USA tourism strategy: tax Europeans to attract Chinese (but don’t make getting visa easy)
Rant: US Tourism strategy is FUBAR.
Here’s the US tourism strategy in summary: let’s tax Europeans–who will just end up levying a retaliatory tax–to attract Chinese–who already want to come but suffer visa restrictions and strict requirements to do so.
I just wanted to mouth off about the recently passed and soon to be implemented Travel Promotion Act of 2010. Industry lobbyist Roger Dow of US Travel Association makes the case for this Act in HuffPo:
The bill is called the Travel Promotion Act, and it was enacted with strong, bipartisan majorities in both the House and Senate (78-18) and is on its way to the President for his signature. The Act establishes a new public-private partnership to promote the U.S. as a leading destination for international travelers and educate them about U.S. security procedures. This partnership will be funded by a modest $10 fee on overseas travelers who do not pay $131 for a U.S. visa and matched by the travel industry. …
When it comes to competing for international travelers, in many ways, the U.S. is playing catch up. Other countries have been quicker to recognize and support the role travel plays in their economies. The countries of the European Union, for example, spend a collective $800 million per year promoting travel to their countries. Mexico spends nearly $150 million annually; Australia over $113 million; Canada and China, about $60 million. The United States: $0.
While it may make sense to spend some money on tourism promotion, it’s not clear why we should tax visitors to pay for it. Let’s see. Each visitor spends about $4,000. So let’s tax people (and otherwise create administrative headaches) so they can enjoy the privilege of doing so. Here’s Gadling‘s blunt take:
Of course, because the new law does not require any U.S. taxpayer dollars, it was passed with bipartisan support. Apparently the stupidity of taxing visitors to the U.S. in order to encourage them to visit was lost on most of the U.S. Congress.
The European Union– no surprise– is displeased by the new legislation, and is considering retaliating against it by charging U.S. visitors to Europe a $10 fee.
Meanwhile, more Chinese go to Paris each year than to the entire United States. (source: some big shot quoted this at World Tourism Summit…need to get source).
Why?
Well, apparently (and I don’t have this confirmed in all cases) Chinese nationals need to come into a US Consulate or Embassy in China for an in-person interview before a visa can be aproved. Guess what? There are only 6 consulates in China: Beijing, Chengdu, Guangzhou, Shanghai, Shenyang, Wuhan (source: US State Dept).
Well, this kinda sucks if you don’t live in one of these 6 cities. According to Wikipedia, there are 160 cities in China with population over 1 mm. Let me offer a few examples of how ridiculous this is. For example, if you are one of the 32 million people in the Chongqing municipality, you have to travel the 350+ km to Chengdu for your visa interview. If you are one of the 11.9 million people in the Tianjin municipality, take the new CRH high speed train from Tianjin to Beijing for your visa interview. Ditto for the other 152 1 million+ population cities in China.
But instead of really helping tap into latent tourism demand from countries like China by either easing visa restrictions or opening up more consulates, let’s tax the Europeans (and other visa-waiver countries) $14 a person.
Do you know any US visa horror stories from your Chinese friends? Any consular interviews leave a bad impression on prospective visitors with a Chinese passport? What are the problems Chinese people are facing coming to the US?
And can you think of how taxing Europeans $14 a head will help overcome these problems?
I actually think the $14 is better than doing nothing — but let’s solve some real problems to get the Chinese (and the rest of the world who currently need a visa) to come to to the great US and A and spend some money in doing so!
Photo: source
Well, modern Chinese society completely lacks any sign of ethics, honesty, integrity, etc. Just because China as a country may have progressed to the status of global economic superpower, does not automatically entitle its citizens to treatment on par with their foreign counterparts. e.g. … behavior of Chinese tourists at Shanghai Expo … have you seen Chinese tourist behavior when plane lands at airport … ?
Besides, visa relationships are usually reciprocal. China maintains archaic visa processes itself – how many Chinese consulates are there in USA, btw? Did you know that a foreign spouse of a Chinese national is not entitled to work or study in China?
Kudos to the USA for not succumbing to the temptation of making it easier to get tourist income from spoiled, rich, self-centered, self-righteous, citizens of this country that surely faces grave problems in future due to money being the sole guiding compass for peoples’ lives.
