Kind of, but not entirely. Some EU countries' citizens are excluded from the US ESTA ( Bulgaria, Romania) and need to apply for a visa with ridiculous questions ( list all countries you've visited in the last 5 years (if you live in the EU that's a stupid question, i had to go through my Google Maps history to have the full list), and crazy stuff like "are you coming to prostitute yourself in the US") and in-person interviews at an American embassy. There's no reciprocity for that kind of special treatment.
Edited to add: and of course they request fingerprints and photos ( of course in a special format nobody else uses). I'm still pissed i had to give up that information and it ended up for nothing ( i didn't end up visiting the US, and now i no longer need that visa)
The most stupid question is when they ask you if you are a terrorist or plan a terrorist attack in America. Even if someone would be a terrorist, why would someone give an honest answer to this question.
Oh, this question is decades old and I believe 15 years ago it was still solved by an *asterisk:
"Answering yes in this question does not disqualify you from receiving a visa".
People entering US from other countries are treated like shit regardless if they have visas or their countries apply for visa-less process. Both of those suck, you are treated like a criminal from the very first meeting in consulate, they take your fingerprints and you still have a decent chance of being put back after arrival. Business visas are more pleasant but it was for so long just "pay for more predictable process" and still has a lot of flaws.
Iceland, and specifically some of our financial institutions, was placed on a terrorist list by the British PM Gordon Brown during the financial crisis in 2008. His thinking was to be able to freeze the funds these institutions held in Britain.
I know of many people who worked on the floor in those institutions during that time that have joked about what would happen if they would technically tell the truth on those ESTA questionnaires.
How can they not have proof you are lying about being a terrorist if they don't have proof you are a terrorist, thus lying? Are you sure it's not ridiculous?
A grandparent once accidentally checked yes for their baby and was irrevocably fucked. No way to correct the record ever, that kid is permanently listed as a terrorist.
In the article you referenced they state that the baby was cleared after a trip to the embassy. The costs were because they needed to reschedule flights. But the baby was cleared to enter.
I meant there's no way to clear the ESTA ineligible flag ticking that box set, which means this baby will need to have an in person interview every time they want to enter the US for the rest of their life.
I had to fill in all countries for the last 10 years for a visa once. They gave me 100 characters. Even just writing two letter codes with a space beteeen that just means 33. I don’t travel much and even I had over 50.
At least they didn’t want entry/exit dates. Imagine you lived somewhere like Baarle-Nassau.
Can we use this as a place to tell stories about how travel was better ‘back in the day’? Here’s mine.
Back in the late 90s/early 00s I worked for the British Council. I travelled the world with a pack of Windows NT 4.0 CDs upgrading their servers. I was in my early 20s. They flew us Business. It was quite a thing. I’ll never stop appreciating how lucky I was, it was the time of my life.
This was pre-9/11, so security was … lax? I remember there being two lines at Heathrow: British, and not. (There were probably three: British, EU, other. Anyway.)
So you’d fly in from some really random place – I mean Kosovo, Ukraine, Nigeria, Colombia – and you’d walk through the ‘British’ line. You’d get to the guy checking passports and, I shit you not, he’d have his feet up on the desk and he’d be reading The Sun. (Terrible tabloid newspaper.)
Scores of British people would walk down that corridor holding their passports up, photo page presented, three abreast, and the guy would occasionally look up from the paper to check nothing too untoward was going on.
I once flew from San Francisco to Frankfurt, and we were stopped by security because my brother had handcuffs in his baggage. (toys from Alcatraz sold as Souvenirs, but they were made of metal and looked quite real).
Can you imagine what would happen today if security found handcuffs in your bags at the air port? Back then, they smiled and put them back after my brother explained they were just toys. Unbelievable today.
> Can you imagine what would happen today if security found handcuffs in your bags at the air port? Back then, they smiled and put them back after my brother explained they were just toys. Unbelievable today.
So you are trying to tell us not to take our sex toys to the airport. The world just got thougher.
I went on a school trip from Manchester to Austria in 1995 and set of the metal detector with my tin foil wrapped sandwiches. Very little difference between that security and the process I had at Heathrow earlier this month.
About 10 years ago was good in the U.K., arrive at heathrow, walk through Iris, job done. Now there’s no fast track arrivals for frequent flyers, and while someone travelling once a year doesn’t mind waiting at immigration for half an hour, when you doing it every week being able to whiz through is very beneficial.
Hot tip: Never fly into Dulles, immigration can take upto 2 hours (pre covid). Fly into and out of BWI instead. IAD has better facilities on the way out, but takes longer to get through the airport.
