Banned from entry for 8 years

[Vossos]

In addition to the 1.5 year stay, did you ever exceed the 180 day total límit as a tourist in a 12 month period since the date of your first arrival in Argentina in 2022?

I wonder if it's possible that doing so more than once triggered a "charge" of "abuse of the tourist visa" and that resulted in what happened today, or if now, just one previous overstay is enough to be denied entry and banned for years.

Perhaps we won't know for sure until it happens to someone else.

I’m at least 95% sure prior to the overstay I never stayed 180 in a rolling 12 months. I’d leave for at least as long as I’d stayed

 

[Alby]

Many people (milongueros, foreign spouses who don't want residency) spend 180 days here on the tourist visa, rolling year in rolling year out. One overstay could lead to an eight-year interruption, if this case proves not to be a one-off.

 

[steveinbsas]

I’m at least 95% sure prior to the overstay I never stayed 180 in a rolling 12 months. I’d leave for at least as long as I’d stayed

Since my previous post I came to the "conclusión" that probably didn't/wouldn't have made much difference.

The migraciones official apparently determined that the 1.5 year stay, combinef with the additional exits and entries was enough evidence to demonstrate to their satisfaction that you have been "living" in Argentina as a tourist, without the proper residency required by law.

If they acted "on their own authority" as far as I know which is prescribed by law (the decreto of 2010?), I don't think anything you could have said today would have made any difference, even citing you never otherwise stayed more than 180 days of a rolling year. It was up to them to make the call.

There is aslo a possiblity that the same official will give a "pass" to others tomorrow, but if the decreto of 2025 is now being strongly enforced by the officials at the border, of course that is far less likely, and the consequences far more serious.

Frankly, I've never undestood why anyone would ever ovestay a tourist visa in the first place and I can't think of a better way to give migraciones the middle finger, regardless of how complacient they have been in the past regarding the enforcment of the laws. That's their prerogative, not ours.

 

[Alby]

I agree, it would never occur to me to do it, but poor old Vos, if we go back and look at his/her 2025 thread, he/she was looking for advice on what to do, and people were confidently advising him/her to 'just overstay/no brainer' etc.

 

[Vossos]

Since my previous post I came to the "conclusión" that probably didn't/wouldn't have made much difference.

The migraciones official apparently determined that the 1.5 year stay, combinef with the additional exits and entries was enough evidence to demonstrate to their satisfaction that you have been "living" in Argentina as a tourist, without the proper residency required by law.

If they acted "on their own authority" as far as I know which is prescribed by law (the decreto of 2010?), I don't think anything you could have said today would have made any difference, even citing you never otherwise stayed more than 180 days of a rolling year. It was up to them to make the call.

There is aslo a possiblity that the same official will give a "pass" to others tomorrow, but if the decreto of 2025 is now being strongly enforced by the officials at the border, of course that is far less likely, and the consequences far more serious.

Frankly, I've never undestood why anyone would ever ovestay a tourist visa in the first place and I can't think of a better way to give migraciones the middle finger, regardless of how complacient they have been in the past regarding the enforcment of the laws. That's their prerogative, not ours.

Interestingly the paperwork doesn’t have the “sospecha fundada - falso turista” marked. Only “prohibicion de reingreso” from “coincidencia en la base de aptitud migratoria”

 

[Vossos]

I agree, it would never occur to me to do it, but poor old Vos, if we go back and look at his 2025 thread, he/she was looking for advice on what to do, and people were confidently advising him/her to 'just overstay/no brainer' etc.

Admittedly I did go by the general advice from here but it is what it is. I’d also incurred a serious injury a few months into that trip and was wheelchairbound for 4 months at which time I wasnt terribly keen on travelling so went with the overstay. I figured short stays after that wouldn’t be problematic but the proof has been in the pudding today. Extremely sad and not sure how to process it

 

[Alby]

Interestingly the paperwork doesn’t have the “sospecha fundada - falso turista” marked. Only “prohibicion de reingreso” from “coincidencia en la base de aptitud migratoria”

I asked my friendly neighbourhood AI (paid version) the following: Someone has reported being denied entry at Ezeiza and has had their passport stamped with an 8-year entry ban. They report seeing a document produced by Migraciones that says: “prohibicion de reingreso” from “coincidencia en la base de aptitud migratoria”. Any idea what those two terms add up to?

I won't paste the answer here, since that seems to be frowned upon by the administrator, but the gist of the answer is that it was not a decision made on the spot, but was the border official simply acting on an expulsion order that was already in the system. It goes on to say that the most likely explanation is that this order was generated during the 15-month overstay, which lies dormant and is not cancelled by paying the fine on eventual exit. It suggests that, given administrative lag times, the expulsion order may not have been formalised at the time of the February entry, but it has since been, hence today's result.

Others can review their own AIs to see whether they agree.

 

[Vossos]

It’s not a good day for it, but maybe contact a lawyer?

Any recommendations? I don’t know how likely or possible appeals are/if there’s a potential visa route

 

[Vossos]

I asked my friendly neighbourhood AI (paid version) the following: Someone has reported being denied entry at Ezeiza and has had their passport stamped with an 8-year entry ban. They report seeing a document produced by Migraciones that says: “prohibicion de reingreso” from “coincidencia en la base de aptitud migratoria”. Any idea what those two terms add up to?

I won't paste the answer here, since that seems to be frowned upon by the administrator, but the gist of the answer is that it was not a decision made on the spot, but was the border official simply acting on an expulsion order that was already in the system. It goes on to say that the most likely explanation is that this order was generated during the 15-month overstay, which lies dormant and is not cancelled by paying the fine on eventual exit. It suggests that, given administrative lag times, the expulsion order may not have been formalised at the time of the February entry, but it has since been, hence today's result.

Others can review their own AIs to see whether they agree.

That would correlate with the entry ban end date being 8 years after my last exit rather than 8 years after today. Would have spent my birthday weekend in Buenos Aires but I’ll be in my 40s by the time that’ll apparently be possible again

 

[Alby]

Any recommendations? I don’t know how likely or possible appeals are/if there’s a potential visa route

Fear not. Bajo-Cero is currently online and is no doubt about to tell us all we and our friendly neighborhood AIs have no idea what we are talking about and will probably tell you what your options are.