Well Mike, Chinese population today is in the 1,324,655,000s. When you have 10 relatives livining in your house are u gonna put a sign out saying “more relative welcome”? Your stupidity and lack of reality is laughable.
When the population reaches that high in the U.S, you think U.S will still open its borders?
This has everything to do with the population problem that the modern Chinese society has to bear and it’s not modern China’s fault. When you have an average of 365 people living in one square mile, of course quality of living will go down. Just like in the U.S, New Yorkers are known to be rude because of the lack of living space and high price of living.
Mike, when you get a touch of reality, then come here and discuss, before that you sound like a college professor who never stepped out his classroom
@Jerryz, I agree with your point that population problem is a root cause of travel difficulties for Chinese. There are plenty of Chinese people who are looking for a better life outside China and I’m sure illegal immigration is a problem. So that’s the cause of the visa difficulties.
I don’t think it’s that hard to get a Chinese visa as a US passport holder. And I feel like China is pretty welcome to foreign visitors from a visa perspective.
@MikeS,
Getting a Chinese visa in the US doesn’t require a visit to a consulate. You can pay a visa service to bring your passport to the consulate, pick it up, and mail it to you.
Turns out the number of Chinese consulates, including the embassy, is, of course, six…same as the number of US consulates in China. Here is where they are: Washington DC (Embassy), New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Houston
You obviously have a lot of negative attitudes toward Chinese people. But don’t you think that a country with an official 9.6% unemployment, that excludes many discouraged workers who stopped looking for employment, should be a bit more humble about finding ways to generate income?
I agree with your point that China faces many grave problems and I’m sure that China’s government would agree. Not sure what that has to do with making it easier for Chinese to spend their income in tourism abroad.
I welcome you to calm down and make some rational arguments!
@Elliott Ng
You are right, every time I go back to China with my family, getting the Chinese Visa from LA consulate were 100% success.
@MikeS, Now come to think of it, the things you mentioned are total rubbish, no point arguing with you.
MikeS, you complain about Chinese tourist behavior when the plane lands in the airport… it just leaves one to wonder what kind of things the Chinese have been saying about people like you and me.
And if those things they say are negative, then of course you would immediately assume new prejudices and rant about how wrong that is for them to be so prejudiced towards us (but of course it’s fine for Americans to mouth off as you just have about the Chinese). You also have to take into account that they come from a different society where different behaviors may be considered acceptable (the difference between Oahu and Virginia [two states that are only 6,000 miles apart] is dizzying enough. Now take into account the fact that China and the US are on completely different continents with different societies and economic situations).
“…completely lacks any sign of ethics, honesty, integrity, etc….”
My only question for this statement is: And have you SEEN us Americans these days? We’re some of the most self-centered people on the planet in my opinion (and don’t get me wrong, I’m a proud American and just as guilty of narcississm as everyone else).
“…does not automatically entitle its citizens to treatment on par with their foreign counterparts.”
What I gathered from this statement is: The Chinese people are inferior. In this case, ‘people’ means ‘human beings’. So if we simplify that statement just a bit we get this translation: Those human beings aren’t as good as us human beings. :)
What a cheerful little message that is.
I apologize for any ignorance I may be expressing in my pointless rant, and if anyone takes offense at what I have said I apologize for that as well.
Mike, you are full of S – China charges $ for visa because we do. Anyhow if I want a Chinese visa, I just mail them my passport and fee – no interview and I get it every time.
While Chinese visa applicants are denial based. Most of the time a parent or sibling (what happened to one-child policy?) have to stay behind to signal intention to return. They don’t do any of this to us.
How about starting with spouses of U.S. citizens? My wife had tried 2 times to get a visa just to visit her parents-in-law in the U.S. with me. The first time, admittedly, we hadn’t been married that long, and as she was changing jobs anyways and expecting to be able to visit, had quit her job. But by the second time, we had a new home _in her name_, had been married 2 years, and she was still rejected. I remember watching a CCTV story about a fish farmer who was able to make trips back and forth for his business, yet I as a U.S., native-born citizen could not take my own wife. Absolutely incredible.
