Residency Obligation - Please advise. Inputs needed.

[armoured]

We are currently in US and I plan to stay closer to Canadian Border and travel on a daily basis(staying in US) to meet Residency Obligation. As part of Spousal PR, do I need to reside in Canada to apply for her PR or can I travel on a daily basis back and forth?

You need to reside in Canada - in the sense of reside, full time, principal residence:
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/publications-manuals/operational-bulletins-manuals/permanent-residence/non-economic-classes/family-class-assessing-sponsor.html

"Sponsors who maintain a principal residence in Canada are not considered to be in violation of residency requirements if they:

• take short holidays or business trips outside Canada on a temporary basis
• have work arrangements that require them to be outside Canada for temporary finite periods of time, but return to live in Canada in between assignments (such as ship crew or seasonal workers)

Persons who do not maintain a principal residence in Canada and who live and work abroad and only return to Canada for short visits are not considered to meet residency requirements."

There is no chance they're going to treat your visits as residing in Canada.

 

[jakklondon]

OP, please note that according to the post I am sharing here (with a link to the referenced Act) you do not have to reside in Canada to meet RO obligation. You can live in the US and just pass by Canada on your way to work in the US, and any part of day spent in Canada will have to be counted for residency purposes. In case you want to reside in the US and maintain your residence in Canada for RO purposes, it seems like you can do that (again, this is according to what is shared in a thread I am linking to below. It's not my assertion). As you may already know, immigration law is complex, and when you have unique case and circumstances it's always prudent to consult licensed immigration attorney and not rely on speculations of laymen on this board. Good luck.

6.4 Day
Section 27(2) of the Interpretation Act governs the calculation of time limits in federal statutes. Where a statute refers to a number of days between two events (and precedes the number of days with the words “at least”), both the day of occurrence of the first event as well as the day of occurrence of the second event are to be counted in calculating the number of days. For the purpose of calculating the number of days to comply with the residency obligation in IRPA A28(2)(a), a day includes a full day or any part of a day that a permanent resident is physically present in Canada. Any part of a day spent in Canada, or otherwise in compliance with A28(2)(a), is to be counted as one full day for the purpose of calculating the
730 days in a five-year period

Follow the link to referenced post here: https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/commuting-from-point-roberts-to-bellingham-time-in-canada-counting-for-ro.757446/post-9944015

See Canada CIC source of authority here: OP 10 Perm Residency Determination

 

[Tubsmagee]

I am a Canadian PR (expiry July 2024)/H1-B holder and had officially moved to Canada in Feb - 2021 from US. I got married in Dec - 2021 and got my wife on H4 back to US as Spousal sponsorship requires me to apply for her PR after I come back to Canada. We are currently in US and I plan to stay closer to Canadian Border and travel on a daily basis(staying in US) to meet Residency Obligation. As part of Spousal PR, do I need to reside in Canada to apply for her PR or can I travel on a daily basis back and forth? Also, for applying TRV for my wife, is it better to apply for visiting visa without me residing in the country. Please suggest.

A permanent resident residing abroad is not eligible to submit a family class sponsorship.

Just wanted to point out that while it is physically possible to cross the border daily if you are in one of the border communities, it is likely to be a real drain after a time. I lived in Blaine and commuted to Surrey for a period, and actively avoided the border the rest of the time. While it is easy enough on paper to cross over (as one poster noted riding her bike over at night), there are times when crossing over will not be as easy. If you are not firmly in compliance with RO before starting such a pattern, I could foresee issues.

 

[canuck78]

OP, please note that according to the post I am sharing here (with a link to the referenced Act) you do not have to reside in Canada to meet RO obligation. You can live in the US and just pass by Canada on your way to work in the US, and any part of day spent in Canada will have to be counted for residency purposes. In case you want to reside in the US and maintain your residence in Canada for RO purposes, it seems like you can do that (again, this is according to what is shared in a thread I am linking to below. It's not my assertion). As you may already know, immigration law is complex, and when you have unique case and circumstances it's always prudent to consult licensed immigration attorney and not rely on speculations of laymen on this board. Good luck.

