IEC - Implied Status Query

[cbcjock]

Hi All,

I'm trying to get a full understanding of 'implied status' for my PR application which was made via Express Entry as a Federal Skilled Worker

In 2017, I activated an IEC (open work permit) and have been in Canada since then. My IEC expired at the end of December 2019 but I applied for PR (inland) at the start of December 2019. My PR application was accepted prior to my IEC expiring and I am currently at the point of giving my biometrics for PR.

When I arrived back in Canada (Shortly after my IEC expired but with an accepted PR application receipt in hand) from visiting family abroad, I was informed that I do not have implied status and that I am a visitor.

My interpretation of implied status, given I had a valid work permit when my PR application was accepted, is that I should now have implied status. And as I'm from a country that is visa-exempt for Canada, I am free to travel back and forth so leaving Canada would not alter my implied status.

I was told at the border however that I can apply for a bridge permit only once I pass the background check (Stage 1?) for PR until then, I'm a visa-exempt tourist.

In other words, why do I not have implied status given I had a valid IEC when my PR was accepted?

Thanks!

 

[scylla]

Hi All,

I'm trying to get a full understanding of 'implied status' for my PR application which was via Federal Express Entry.

In 2017, I activated an IEC (open work permit) and have been in Canada since then. My IEC expired at the end of December 2019 but I applied for PR (inland) at the start of December 2019. My PR application was accepted prior to my IEC expiring and I am currently at the point of giving my biometrics for PR.

When I arrived back in Canada (Shortly after my IEC expired but with an accepted PR application receipt in hand) from visiting family abroad, I was informed that I do not have implied status and that I am a visitor.

My interpretation of implied status, given I had a valid work permit when my PR application was accepted, is that I should now have implied status. And as I'm from a country that is visa-exempt for Canada, I am free to travel back and forth so leaving Canada would not alter my implied status.

I was told at the border however that I can apply for a bridge permit only once I pass the background check (Stage 1?) for PR until then, I'm a visa-exempt tourist.

In other words, why do I not have implied status given I had a valid IEC when my PR was accepted?

Thanks!

I don't think your understanding of implied status is accurate based on what you've posted above. Applying for PR alone does not give you implied status.

How did you apply for PR? Through an economic immigration stream (i.e. Express Entry)? Or spousal sponsorship? It's not at all clear from your post - and you're mixing rules a bit (some related to economic immigration and some to spousal sponsorship).

 

[cbcjock]

I don't think your understanding of implied status is accurate based on what you've posted above. Applying for PR alone does not give you implied status.

How did you apply for PR? Through an economic immigration stream (i.e. Express Entry)? Or spousal sponsorship? It's not at all clear from your post - and you're mixing rules a bit (some related to economic immigration and some to spousal sponsorship).

Thanks for the reply. I applied via Express Entry as a Federal Skilled Worker

If it makes any difference, I'm common law with a Canadian citizen but we elected not to go via the sponsorship route as my Express Entry route based on my background is very strong.

 

[scylla]

Thanks for the reply. I applied via Express Entry as a Federal Skilled Worker

If it makes any difference, I'm common law with a Canadian citizen but we elected not to go via the sponsorship route as my Express Entry route based on my background is very strong.

I see you said that now in your original post - sorry.

You do not have implied status. The only way you would have implied status is if you had applied for a BOWP before your IEC expired. Submitting an Express Entry application does not granted implied status.

You are in Canada as a visitor only at this point and are not entitled to work.

You do not qualify for a BOWP since you must be holding a valid work permit at the time you submit the BOWP application - and by the sounds of it, your IEC has already expired. As thing stand now, you will only be entitled to work again once your PR application has been fully processed and approved and you have landed in Canada as a PR. Until then, if you want to be able to work, you would either have to go through the closed work permit process (requires a job offer and approved LMIA) - or obtain another IEC (if you qualify).

 

[cbcjock]

Thank you, appreciate the reply and clarification. It's what I was told at the border with the exception that I can get a BOWP once my PR reaches 'Stage 1' regardless of my IEC being expired.

I note you said:

'Submitting an Express Entry application does not granted implied status.'

My Express Entry application was accepted, and I got an invitation, and I have made a PR Application, which has been accepted. Just double checking we're saying the same thing here.

So, to sum up, implied status would only be granted if I had applied for a BOWP when my IEC was still valid, and would be for the period of time when the BOWP was still being determined when my IEC is expired.

Not that it really matters but it seems a tad redundant to have to apply for a BOWP when an inland PR application is already in motion with a valid IEC when the PR application is accepted. Surely it's pretty much the same thing? (Not asking, hypothetical question )

 

[scylla]

Thank you, appreciate the reply and clarification. It's what I was told at the border with the exception that I can get a BOWP once my PR reaches 'Stage 1' regardless of my IEC being expired.

So, to sum up, implied status would only be granted if I had applied for a BOWP when my IEC was still valid, and would be for the period of time when the BOWP was still being determined when my IEC is expired.

Not that it really matters but it seems a tad redundant to have to apply for a BOWP when an inland PR application is already in motion with a valid IEC when the PR application is accepted. Surely it's pretty much the same thing? (Not asking, hypothetical question )

Unfortunately CBSA are not IRCC and aren't always that familiar with the immigration rules. The information you were provided was unfortunately incorrect. It's mandatory that you be holding a valid work permit at the time you apply for a BOWP. The CBSA officer was confusing economic immigration class BOWP rules with spousal sponsorship OWP rules. If you had applied for PR under inland spousal sponsorship, then you would in fact qualify for an open work permit with Stage 1 approval. However since you applied under EE, that's not the case.

Yes - if you had submitted a BOWP application after submitting your PR application and before your IEC expired, you would have implied status and be able to continue working.

I'm not sure I see how it is redundant. If you want to continue working after your work permit expires and you have submitted an application for PR, then the BOWP is the vehicle that allows you to do this while at the same time granting you implied status. Anyway - moot point.