I understand there is high demand, are fake marriages, etc., but the idea that one cannot take one’s own wife/husband, while other people can go back and forth freely for trivial reasons, with no intention to immigrate by the way, is just beyond reason to me.
I finally caved in, and disregarded their advice about not contacting one’s representative. My representative’s office kindly wrote a letter, and presto, she was approved the next time she went in. There really do seem to be some “killers” (whether by design or not), or individual officers who just say no, no matter what.
@Brett, thanks for sharing your story. I had a business partner declined for a business meeting, I think because she was a single woman. I was infuriated because we had real business reasons to have her visit our offices in the US to help move forward our business…so we could continue to make money, pay taxes, and employ Americans. I can only imagine your frustration not being able to bring your wife.
Good advice about contacting your representative. I assume you are talking about your Congressman or Congresswoman of your last legal residence in the US? or where you are registered to vote?
Yes, Congresswoman where I keep a domicile…
Btw, when people make absurd comments like “lacks any sign of ethics, honesty, integrity” especially about Chinese who demonstrate quite a few virtues, even if they, like those in the U.S. grapple with materialism, do have certain moral shortcomings, it’s not just hard to fathom how people can be so blind to their own collective faults. My mother-in-law and father-in-law are so advanced in certain areas of morality that if I had not seen it in others here as well, I would think no one could surpass them.
Those who actually love their country will want to build bridges with people from other countries to provide their country (not to mention others) with mutually beneficial relations. Such comments as these, especially in the frequency I hear them online, besides being itself its own kind of immorality (in courtesy if nothing else) endanger our own country and its legitimate interests.
Iranians have an expression when someone pays a compliment, that it is the complimenter’s eyes which are beautiful to be able to find beauty in something not so beautiful. Even if one finds certain qualities lacking in those of other cultures, it behooves us to find its positive aspects of which there are many, and also not fail to observe the many shortcomings in our own (and own group’s).
The irony is that a lot of so-called patriots also claim to believe in religion, where their own religion teaches that people should overlook others’ faults.
Racism and this sense of superiority is truly the most significant barrier to America’s progress and international standing.
While international travel has boomed over the past decade, with 48 million more overseas trips taken in 2008 than 2000, America actually lost visitors, welcoming 633,000 fewer overseas visitors in 2009. If the United States had simply kept pace with global travel trends since 2000, 58 million more overseas visitors would have visited the United States between 2000-2008 generating $182 billion in spending and an estimated 245,000 new U.S. jobs in 2008 alone. Oxford Economics estimates that the new marketing and communications program created by passage of the Travel Promotion Act will spur $4 billion in new travel spending each year and create 40,000 new American jobs.
Addressing negative perceptions of travel to the U.S. since 9/11 is just one aspect of the travel industry’s strategy to bring more visitors to our country and compete in the global travel economy. The U.S. Travel Association has also been working with partners in government to reform the visa and entry processes through expansion of programs such as the Visa Waiver Program, Global Entry and Model Ports of Entry. Each of these are designed to address the systemic challenges faced by visitors to the U.S. Better access to visas is in fact a top priority, and U.S. Travel fully supports secure videoconferencing technology to alleviate the hassle you have described for travelers in countries such as China, Brazil and India. For more on the status of this legislation, please visit http://www.ustravel.org/news/press-releases/travel-industry-hails-senate-effort-improve-visa-processing-foreign-visitors.
@Kristy, good response and thanks for providing a broader perspective of USTA’s approach toward increasing inbound travelers to the US.
No offense Elloit, but you sound a bit like a regular at the China Daily BBS called “timbatu”…
http://bbs.chinadaily.com.cn/viewthread.php?gid=2&tid=654810&extra=page%3D1&page=1
… ranting that P.R. China should have preference over all other nations to tour/emigrate to the U.S.?
Hi Matthew, no offense taken!
No, I’m not suggesting that PRC nationals “have preference over all other nations.” Hardly. I’m suggesting that our visa processes are antiquated and preventing business and tourism being done between China and the US. I don’t track this situation for other countries, but it’s likely that people in other countries have the same experience as Chinese nationals. I am merely using China as the case study that I know better than other countries.
Thanks for your comment, and honestly I never really go into the China Daily BBS’s but am glad that others like you enjoy that community.