6.4 Day
Section 27(2) of the Interpretation Act governs the calculation of time limits in federal statutes. Where a statute refers to a number of days between two events (and precedes the number of days with the words “at least”), both the day of occurrence of the first event as well as the day of occurrence of the second event are to be counted in calculating the number of days. For the purpose of calculating the number of days to comply with the residency obligation in IRPA A28(2)(a), a day includes a full day or any part of a day that a permanent resident is physically present in Canada. Any part of a day spent in Canada, or otherwise in compliance with A28(2)(a), is to be counted as one full day for the purpose of calculating the
730 days in a five-year period

Follow the link to referenced post here: https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/commuting-from-point-roberts-to-bellingham-time-in-canada-counting-for-ro.757446/post-9944015

See Canada CIC source of authority here: OP 10 Perm Residency Determination

You keep on ignoring the fact that OP wants their spouse to join them in Canada and get PR. Crossing the border daily down not solve the primary issue that the wife wants to get PR. If the spouse lives in Canada they not longer qualify for the H4.

 

[canuck78]

Thank you for your clear, enlightening and reasonable answer, which distinguished definition of residence for sponsoring purposes from definition of residence as applied to RO requirements. As someone who twice admitted ignorance of TRV visa requirements, I appreciate the input you provided.

It's a pleasant relief to see no delusional projections, visions of "payed games" and paranoia in it. I bet someone who sees games and insinuations in each ink blot has totally gamed, played and defrauded their way into Canada, and therefore is possessed by delusional visions of "games" and "plays" and other things coming from depth of their own profoundly fraudulent personality. Psychiatric help and heavy regimen of medications in such instances are in order (alas, not my specialty, so can't tell which medications will work).

To OP: It's a common consensus that you should seek advise of a licensed immigration attorney who can give you the most reliable insight and advise on what options you have. Good luck!

Instead of saying that you were wrong and the answer presented was actually correct information, you keep criticizing someone and accusing them of being delusional, playing games, etc.

 

[jakklondon]

You keep on ignoring the fact that OP wants their spouse to join them in Canada and get PR. Crossing the border daily down not solve the primary issue that the wife wants to get PR. If the spouse lives in Canada they not longer qualify for the H4.

I don't keep ignoring anything, I thrice advised OP that I know nothing about TRV and that he should consult an attorney.
But you appear to ignore what I write. It seems like you have emotional investment in "proving me wrong", so you will pick an argument even if there is none.

 

[jakklondon]

Instead of saying that you were wrong and the answer presented was actually correct information, you keep criticizing someone and accusing them of being delusional, playing games, etc.

What exactly I have said (quote me) that was wrong? And why is it Ok for someone who missed their daily doze of psychiatric medication to come and insinuate that I have played games and therefore was sent to secondary inspection at the Canadian border? I understand you have emotional investment in "proving me wrong", but it doesn't change the facts and rules of argument. Nor gives carte blanche to delusional, paranoid, insane person to project contents of their fraudulent personality on me, then blame me for who they are. If they do, I am obliged to make clear for everyone else who is who.
Also notice that I have repeatedly ignored that deranged poster (ever since I signed up on this board), in hopes he would get a clue and stop his provocative ad hominems and stick instead to debating the subject matter. I never picked an argument with him, never responded to him directly, ignored him on nearly all occasions, but he kept harassing and insulting me, over and over again, staring from the very first time I posted on this forum, and he keeps doing it every time he responds to a thread where I make a comment. And after all that you say I am the at fault party? LOL

 

[jakklondon]

Just wanted to point out that while it is physically possible to cross the border daily if you are in one of the border communities, it is likely to be a real drain after a time. I lived in Blaine and commuted to Surrey for a period, and actively avoided the border the rest of the time. While it is easy enough on paper to cross over (as one poster noted riding her bike over at night), there are times when crossing over will not be as easy.

I have read posts from a number of Canadian PRs who commuted from Canada to US for work and maintained their PR status. I personally don't recall anyone complaining and being particularly upset and worn down by doing it. Yes, it's a hassle, but many people go through hassle and it's a part of the life. As long as they do it by choice they don't complain. Just ask people who work in New York and commute all the way from mountains of Pennsylvania, driving two hours and half each way, every day. That's like 5 hours of commute daily Is it easy? No, it's not. But no one is forcing them and that's what they choose to do, because they want to live in a large house with 20 feet ceilings and two acres of land, and they want to get an income that will allow them to live the lifestyle they want. Buying home in PA and working in NYC allows them to accomplish that, with as much as a high school degree and work in a blue collar or low level office jobs.
I am not suggesting or telling OP or anyone else what to do. But I think everyone should be aware of options out there, and then make their own decision about it, without coercion and hard rolling. It goes without saying that words possible and convenient are not synonyms.
I also think the issue with OP is not so much the maintenance of RO, but how to sponsor his spouse for TRV while spending most of the time outside of Canada. And that may or may not be possible while commuting back and forth (I understand that laymen here assert that it's impossible, but I can't be certain one way or another unless someone who practices law confirms it, and until then I have to say "may or may not be possible").

