Thousands of Argentines, with terror of being expelled

[AlexfromLA]

This is interesting, so what happens when there is a renewal denial. Do they have to leave in 24 hours or something, and if entering from uruguay do they get turned back ?

In Arizona they want to make it a felony. That means jail time, subsequent deportation and you won't ever be allowed back.

Maybe they should try something similar in Argentina ?

 

[ssr]

Thank you for saying this. I wanted to say something similar but didn't want to rub anyones nose in it. Might as well now.

Bottom line is, if the Argentinian government starts cracking down on perma tourists at some point, many United States citizens are going to know what it feel like to be an illegal immigrant in a country that doesn't want them.

Haven't we been over this ad nauseam here at BAExpats.org? There's a huge difference between people who have fled their home country in search of opportunity elsewhere (and who have built a life in a new country and are dependent on income earned in that country) and "expats" with money to burn who will just float on to the next hip place (Prague, Goa, Thailand, wherever) if things get too difficult in their current expat paradise.

I don't even know how anyone can think the two situations are at all comparable. I can't imagine the stress of worrying that my family and I are going to be deported back to Latin America after setting up a life and earning a good income in the US. Yes, they broke the law and there should be consequences, but it has to be a terrible feeling nonetheless. On the other hand, it's difficult to have much sympathy for "expats" who would have to go back to their developed countries if Argentina decided to start enforcing its laws.

It's more than a little ridiculous to suggest that the latter form of "illegal immigrant" will ever know what it's like to be the former.

 

[LAtoBA]

Excuse me, but " perma " and " tourist " terms do not go together, making a trip to Uruguay with the sole purpose of getting extra months as a tourist to permanently reside here obviously violates the spirit of migratory laws, and any competent judge could enforce the law and get you deported just with that, the fact that it is not enforced is what makes the difference, there is no loophole here.

If you google the definition of a "loophole" it can indeed be defined as an exception, ergo, lack of enforcement. Perhaps it is not technically by law a loophole, but the fact that the government is complacent in the existence of perma-tourists sure does sound like a "loophole" to me.

 

[nikad]

In Arizona they want to make it a felony. That means jail time, subsequent deportation and you won't ever be allowed back.

Maybe they should try something similar in Argentina ?

I do not understand how making it a felony changes things really: US migration laws are enforced, you get caught you are deported, why would they want to host you and feed you before doing so?

 

[steveinbsas]

In Arizona they want to make it a felony. That means jail time, subsequent deportation and you won't ever be allowed back.

Maybe they should try something similar in Argentina ?

Did the Arizona law create new penalties for being an illegal immigrant or just support the enforcement of existing federal laws?

 

[SaraSara]

Wish I could have said it as well as you did.

Haven't we been over this ad nauseam here at BAExpats.org? There's a huge difference between people who have fled their home country in search of opportunity elsewhere (and who have built a life in a new country and are dependent on income earned in that country) and "expats" with money to burn who will just float on to the next hip place (Prague, Goa, Thailand, wherever) if things get too difficult in their current expat paradise.

I don't even know how anyone can think the two situations are at all comparable. I can't imagine the stress of worrying that my family and I are going to be deported back to Latin America after setting up a life and earning a good income in the US. Yes, they broke the law and there should be consequences, but it has to be a terrible feeling nonetheless. On the other hand, it's difficult to have much sympathy for "expats" who would have to go back to their developed countries if Argentina decided to start enforcing its laws.

It's more than a little ridiculous to suggest that the latter form of "illegal immigrant" will ever know what it's like to be the former.

 

[citygirl]

I have asked this question a multitude of times - have never seen nor read the law that says a tourist can't exceed 180 calendar days in Argentina, such as in Brasil. Does anyone have proof that it exists?

The only law I've seen is that you must leave the country after a maximum of 6 months but that doesn't answer the maximum stay question.

Again, if someone could post the 180 day law, I would love to read it.

I do believe that if the stay exceeds 180 days, one should be filing taxes in Argentina.

 

[LAtoBA]

In Arizona they want to make it a felony. That means jail time, subsequent deportation and you won't ever be allowed back.

Maybe they should try something similar in Argentina ?

Expats would just move on to the next country in Latin America.

 

[nikad]

If you google the definition of a "loophole" it can indeed be defined as an exception, ergo, lack of enforcement. Perhaps it is not technically by law a loophole, but the fact that the government is compliant in the existence of perma-tourists sure does sound like a "loophole" to me.

I still there is no loophole but lack of law enforcement...

Loophole: Ambiguity, omission, etc, as in a law, by which one can avoid a penalty or responsibility. A technicality that allows a person or business to avoid the scope of a law without directly violating the law.

 

[LAtoBA]

I still there is no loophole but lack of law enforcement...

Loophole: Ambiguity, omission, etc, as in a law, by which one can avoid a penalty or responsibility. A technicality that allows a person or business to avoid the scope of a law without directly violating the law.

In the end it's all about interpretation. In the below definition of loophole I see it differently:

A loophole is a weakness or exception that allows a system, such as a law or security, to be circumvented or otherwise avoided. ...