appendix A: Residency obligation in the guide for both PR card and PR TD applications; PR card application guide is here: https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/application/application-forms-guides/guide-5445-applying-permanent-resident-card-card-first-application-replacement-renewal-change-gender-identifier.html . . . the appendix in particular: https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/application/application-forms-guides/guide-5445-applying-permanent-resident-card-card-first-application-replacement-renewal-change-gender-identifier.html#appendixA

See, in the appendix, Situation B. Accompanying a Canadian citizen outside Canada

But even this is easily prone to self-serving interpretation and failing to adequately understand what "accompanying" means. You are not alone here. And, IRCC's casual use of language like "travel with" in the FAQ answer does not help. What matters is what "accompanying" means. But does it mean, in effect, "go-with" or is "be-with" enough? There is no consensus. It can go either way. It really can go either way.

Low-Risk of a Who-accompanied-whom issue:

For most PRs living with a Canadian citizen spouse abroad, regardless what led to their living abroad it is readily apparent that there is a very low risk of any issue if they were living together in Canada for a significant period of time BEFORE going outside Canada to live, in close proximity timewise if not exactly together.

The biggest risk is when the PR never lived in Canada. And yeah, that's your situation. Thing is, we do not really know if this is a high risk, or just a significant enough risk it results in some PRs being denied the credit and losing PR status, or at least having to appeal a negative decision and rely on H&C relief. We have no numbers, other than going through published IAD decisions and adding up the number affected, but without statistical context that illuminate little more than yeah, there is enough risk it goes badly for more than a few.

It is very unlikely that you would be able to count time toward residency obligation if your family never moved to Canada first.

That's possible, perhaps true, but we do not really know that. We just plain do not know the odds.

Particularly for a U.S. citizen. While there are some logistical matters that @armoured referenced, a U.S. citizen does not need a PR card for travel, and so could put off applying for a PR card until they have actually come to Canada and established a home here. A U.S. citizen should have no need to apply for a PR TD, since again they can travel to Canada using a U.S. passport. It warrants noting that almost all of the known negative who-accompanied-whom decisions occurred in the context of an application for a PR TD.

It might come up during Port-of-Entry screening, but so far as I have seen very few of these cases come from that setting and, it warrants noting, the Minister of Public Safety does not appear, at least not regularly, to be arguing the who-accompanied-whom issue like counsel for IRCC has been. RO enforcement cases originating from PoE examinations are prosecuted by the Minister of Public Safety. Those arising from internal IRCC actions (like in response to a PR card application), or from overseas office decisions (like denied PR TD applications), are prosecuted by the Minister of IRCC.

That is, main risk of triggering enforcement action and being denied RO credit is in the making of a PR TD application, and U.S. citizens can generally avoid that.

HOWEVER, @canuck78 also referenced another aspect of your situation:

You also typically have to show concrete proof that you will be relocating to Canada to sponsor your family if you are living abroad to ensure that Canadian living abroad do move to Canada if they sponsor their family. There was no point in sponsoring your family until you had plans on moving to Canada.

Stuff happens. Plans change. Sure. And generally it is difficult to prosecute misrepresentation of intention (not impossible, but difficult). Hard to prove. Since, yeah, stuff happens. Plans change.

Not so difficult, not nearly so difficult, for something like this to catch a bureaucrat's attention, trigger questions, invite concern, seed some doubts, and more or less open the door to elevated scrutiny and comprised credibility. Once that door to increased scrutiny is open, once credibility is compromised, the fact your spouse did not travel abroad (from Canada) with you stands rather tall and obvious right smack in the middle of you and your spouse's situation. Will this be what tips the scales, leading to RO enforcement denying credit for days outside Canada? Other than to say this increases the odds of a problem, I still cannot guess by how much, what the overall odds are. I doubt anyone knows the odds any better.


Soft-landing in General:

I do not disagree with the general view that doing a "soft-landing" is not, in itself, problematic.

Yes, nothing wrong with soft landing on its own, and of course, 'things happen' - reasons why people end up not moving exactly when they first become PRs.

However, given that that the intention of coming to live in Canada PERMANENTLY is a requirement for even being granted PR status, for all primary applicants, and that to complete the landing the prospective PR usually (Covid crunched some of this processing; I am not sure to what extent there are continuing exceptions) generally must affirm they are coming to Canada to settle permanently, the fact that there is no direct, overt action aimed at verifying the new PR actually had such intent does not mean total stranger bureaucrats will not look at this in the context of assessing credibility if and when the new PR delays coming to Canada for so long it appears they may have lacked the requisite intention when being processed. I doubt a soft landing carries much negative weight, if it comes up at all, but for those who are otherwise colouring outside the lines, even the subtly negative can add up.

For the PR sponsored by a citizen while the citizen is outside Canada, probably does not trigger misrepresentation prosecution but if something has triggered elevated scrutiny, a long delay in moving to Canada quite likely risks more than a subtly negative influence on how things go.