If you are not firmly in compliance with RO before starting such a pattern, I could foresee issues.

There is no doubt about it. Someone who had already breached RO and then kept crossing the border twice a day on a daily basis would be asking for deportation.

 

[jakklondon]

Reading all these posts and seeing how much pain some people go through just to live their lives, I can't stop myself from once again expressing my deepest disgust at Orwellian Triple Hermetic Secret Worshippers who make the lives of the ordinary people so difficult, while those on the top of Global elite cut the skies in private jets and cross the seas in private yachts costing above one hundred million dollars. Something is grossly wrong with this Orwellian Triple Hermetic picture.

 

[canuck78]

What exactly I have said (quote me) that was wrong? And why is it Ok for someone who missed their daily doze of psychiatric medication to come and insinuate that I have played games and therefore was sent to secondary inspection at the Canadian border? I understand you have emotional investment in "proving me wrong", but it doesn't change the facts and rules of argument. Nor gives carte blanche to delusional, paranoid, insane person to project contents of their fraudulent personality on me, then blame me for who they are. If they do, I am obliged to make clear for everyone else who is who.
Also notice that I have repeatedly ignored that deranged poster (ever since I signed up on this board), in hopes he would get a clue and stop his provocative ad hominems and stick instead to debating the subject matter. I never picked an argument with him, never responded to him directly, ignored him on nearly all occasions, but he kept harassing and insulting me, over and over again, staring from the very first time I posted on this forum, and he keeps doing it every time he responds to a thread where I make a comment. And after all that you say I am the at fault party? LOL

This is when you claimed I was making things up.

canuck78 said:
You can’t sponsor a spouse for PR if you don’t live in Canada. Assume the goal it to get PR and then citizenship so he needs to move to Canada he can’t just drive in for a few minutes everyday. If living in Canada then a spouse can’t remain living in the US on their H4. Only option is to try to get a TRV and sponsor inland or return to your home country while your spouse sponsors you from Canada.

You replied:
I think you are pulling this from thin air. There was another poster on this forum who brought a link to CIC and code of regulation, which confirmed his claim that even a brief step on Canadian soil qualified PR for maintenance of residence for PR purposes. That's why I advised OP to speak with attorney. I don't know anything about TRV, and one must know all about it and definition of "residence" according to CIC to be able to give reliable answer to OP.
I don't like pulling things from thin air (or my own imagination), and insisting on its accuracy.

 

[canuck78]

Reading all these posts and seeing how much pain some people go through just to live their lives, I can't stop myself from once again expressing my deepest disgust at Orwellian Triple Hermetic Secret Worshippers who make the lives of the ordinary people so difficult, while those on the top of Global elite cut the skies in private jets and cross the seas in private yachts costing above one hundred million dollars. Something is grossly wrong with this Orwellian Triple Hermetic picture.

Minimal pain to live in Canada for 2 out of 5 years and to get citizenship after 3 out of 5 years.

 

[canuck78]

I have read posts from a number of Canadian PRs who commuted from Canada to US for work and maintained their PR status. I personally don't recall anyone complaining and being particularly upset and worn down by doing it. Yes, it's a hassle, but many people go through hassle and it's a part of the life. As long as they do it by choice they don't complain. Just ask people who work in New York and commute all the way from mountains of Pennsylvania, driving two hours and half each way, every day. That's like 5 hours of commute daily Is it easy? No, it's not. But no one is forcing them and that's what they choose to do, because they want to live in a large house with 20 feet ceilings and two acres of land, and they want to get an income that will allow them to live the lifestyle they want. Buying home in PA and working in NYC allows them to accomplish that, with as much as a high school degree and work in a blue collar or low level office jobs.
I am not suggesting or telling OP or anyone else what to do. But I think everyone should be aware of options out there, and then make their own decision about it, without coercion and hard rolling. It goes without saying that words possible and convenient are not synonyms.
I also think the issue with OP is not so much the maintenance of RO, but how to sponsor his spouse for TRV while spending most of the time outside of Canada. And that may or may not be possible while commuting back and forth (I understand that laymen here assert that it's impossible, but I can't be certain one way or another unless someone who practices law confirms it, and until then I have to say "may or may not be possible").