Given the domestic and foreign issues of the day/year/decade – it is going to be a while before Congress/Supreme Court/President take a good hard look at the issue. Hell, if this Arizona issue doesn’t get resolved quickly, could see the visa issue get worse.
I support the new Arizona law. Illegal aliens and legal visa holders are two groups competing with each other. If U.S bans illegal immigration, it would only leads to better visa situation for legal immigration for people who are actually skilled to benefit this country instead of sucking up welfare, using tax payers’ money to pay for their medical bill, and taking up prison space.
Now all the illegals in Arizona are leaving for neighboring states like venom spreading into California, New Mexico, Utah, Nevada and Texas. I have relative who works in the Kaiser maternity hospital in San Diego. Every week 20-30% of the babies are born to illegal aliens. They are granted full citizenship and the family receive tax payer’s money as support. What they do with the money? They send them back to Mexico and smuggle more pregnant moms across the border to give birth in the U.S. In some cases you can have American tax payers supporting a Mexican family living in Mexico such as $5000 a month because the mom gave birth 5 times in the U.S. Now, think about it when you times that by 100000. This is not even the worst problem the illegals bring when you consider the drug related crimes, traffic accidents(no insurance of course).
I however, do not support U.S putting a quota on legal immigration but I sure hope Arizona’s illegal immigration law gets the nod by the supreme court. If they don’t, they may as well as merge U.S with Mexico because I can’t see the difference 20-30 years down the road between the two countries when U.S’s border, language and culture are all dissolved by illegal aliens.
Elliott
Your comments are born out by the facts. Of the top 75 countries in the world with a population totalling more than 6 billion only 9 (excludes the US, Canada and Mexico) are part of the US Visa Waiver Program (VWP). Citizens from these 9 countries, e.g. UK, France, Germany, are not required to get a US visa. Citizens of the other 63 overseas countries are required to get a visa. Since 9/11 US law requires visa applicants to be interviewed “in person” by a US Foreign Service officer at an embassy or consulate location. As a result the percentage of citizens from visa waiver countries that visit the US is 27X greater than the percentage of citizens from non-visa waiver countries that visit the US. The economic consequences of this visa policy are dramatic. According to USTA $100,000 of foreign visitor spending in the US creates 1 new job in our economy. Also according to USTA the average foreign visitor spends $4500. Thus for every 22 foreign visitor who spends their vacation dollars in the US 1 new job is created. The painful irony is that every politician is running around claiming their concern about creating new jobs and helping the economy grow while we intentionally ignore the “Secure Borders and Open Doors” policy initiative touted by former Secretary of State Rice and Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff. The Rice/Chertoff initiative pressed for implementing videoconferencing visa interviews in order to eliminate the need for a visa applicant to travel up to 1000 miles for a two minute “in person” interview. To date the State Department has failed to implement this initiative.
Visas everywhere should be at no charge.
Once again, I apologize for the buttheads in America.
I’m actually a consular officer at an Asian country. Let me clear up some misconceptions. I’m also happy to contribute to CN Reviews on global visas and travel issues if ever needed.
1) U.S. cannot just open consulates across the country willy-nilly. First, the problem is that each new consulate has to have a reciprocal opening by China in the U.S., and negotiations take forever. Second, the costs and time involved with each genuine consulate opening worldwide is tremendous — which is why very few new ones are ever opened, especially in light of the stringent anti-blast requirements now required by OBO worldwide in the wake of frequent attempting bombing/AK-47 gunmen.
BTW, Wuhan is not a formal Consulate taking visa applications. It is a small post for very minor consular services for American citizens and for regional political/economic liaison.
2) Second, the reasons why many Chinese are refused go to section 214(b) of the U.S. immigration law. If you’re angry, go and lobby Congress to reform our current Immigration law. Section 214(B) orders Consular officers to PRESUME all non-immigrant visa applicants are intending immigrants. This means that they are PRESUMED to be ineligible for a NON-immigrant visa unless they prove otherwise.
The refusal rates for different consulates across China vary, but suffice to say the area covering Fujian (Guangzhou consulate?) experiences much higher refusal rates. However, refusal rates for non-immigrant visas are getting lower than ever in China, and probably better than Mexico, Philippines or Nigeria, some other high-fraud, high-refusal posts.
