8 ms·

I have always been blown away by money requirements for such visas, in many countries. Show monthly income of 1000000 ISK. Over 7k USD. Why? I used to live in

• triceratops 4y ago
  They want rich nomads who will spend lots of money in the local economy.
• slaw 4y ago
  Only high earners are welcomed.
• whichfawkes 4y ago
  Well, of course they're going to set the requirement high enough that they can be confident you'll survive without them needing to pay to deport you. Beyond that though, they want you to spend your money in Iceland - why else? Presumably you aren't paying any income tax. So the only advantage to letting you into the country is that you'll spend money on goods and services.
• ashconnor 4y ago
  Your FAANG job probably wouldn't allow you to work from Iceland anyway. Still the requirements are less strict than Thailand's remote work visa [0] but that lasts for 5 years renewable for another 5. In Thailand's case the existence of a work-from-Thailand visa also clarifies that working remotely on other visas (Tourist, Non-O, Non-B) is not permitted. [0] - https://kpmg.com/th/en/home/insights/2022/11/legal-news-flash-issue-19.html https://kpmg.com/th/en/home/insights/2022/11/legal-news-flas...
  • __s 4y ago
    Indeed, tried to get the go ahead with this at Microsoft, HR was very clear about not letting it through
    • Aeolun 4y ago
      Why though? HR is right to be leery of allowing people to work overseas when the legal status of that is doubtful, but Iceland apparently went out of their way to clarify that situation.
• zerr 4y ago
  Seems like a lawful way to say "North Americans Only".
  • noodlesUK 4y ago
    Basically because you already need to have visa free entry to Schengen (and if you're an EEA/CH citizen you can already move there) this is only available to North Americans, Aussies/Kiwis, and other rich countries like Japan, as well as us Brits mourning our FOM.
• Pmop 4y ago
  Isn't Iceland inhabited by like 340k people? Maybe they're testing the waters or trying to limit how many people end up moving there. Overall I agree. DNs would use Portugal's D7 to move in (in an exception of what the visa was originally intended to), but then Portugal introduced a DN visa which now requires a much higher income than what D7 requires, I think 4x times more than D7.
  • MrDresden 4y ago
    Iceland is in Schengen. Effectively the whole of Europe could move here tomorrow if they wanted. This is not due to immigration control.
    • foldr 4y ago
      It’s in the EEA, more to the point.
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  • EduardoBautista 4y ago
    D7 was minimum wage, if I recall correctly, around 800 euros per month. I don't think 4x minimum wage is at all unreasonable if it makes the process smoother, since they make the D7 application process as horrible as possible. I had an awful experience applying for D7, so I am now happily living in Dubai instead which has the best residency process I have seen for ANY country.
• starik36 4y ago
  > Over 7k USD. I don't think you understand how ridiculously expensive Iceland is. Practically everything has to be shipped/flown in. Just to give you an idea, a small completely unremarkable burger at a fast food place will be around $20-25. It will not make you full. 7K a month is realistic. Our vacation was still fantastic despite the cost.
  • Aachen 4y ago
    That's realistic if you are there as a tourist who wants the premium experience on everything. Staying in hotels and eating out daily, we didn't spend 7k when extrapolating our two weeks to a month. Heck, it's still below 7k if you include all one-time purchases like the way there and back, clothing, new expensive hiking boots, etc. I've got a problem with most waterproof fabrics so I didn't have a raincoat, but reading about Iceland, I figured it's worth finding one that works for me, so that's another purchase I count towards my Iceland expenses. All in all still below 7k after extrapolation. (Edit: oh and I forgot that this is for 2 persons. You can't divide by two of course, but some correction factor should be applied.) I fully agree with anyone saying Iceland is expensive, but if you stay in an actual apartment instead of hotels, don't do a number of guided tours every month, don't rent a vehicle for the whole time you're there (and drive around, though fuel was a surprisingly small part of the final expenses), you'll definitely not need 7k per month.
    • lazyasciiart 4y ago
      They have absolutely no interest in sponsoring visitors. This visa program is intended to bring in well-off professionals who will have plenty of cash to live a comfortable lifestyle and cover a disastrous broken leg or two and still be able to fly back home if they lose their job. That $7k is before taxes, before retirement savings, before health insurance, before your assumed flight home once every month or two...
      • Aachen 4y ago
        That's actually a good point that it's before taxes, I hadn't factored that in. If you live in a low tax country, you would ordinarily have a lot to spend and be rich, and also have enough money to live off of in Iceland potentially, but might not meet that requirement by even half, whereas someone from a high tax country loses roughly half their income on them and would meet the requirement. Not the fairest method but, as you say, this clearly isn't geared toward charitableness in the first place.