There is no doubt about it. Someone who had already breached RO and then kept crossing the border twice a day on a daily basis would be asking for deportation.

You clearly don’t know anyone commuting over 30 minutes a day one way. Lots of complaining even if was their choice.

 

[canuck78]

I don't keep ignoring anything, I thrice advised OP that I know nothing about TRV and that he should consult an attorney.
But you appear to ignore what I write. It seems like you have emotional investment in "proving me wrong", so you will pick an argument even if there is none.

You should stop replying to a post if you don’t know the answer and when someone else has already provided the correct information.

 

[jakklondon]

You should stop replying to a post if you don’t know the answer and when someone else has already provided the correct information.

As if you knew answer when you replied LOL

 

[jakklondon]

This is when you claimed I was making things up.

canuck78 said:
You can’t sponsor a spouse for PR if you don’t live in Canada. Assume the goal it to get PR and then citizenship so he needs to move to Canada he can’t just drive in for a few minutes everyday. If living in Canada then a spouse can’t remain living in the US on their H4. Only option is to try to get a TRV and sponsor inland or return to your home country while your spouse sponsors you from Canada.

You replied:
I think you are pulling this from thin air. There was another poster on this forum who brought a link to CIC and code of regulation, which confirmed his claim that even a brief step on Canadian soil qualified PR for maintenance of residence for PR purposes. That's why I advised OP to speak with attorney. I don't know anything about TRV, and one must know all about it and definition of "residence" according to CIC to be able to give reliable answer to OP.
I don't like pulling things from thin air (or my own imagination), and insisting on its accuracy.

I still think you pull things from thin air, I don't see confirmation of your claims. You categorically state "You can’t sponsor a spouse for PR if you don’t live in Canada.", which in the context of the rest of your reply means one can't sponsor a spouse for PR, even if they maintain residence in Canada under section 6.4 OP 10 Permanent Residency Status Determination, which states that any part of the day spent in Canada is counted as full day for RO (Residency Obligation) purposes.
In light of definition of residence for RO (Residency Obligation) purposes, question remains: what is definition of residing and living in Canada when you sponsor for TRV visa? IF** it is the same as definition of residence for purposes of calculating days in Canada for RO (Residency Obligation) purposes, then it should be possible to sponsor someone while maintaining PR status and RO (Residency Obligation) by briefly visiting Canada. On the other hand, if the Immigration Act specifically defines what "residence in Canada" for PR sponsorship of TRV means and distinguishes it from residency requirements for RO (Residency Obligation) purposes, then depending on what that definition is, he may or may not be able to sponsor his wife for TRV while maintaining his RO (Residency Obligation) by brief visits to Canada. As you can see, all depends on definition of one or other term (which, with the way actual laws are written, can mean things that appear counterintuitive or don't make sense to us).
You have made an assertion, but you have not made clear what is the basis for your assertion (you only shared your interpretation of general requirement on residency and what you think the legal requirement for PR to sponsor TRV should be). For that reason I believe you pulled your assertion from thin air.
And, quite frankly, I don't think you are qualified to make a legal argument: you are neither licensed attorney nor you sound like someone who is an expert in Canadian immigration laws.
NOTE that none of what I stated implies that OP CAN sponsor his wife for TRV while jogging back and forth between US and Canada. I don't make brazen assertions one way or another (I humbly admit that I lack enough knowledge to do so, and TRV is not my forte), but you can't just admit your own ignorance in legal matters. Instead, your above posts are emotionally motivated and Ego driven, and as such are about proving you are right and your opponent is wrong, even if you have no clue what your assertion is based on, or what your opponent actually states. I have no such concerns. All I care about is establishing what is correct and when I lack sufficient knowledge I admit so and advise askers to seek professional legal counsel.


-----------------------------
**I hope you understand definition of the word IF. If not, look up Merriam-Webster's dictionary online.