China suffers also from high fraud. Consular officers are taught worldwide that a paper trail DOESN’T matter. This is true, especially for China. There are a lot of myths among Chinese who want U.S. visas. They include that they need:
A) having an invitation letter (helpful for biz travelers, but actually makes it HARDER to those seeking ‘family’ visits.);
B) letters from Congressmen (virtually useless; trust me, Consular officers are well-protected from Congressional ire. Moreover, Congressional staffers rarely care if the visas are issued — the write hundreds of ‘support’ letters each week. The only difference is that after refusal, Consulate officers will write a note explaining section 214(b) to the Congressman.
C) Bank/Housing records. Sometimes relevant, but the best financial evidence for a visa applicant is to have an authentic payslip from a major company showing steady employment. Bank records are too easily forged/manipulated (temporarily depositing a loaned lump sum to boost the account balance for the interview). In general, the high sophistication of forgeries in China makes all paper documents suspect.
This means that the poster who claimed his Chinese wife couldn’t get a tourist visa to visit her U.S.-based in-laws was definitely NOT helped by a Congressman’s letter. I suspect her previous refusals relate to A) her American husband didn’t have a stable job in China; B) she was understandably nervous and wasn’t able to convince the Consular officer her intention to return to China. 3) the second time she interviewed (when the husband added his name on her housing lease) doesn’t guarantee stability because the name may have been added too recently, and of course fraudulent documents.
Like anyone with U.S. relatives, spouses/fiances of American citizens (Amcit) are MORE LIKELY TO BE REFUSED for a non-immigrant visa, especially if their Amcit husbands haven’t shown a long, clear and consistent residence/employment outside the United States. By marriage these spouses are more likely to be INTENDING immigrants. We HAVE something called an immigrant visa for those people. We DO NOT give non-immigrant visas to them because it’s too easy to go into the U.S. and adjust status to become a legal permanent resident.
The art of a Consular officer is to figure out who is telling the truth, who is lying, who is nervous, and who is telling half-truths. Unfortunately it’s not a precise science, especially when there is so little time to make decisions. But an experienced Consular officer usually has a good sense of genuine travelers versus those seeking to immigrate.
SOME COMMON REFUSALS INCLUDE:
Girlfriends/”Fiances” of Amcits
Spouses of Amcits in China on tourist/student visa
Students attending a junior college/English school
Single men going to Disneyland
Couple/Family on vacation with no foreign travel history
Older “aunties” going to help their daughters/sons/nieces with childcare
Fujianese and, increasingly, Dongbei folks.
This of course doesn’t mean all those categories are refused. But when the visa applicant gives stock responses, poor details of travel and ties to China, vague itineraries, it makes it easy to refuse. ‘
@Joshua, “Family on vacation with no foreign travel history”
Wow, so basically every Chinese family finally decided to give America a chance get slapped on the face. Nice!
You didn’t read clearly. NO foreign travel history. In China, entire families who are genuine travelers planning to go to the United States almost always have been on vacation overseas before. Most people in China don’t just up and take their entire families for the first time to the United States.
But even if one certain family DID fall into that scenario, a credible response and interview WITH truthful details about itinerary, inspiration for choosing the U.S. as first trip abroad, funding sources… are helpful to aid that family get their visas.
Having said that, I should amend that statement further and say that couples/familes planning an extended vacation (three weeks or more) of non-packaged tour (self-guided vacation), first trip abroad, are VERY likely intending immigrants.
I have always found strong inconsistencies in these latter type of applicants — “Q: Where will you stay? A: Around… I’ll find something; Q: What cities and sights do you want to see? A: I’m just having a look… Q: Do you know how much this will cost? Average hotel room costs? A: I’m bringing 50k RMB. I’ll figure it out later.”
Of course there are rich families in China who don’t plan ahead. But again, these rich families always have FOREIGN TRAVEL EXPERIENCE. Especially Europe/Canada/Australia/Japan, but interesting details about unique trips to Africa or South America are also helpful.