• MrDresden 4y ago
  Local tech worker in Iceland, and this is the going rate for a midrange software worker. Wages here have grown ~25% (for the whole country) over the last ~4 years (if my memory from the reporting on this is correct). Everything has to be imported, and what little that isn't is heavily reliant on imported goods. Living here is mightily expensive. Ofcourse you could live more frugally, and obviously most here do. Tech workers here are in the top income bracket like in most other places. Not sure why digital nomad visas should have lower restrictions though. We want foreigners that come here and spend their money. No need to make it easier for the frugal tourist to come here for longer.
• seanhunter 4y ago
  > Show monthly income of 1000000 ISK. Over 7k USD. Why? I'm not familiar with the reasoning for Iceland specifically but in another country (Switzerland) I was in the position of having to apply for long-term work visas for myself and some of my employees. There they justified the high income requirement because they wanted to know you weren't going to bring in cheap foreign labour and thereby undercut local wages. So you had to show that the wages were high in absolute terms and that you weren't paying less than the national average.
  • dagurp 4y ago
    Expect to spend a third of that on rent
  • oneeyedpigeon 4y ago
    But this is for remote work — undercutting local wages shouldn't be an issue.
• mytailorisrich 4y ago
  They want to attract high value individuals because they are doing this to benefit their country and economy while limiting the number of people, not to make foreigners happy. Edit: apparently the average income in Iceland is close to $6k per month so 7k is not even "high value", it's just making sure only people who earn at least an average income qualify, which makes sense.
• sidewndr46 4y ago
  Why would a tiny exclusive island ever want anyone other than high income individuals to move there? If it weren't the fact that US cities cannot restrict the free migration of individuals, almost all of them would ban anyone moving there who didn't make above the average income for the area. Hawaii's last Republic governor tried every possible step to kick out the Marshallese, which is fucking hilarious considering how few of them there are globally. If it wasn't for the US constitution you'd have giant slums in the interstitial space between cities, with a few zones stylized after the Jewish Autonomous Oblast here and there as well.
  • grumple 4y ago
    This is simply not accurate. The US was historically and is currently built by accepting poor immigrants. As the famous poem by Emma Lazarus says, "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free". The US is and always has been a place where the poorest can make something for themselves. No matter what rhetoric you spout, this is still demonstrably true: 40 million Americans are first generation immigrants. Another 40 million second generation. So when I, as an American, see these heavy restrictions, it highlights a couple things for me: 1) Just how different US immigration culture is from anywhere else. And how despite all the anti-US rhetoric, all the political nonsense, we are still the most welcoming place in the world for immigrants, and it isn't even close. 2) How unwilling other nations are to provide opportunities for people outside their borders. I want to go a little further and say these nations don't have much interest in being a part of the world if they can't exploit it.
    • gumby 4y ago
      The US doesn’t have the highest proportion of immigrants, nor is it the most welcoming to most (I am myself an immigrant to the US, and was welcomed). It’s in the top quartile of both criteria, though.
      • pessimizer 4y ago
        The US had the advantage of mostly eliminating the indigenous population. The only Americans who aren't immigrants are natives and the descendants of slaves. Other countries have large native populations.
• deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
• yodsanklai 4y ago
  > Not all nomads work remotely for FAANG. Also FAANG aren't particularly flexible for nomad work.
• huhtenberg 4y ago
  > Why? They give you a visa in exchange for the money you will spend in the country. That's it.
• opportune 4y ago
  The goal is to get self sufficient people (who will stimulate the economy through consumption and not incur costs on the government), not buskers or low-impact nomads. I know tech salaries outside the US can be much lower, but the requirements Iceland is putting up are basically enough (pre tax) for almost any tech employee in the US. Not just FAANGs. Not sure if Iceland is counting gross vs net pay but even if so, it’s enough for a very large portion of us tech employees still
  • Aeolun 4y ago
    > almost any tech employee in the US And almost nowhere else. Hell, it’d be too high for most tech workers in Europe.
    • valdiorn 4y ago
      most of Europe can already come to Iceland with no reason needed. EEA and Schengen allow them to live and work there without a permit. I moved to the UK under the same rules (before Brexit) - never moved back home to Iceland :)
      • Aeolun 4y ago
        Yeah, I know, and I could too. Just feels a bit hypocritical somehow. Like they only want people that get what they cannot give.
• _pigpen__ 4y ago
  Perhaps the calculation is how much they anticipate you contributing to the local economy. They’re not doing this for altruistic reasons.
• oneeyedpigeon 4y ago
  Yeah, this is what disqualifies me, although together with my partner, I could possibly make it work. I wonder what accommodation prices are like in Iceland.
• yieldcrv 4y ago
  They want rich people spending locally and bringing their rich network, what answer did you want?
• webinvest 4y ago
  Iceland is the 3rd most expensive country in the world to live in. Just look at the prices in ISK for the websites of businesses in Reykjavik, one of the only cities there with cellular data service, and convert it to your local currency. Your money will stretch 3x-5x further in Europe unless you plan to build yourself an igloo and catch fish lol. Europe isn’t known for being cheap either.