My dad is a pilot, and pre 9/11, I would sometimes join him as a kid on flights from Europe to the US. I still vividly remember walking with a backpack behind my dad in pilot uniform trough all the US airport "security" without them checking anything.
Fast forward several months after 9/11: even the pilot had to take off his shoes and get them checked.
Flying really was amazing and luxurious in the 90'ies. On the other hand: the price has gone down a lot making flying a lot more accessible.
Before any of my fellow citizens complain, take note:
> This new system should not put American noses out of joint. The United States Customs and Border Protection has run a similar visa-waiver program since 2008, called the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA). The U.S. visa-waiver program requires citizens from 40 countries in Europe and elsewhere to apply online for a visa waiver and pay $14 to enter the U.S. for short stays of less than 90 days.
And don't let your parents/those willing to trust seach engines click on any official looking link they see. They might pay usd75 for a third party to 'help' make the application.
Of those I know who have fallen for it most were able to get their money back.
E.g. (not the first link for me but still up there on duckduckgo)
Before I could enter USA as EU citizen, I had to register via VWP in 2005 and 2006, got interviewed/screened (including my fingerprints taken) by airline as well as border control (fingerprints only by border control). As part of VWP, I had to state I did not take part in WWII on the Axis side, etc etc (I was born in the 80s...). I'm not sure what the requirements of Americans entering Europe were or are, can't imagine they were/are as strict. Going back, guy looked at my face 2 times, and I was allowed in. Its nice living in a free country like The Netherlands, I thought. And yes, we did have terrorism threat back then (Muslim extremists).
On the other hand, choosing where to go is an emotional argument. By the time someone has made the decision to go to the US because of advertising and marketing, the fee for ESTA or a visa are secondary concerns. Even more so if the decision maker and the accountant are not the same person, as can happen in families.
I hope we have sense to demand the devices and account passwords at the border. Just to ensure are critical data can be harvested from these potential terrorists.
To be fair, we have had a decades long problem with European genocide-doers settling in the US. There have been regular deportations of former nazis up until just a few years ago.
There must be tens or hundreds of thousands of Europeans who have done terrorism/genocide/espionage earlier in their life and are now reintegrated into society to the point that they might want to visit Disney World.
ETIAS registration will be necessary to enter Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland. The same goes for trips to the microstates of Andorra, Monaco, San Marino and Vatican City.
Four countries — Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus and Romania — are not Schengen countries yet but are in the process of joining. Once they are admitted to the zone, they will require travelers to have an ETIAS authorization, too.
This is a fairly large chunk of Europe, but it is not the entirety of Europe. Notably it excludes the European nations of Ireland, the UK, Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia, Moldova, most of the Balkans...
> This is a fairly large chunk of Europe, but it is not the entirety of Europe. Notably it excludes the European nations of Ireland, the UK, Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia, Moldova, most of the Balkans...
I think they call it "Schengen-land", named after an obscure town in Luxembourg.
Didn't realize that Russia was a part of Europe. I thought the dream was the opposite, to make Europe a part of Russia.
There are many political, cultural, and geographical definitions of Europe. Sometimes Israel is a part of Europe, and sometimes a small part of Kazakhstan is in Europe. Sometimes the EU, the EEA, the Schengen Area, and the Eurozone are also called Europe, even though they cover only a part of Europe.
It's as if Europeans deliberately wanted to make life difficult for people who believe in categories.
It's not Europeans who are trying to do that, it's careless journalists like the author of this article. I'm European, and for me if you talk about Europe, you are still referring to the continent (which however has its own issues, as it takes up only a part of the land mass known as Eurasia, which leads to some countries like Russia and Turkey being partly located in Europe). Any other entity that gets conflated with "Europe" (the EU, the Schengen Area etc.) should be referred to by that name...
For example, when I still lived in Finland, going to Europe meant traveling to the continental Europe south of the Baltic Sea. Finland was not in Europe, Sweden was not in Europe, the UK was not in Europe, and Denmark was a borderline case. Poland was the northern and eastern limit of Europe. Mediterranean beach resorts were also not in Europe, but nearby cities were again borderline cases.
And when I read Finnish news, the EU is usually referred to either as "EU" or "Eurooppa". The actual name "Euroopan unioni" is too long, and it takes a lot of effort to write it and even more effort to say it.
> I think they call it "Schengen-land", named after an obscure town in Luxembourg.
Strictly speaking it's not named after the town, but after the agreements which were signed there, which grant the right of check-free border crossings to citizens of signatory countries.
Switzerland, Norway, San Marino, Andorra, Liechtenstein, Iceland, and Monaco are in the list and are not EU. They could have written "to visit the Schengen area", but many americans don't know what that means.