“the reasons why many Chinese are refused go to section 214(b) of the U.S. immigration law. If you’re angry, go and lobby Congress to reform our current Immigration law. Section 214(B) orders Consular officers to PRESUME all non-immigrant visa applicants are intending immigrants. This means that they are PRESUMED to be ineligible for a NON-immigrant visa unless they prove otherwise.”
There was something I did not mention in my original post which was how my wife described how she was treated rather rudely by an officer there who wouldn’t even look at the paperwork which she brought (and when she first presented it, he was to have pushed it back sarcastically asking whether he asked her for it). This is part of the reason I made the comment tieing in “killer” officers. However, indeed if the law is phrased the way you describe, then obviously the issue is more the law which officers are obliged to follow, but I also question the wisdom and even fairness of a number of the specific criteria used to supposedly presume intention to immigrate (as well as yes, the law itself, in the case of spouses of U.S. citizens).
Yes, at the time, my financial situation was temporarily not in a good position due to the fact that I was overcoming one serious health condition and also retraining myself to compensate for another debilitating condition. Yet I do not see that it is the business of the government, in practically any circumstance, to determine who has a right to marry, and what I think ought to be a reasonable entailing right, the right to actually be able to travel freely with that partner, for a short-term visit no less. What meaning does Article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights have (to which we are not only a signatory, but boasting a prominent citizen mainly responsible for authoring the document) if the choice of whom one can effectively marry can be restricted?
The government has every right to restrict citizenship and benefits for non-citizens (the UDHR does not grant the right to come into any country, only the right to leave and return to one’s own), but preventing a visit of a spouse, is in my view, a rather unjust circumstance, which I hope could indeed be amended so as not to discriminate about the freedom for a person to choose their own spouse and travel with them freely (at least so long as they are married).
Whatever the understandable obligation of officers to enforce policies not under their discretion, I find that the rationale about it being too easy to go into the U.S. and adjust status–which was also given to me by another consular officer–to seem to me to be in every way completely unjust and even irrational. If the rationale were a pragmatic one saying something like, applying for a visa is easier than immigration but then people will over-extend their visits illegally and disappear, that would at least be something reasonable (if unfair for law-abiding couples). But if it’s just that it is too easy to adjust the status within the U.S., then someone should fix it! Why is that my problem? We were being honest in saying we don’t want to immigrate. Does the “balance of powers” in government somehow apply to consulates competing with domestic agencies hedging against the other’s perceived shortfalls?? Maybe some officers should be sent back home if there is not enough support there.
I also find it disturbing that an invitation letter would be used against a person (as we had one, with my parents being eager to contribute in some way to allow them to see their daughter-in-law). Sure, no doubt it could be a sign of zealousness of some who may artificially fabricate paperwork, but it could also be a sign, as it was in our case, of a family eager to do what they can to arrange a visit for their family. While such a policy may sound like a clever gotcha, it is something which rule-conscious agencies are liable to discover, while punishing regular folks who simply expect they can actually bring their spouse back for a visit.
Also, it wasn’t me adding my name on her housing lease–the housing paperwork we had put entirely in her name, but the officer wouldn’t even look at it. The officer would not look at the bank records she brought either, nor did I find the consulate websites making so explicit (as you helpfully did) with what paperwork is considered preferential–my wife was working in a large American company and could easily have provided payslips if American citizens were informed about such things (and again, if she were given some chance by this particular officer).
As far as being on a tourist (family visit) visa, I was indeed on such a visa, because, as someone self-training at that time to become a programmer, I had no need to get a work visa.
How many fake marriages are there, by the way? Is this really such an overwhelming problem? I know fraud is, but with marriages specifically? I don’t think that justifies “guilty till proven innocent” for U.S. citizens as is apparently currently enshrined in the law, but at least it could help me appreciate it more if it were some highly significant problem.
Despite my incredulity about the rationality of some of this, I’m not blaming officers who are serving their country and indeed world by enforcing laws to regulate immigration, which despite my having hopes for greater leveling of incomes in the world to make more unfettered travel and exchange between countries possible for any world citizen, I recognize is indeed necessary for social stability and maintaining a certain standard of living to which people are accustomed. But I certainly have the right to make my views known about what I think is an unjust situation and for my belief at this stage in its apparent need for reform.
