4 ms·

There is a massive difference: the purpose of the visit. Being on a vacation, doing a business visit, visiting friends/family, and working normally while visiti

There is a massive difference: the purpose of the visit. Being on a vacation, doing a business visit, visiting friends/family, and working normally while visiting the country are all different purposes. There is no reason to assume that the immigration and tax laws of any specific country should treat them in the same way. Incidentally, setting up in-person business meetings with the locals is more likely to make your income not taxable in a random country you are visiting. It looks like a business visit, which are often treated in the same way as tourism. If you are simply staying in the country and earning money, immigration and tax authorities are more likely to assume that you are living and working there, unless you can prove otherwise.

hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
Where do you draw the line, then? There are lots of people I know that are fully remote employees. They love travelling, so they'll spend about 2 months in a particular locale, making about 3 trips a year. Note the purpose of the trip is exactly the same as a tourist: they want to explore a foreign country, take in the sights, meet people, etc. There is literally 0 difference from this, and the one time I had an ill-timed week long trip to Cancun right before a big deadline so I ended up working most of the trip, than the length of stay. The only lever that governments can really use to differentiate between this and most tourism is different visas based on the length of stay, unless they want to decimate their tourism industries.
- jltsiren 4y ago
  Like in most other legal matters, you don't draw a line. There are situations where you are unambiguously a visitor, situations where you are unambiguously a resident, and situations where your legal status is ambiguous. If you are in an ambiguous situation, you are taking a personal risk. The risk may be minimal, and it may be worth it, but your immigration and tax situation is uncertain and cannot be known in advance. Also, it's not up to you to determine the purpose of your visit. Immigration and tax authorities determine it by any means they want. If you disagree with them, you are wrong unless you can prove otherwise according to the criteria they use. As a non-citizen in a foreign country, immigration and tax law are often areas where you are guilty until proven innocent. You don't have the same rights you are used to in your home country. It's up to you to prove that you are following the law, rather than for the authorities to prove that you are breaking it. Some countries encourage tourism by not enforcing their laws. As long as you are a nice harmless tourist doing nice harmless touristy things, the authorities ignore you. But if they have a reason to dislike you, it turns out you are illegally in the country, because you didn't follow some overcomplicated process to the letter.

hn_throwaway_99 4y ago

Where do you draw the line, then? There are lots of people I know that are fully remote employees. They love travelling, so they'll spend about 2 months in a particular locale, making about 3 trips a year. Note the purpose of the trip is exactly the same as a tourist: they want to explore a foreign country, take in the sights, meet people, etc. There is literally 0 difference from this, and the one time I had an ill-timed week long trip to Cancun right before a big deadline so I ended up working most of the trip, than the length of stay. The only lever that governments can really use to differentiate between this and most tourism is different visas based on the length of stay, unless they want to decimate their tourism industries.

jltsiren 4y ago
Like in most other legal matters, you don't draw a line. There are situations where you are unambiguously a visitor, situations where you are unambiguously a resident, and situations where your legal status is ambiguous. If you are in an ambiguous situation, you are taking a personal risk. The risk may be minimal, and it may be worth it, but your immigration and tax situation is uncertain and cannot be known in advance. Also, it's not up to you to determine the purpose of your visit. Immigration and tax authorities determine it by any means they want. If you disagree with them, you are wrong unless you can prove otherwise according to the criteria they use. As a non-citizen in a foreign country, immigration and tax law are often areas where you are guilty until proven innocent. You don't have the same rights you are used to in your home country. It's up to you to prove that you are following the law, rather than for the authorities to prove that you are breaking it. Some countries encourage tourism by not enforcing their laws. As long as you are a nice harmless tourist doing nice harmless touristy things, the authorities ignore you. But if they have a reason to dislike you, it turns out you are illegally in the country, because you didn't follow some overcomplicated process to the letter.