Canadian snowbirds will soon be granted 8 month visas to US

[abela]

The U.S. Congress is about to vote on a new law that would grant visas to Canadians allowing them to reside in the US for up to 240 days instead of the now maximum of 182 days. Canadians spent $16.5 billion in the U.S. in 2011 and purchased $20 billion of U.S. real estate in 2012 alone !

Living outside of Canada for more than 183 days however, could affect access to free medicare in most provinces.

Obviously, the U.S. did its homework and wants the Canadian dollar...

[Sunshine Girl]

The U.S. Congress is about to vote on a new law that would grant visas to Canadians allowing them to reside in the US for up to 240 days instead of the now maximum of 182 days. Canadians spent $16.5 billion in the U.S. in 2011 and purchased $20 billion of U.S. real estate in 2012 alone !

Living outside of Canada for more than 183 days however, could affect access to free medicare in most provinces.

Obviously, the U.S. did its homework and wants the Canadian dollar...

The U.S. Congress is about to vote on a new law that would grant visas to Canadians allowing them to reside in the US for up to 240 days instead of the now maximum of 182 days. Canadians spent $16.5 billion in the U.S. in 2011 and purchased $20 billion of U.S. real estate in 2012 alone !

Living outside of Canada for more than 183 days however, could affect access to free medicare in most provinces.

Obviously, the U.S. did its homework and wants the Canadian dollar...

Canadians should do their homework too. Extended 8 month visas are one thing. The IRS law for tax residence is another. Currently Canadian snowbirds are vulnerable to the IRS income tax under the substantial presence test if they stay a total of over 121 days in any given year in the US. Also, real estate property owned by Canadians in the US is taxable under US estate tax, which is a very different system from the Canadian tax law. http://www.amchamcanada.ca/business-in-us/tax-issues/US_Taxation_of_Canadian_Snowbirds

[BobC]

My understanding is that it is precisely the tax laws that are being changed. The 121 days is being extended to 180 days before one would be deemed to have a "substantial presence" and thereby be subject to tax in the US. This would only apply to Canadians--no other nationalities.

Canadians don't actually need a visa for short stays in the US as long a they don't work. But, as stated, if they spend too much time in the US, they will get tangled up in US tax laws.

[Sunshine Girl]

My understanding is that it is precisely the tax laws that are being changed. The 121 days is being extended to 180 days before one would be deemed to have a "substantial presence" and thereby be subject to tax in the US. This would only apply to Canadians--no other nationalities.

Canadians don't actually need a visa for short stays in the US as long a they don't work. But, as stated, if they spend too much time in the US, they will get tangled up in US tax laws.

Please post your source? I can't find anything that confirms this bill involves a change in IRS rules about "substantial presence"...

[More Liana]

A Canadian friend living in Vancouver says that the new law is applicable only to Canadians over age 55. Yes? No?

[CWB]

Would Americans discriminate that way?

[Sunshine Girl]

http://www.thestar.com/business/personal_finance/retirement/2013/02/11/avoiding_the_snowbirds_trap.html

[More Liana]

Would Americans discriminate that way?

Apparently so, CWB.

[ericurmudgeon]

The U.S. Congress is about to vote on a new law that would grant visas to Canadians allowing them to reside in the US for up to 240 days instead of the now maximum of 182 days. Canadians spent $16.5 billion in the U.S. in 2011 and purchased $20 billion of U.S. real estate in 2012 alone !

Living outside of Canada for more than 183 days however, could affect access to free medicare in most provinces.

Obviously, the U.S. did its homework and wants the Canadian dollar...

Medical coverage certainly will be an issue unless something changes in the various provinces. Also, coverage is NOT free in BC nor, I think, in most other provinces. I pay over $1500 a year in premiums and many of the services/tests I use are charged for. Just want to keep the record straight.

[Tangawizi]

The different provinces have different rules. Coverage is pretty darn free in Saskatchewan. I gave birth to four children in Saskatchewan - total cost, nada. My son had an emergency appendectomy a few years ago - admission to the emergency room, assessment, ambulance transfer to a beautiful pediatric ward in another hospital, surgery and follow-up care. Total cost, nada. There is a fee for ambulances if you call them yourself, but since the ambulance transfer was requested by the doctor, it was free. I remember how grateful I was that a person like myself, working full-time but with fairly low income, could receive such fast and efficient health care. No social assistance was involved, by the way, and my employer didn't offer a group insurance policy to top up the provincial coverage. That health coverage was mine just for being a Canadian citizen and a resident of Saskatchewan.

So yes, the medical coverage is a major factor for most Canadians when they're looking at retirement options. That said, I have an aunt who relocated full-time to a retirement community in Florida after my uncle died and before the big crash, and she's happy with her choice.

[joco69]

The different provinces have different rules. Coverage is pretty darn free in Saskatchewan. I gave birth to four children in Saskatchewan - total cost, nada. My son had an emergency appendectomy a few years ago - admission to the emergency room, assessment, ambulance transfer to a beautiful pediatric ward in another hospital, surgery and follow-up care. Total cost, nada. There is a fee for ambulances if you call them yourself, but since the ambulance transfer was requested by the doctor, it was free. I remember how grateful I was that a person like myself, working full-time but with fairly low income, could receive such fast and efficient health care. No social assistance was involved, by the way, and my employer didn't offer a group insurance policy to top up the provincial coverage. That health coverage was mine just for being a Canadian citizen and a resident of Saskatchewan.

So yes, the medical coverage is a major factor for most Canadians when they're looking at retirement options. That said, I have an aunt who relocated full-time to a retirement community in Florida after my uncle died and before the big crash, and she's happy with her choice.

There is no such thing as free, we Canadians pay much higher income taxes than our neighbours to the South, the reason is our "free" access to medicare. And yes there are extra fees depending in which Province you live, healthcare being a provincial jurisdiction.

[Canamex]

It isn't really an issue of "free" vs "not free" though as pointed out different provinces have different rules. The point with our higher taxes is that there is still, hopefully, a social conscience and sense of community amongst Canadians.

It's a recognition that you damn well can, and almost certainly will, get sick one day and need more help than you can afford. Health care is still a sacred cow to Canadians and most won't risk it for staying a month longer in Florida. Incidentally, it's funny that the same people who get all goggle-eyed over Mexican public health care get all critical and irrational about Canada.