Remember spouses and fiances of Amcits DO have the immigrant visa option. This is much easier to obtain, but requires the fee payments and processing time. My suggestion for American spouses is to plan ahead their visit with their immigrant visas, about 10 months before your intended travel.
And fake marriages are very prevalent in China. In places all around the U.S. Chinese/Vietnamese communities there are “law offices” specializing in immigration issues and dating services. You can surmise what kind of “dating” they assist.
Like I said again, documentary evidence is tertiary to a non-immigrant visa interview (unlike immigrant visas, where certain docs are required). This is why the Consular officer wouldn’t even look at it.
So what’s the best plan for the interview? Make sure the applicant says everything in detail as early as possible in the interview. For example, my let’s say your in-laws are planning to visit.
First Question: Why are you going to the U.S.?
Answer: We’re visiting our only daughter, who currently lives in Arizona studying mechanical engineering at XX university. It’s been three years since she’s returned to visit during Chinese New Years and we’re planning to stay 2 weeks over the CNY holidays at her apartment. She’s picking us up at the airport in Los Angeles. We’re going to spend three days visiting Los Angeles before driving to Arizona. Then we’re returning on XX day back to China to attend a meeting with our company’s new distribution partner/etc. We also plan to visit her again in June for her graduation.
In this answer, the applicant clearly identified her reasons for visiting, credible details about the daughter, credible details about itinerary, information about their current job/economic situation in China. All in one short paragraph.
BTW, interviews can be done in Chinese.
Finally, nobody questions your right to marry, so don’t quote a UN charter full of good intentions. We question whether your wife will use the non-immigrant visa correctly. An Amcit husband without a job and limited finances (and frankly, everyone has excuses) had every right to marry. He does NOT have the right to bring in anyone he wants to the U.S., from a foreign spouse to a good friend. Please find the section in the UN charter that guarantees rights for free international travel.
I’ll say one last time: Immigrant Visa. It doesn’t mean your wife has to change her nationality. It only gives her a green card. She can remain Chinese if she wants.
I am very proud to quote a UN Charter full of good intentions (though I was technically quoting the UDHR). Everything good, including our own Constitution, begins with good intentions. And I don’t think an officer of a national government should deter a citizen from quoting from the higher moral authority of a democratically-determined international document which includes but is not limited to their country, anymore than a local representative should prevent someone from quoting from their higher national constitution which includes but is not limited to a single locality. Just because the reality today is that powerful governments make (and the weak international system allows them to make) undemocratic exceptions for themselves (as states did in the time of the Articles of Confederation) does not mean this should or will indefinitely remain the reality of the future.
I myself pointed out that the UDHR does not guarantee a right for free international travel, so there was no need for you to thrust that upon me as though I were insulting you with it. My point was that I see little point to the _universal_ right to marry if it cannot allow two people to abide together no matter their country of origin. My viewpoint might not be supported by national or even international law, but I am expressing a viewpoint here about how I think things ought to work. I am not challenging you personally, so I don’t know why your tone seems to be hostile. I particularly wonder why you used the word “excuses” which seems to imply something which could be very offensive were I to read it that way, especially given the rest of the tone I got from your post.
And as far as getting an immigrant visa, I recall seeing explicit instructions, perhaps on the consulate website, deterring people from getting such an immigrant visa if they did not intend to migrate. In any case, I still do not believe a visitor should be required to go through the full procedures including the need to file taxes, establish residence, or whatever the requirements are, just because they want to go for a visit. That’s my opinion.
I agree we need to change the rules on adjustment of status. Unfortunately, it is FAR too easy to adjust status, whether you’re a tourist adjusting to become a “student” at some fly-by-night English school or a girlfriend adjusting to become a wife.
If it weren’t so simple, I personally would be more willing to issue on many borderline cases.
The above policy seems to have failed miserably. The expected growth in Chinese visitors didnt materialise.
Europe is still seeing a huge increase in young visitors from China, whether to study – usually English or take up short term sabatical roles.
While touring across Europe recently – I was amazed to see the number of Chinese on tour
Europe has a lot to offer http://www.ratsass.tv?e=1234&i=425&a=100&z=10593 West Cork is just one of the magical places I came across.
The local people were saying that half of China seems to be visiting.
So it just goes to show stupid laws can have little impact