"Prospective visitors will need to complete an online application and a €7 fee will be required from those between ages 18 and 70.[10] The system is expected to process the vast majority of applications automatically by searching in electronic databases and provide an immediate response, but in some limited cases it may take up to 30 days.[11][2] If approved, the authorisation will be valid for three years or until the expiry date of the travel document if earlier.[2]"
The US asks if you have been to places like Iraq, Iran, Libya etc since 2011. If you do, you can’t ESTA, you need a visa.
Work would like me to go to Iraq, which is fine. They’ll pay for me to get a US Visa too.
Trouble is in 20 years time when I want to go to NY for my kids wedding or whatever, I’ll still have to answer “yes” to the “I visited Iraq” question, and I won’t be working for the company that sent me there, so I’d have to go for the long arduous process of prostrating myself at the US embassy to beg for a visa, incurring a large expense to do so. Just because the stamp isn’t in my active passport doesn’t mean I can answer “no” to the question
It’s not like Israel, where the stamp would cause problems but they don’t ask (or the other way round where an Israeli stamp would cause problems going to Iran).
Even when I apply for a visa and have to list every country (often in a comically small box with like 100 characters max length), like with India, it only asks “what could tries have you visited in the last 10 years”
I wonder how that works for people that went there because their country joined one neocon middle eastern venture or another. Does it count if you went there for invasion purposes?
I have two because I provided a letter from my organisation backing me having two as I travelled frequently and often had a passport away at an embassy waiting for a visa and need to be able to travel at short notice.
Since then I’ve reduced the number of visa based countries I’ve needed to go to (more have gone electronic), and countries have reduced stamps, throw in covid, and it’s to the point that I doubt I’ll fill my passports up before the 10 years has expired. It’s a shame really, the stamps in past passports are a great momento, but places like Hong Kong, Israel, Canada, Australia have all stopped stamping in the last few years.
Guess the lack of stamps means record holding has moved from the passport into the cloud. While the distributed record keeping was certainly more privacy friendly, the new method makes it certainly easier for nation states.
> Without prejudice to the provisions on travel documents applicable to national border controls, Member States shall grant Union citizens leave to enter their territory with a valid identity card or passport
Europe is composed by 44 countries, a subset of those countries are part of European Union, more precisely 27, which also makes the Schengen Area with agreementes with external EU countries like Switzerland.
It is an exercise in geography to track down down which 16 countries don't care you have an ID card.
Have you travelled to, or been present in Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, North Korea or Yemen on or after March 1, 2011?
Using a second passport, fake passport, alias, fake glasses and moustache doesnt make a differnce to the answer to that question. Its not even a workaround.
I meant that it is not legal to use a second passport as a workaround to support a lie about your travel history. Lying to enter the US is illegal regardless of the number of passports you have.
That's true. This only affects those who have visited Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Sudan, Syria, Libya, Somalia and Yemen on or after March 1, 2011, and they're still not disqualified, but I do understand the frustration at the inconvenience (although none of this will affect me since I am a US and EU citizen).
You can get a second US passport with limited validity. Great when you need to apply for visas but also have other international travel going on. And sometimes it's convenient for hiding visa stamps of one country from another country.
No. Foreign nationals from countries (including most of Europe) that normally have access to the US through the Visa Waiver Program and ESTA lose that access if they visit Iran or a few other countries. They thereafter need to go through the full US visa application process if they want to go to the US.
One of the cases where at least in Germany you can get a second passport without problems. Another example would be travel to Israel and Arabian countries.
The question at the border is "Have you ever visited Iran?", Not "Do you have a stamp for Iran in this passport?".
Since passenger lists on flights around the world are pretty much public information, the US immigration services will know exactly where you have visited in the past, and could totally put you in prison for lying when answering the question.
They ask that questions also during student or work visa issuance - and even during the greencard (adjustment of status) and naturalization processes. They don't ask it every time you enter with these visas or statuses however.
But as a US citizen you will never be asked. And better yet if you are a dual citizen like me. Then you can travel on your other passport to the places the US finds to be undesirable.
I think green card and naturalization ask about travel in the last few years. But they don't ask about travel prior to that, and they don't ask about Iran specifically.
Still requires you to lie on the ESTA form, which is not necessarily a good idea. (i.e. if you lie and get caught, that's worse than going through the visa process)
Sure, simple answer: don't carry both passports at the same time. Pretty sure Iran (an the other countries on the US blacklist) don't exchange travel information with the US.
Two different passports, only carry the right one: easy. And unless US border police is checking any, potential, Iranian travel data the NSA collected I don't see the problem. Confidently telling those border police officers you've never been to Iran seems to be the trickiest part. But hell, it works just perfectly fine for everyone travelling to Israel and any Arabian country, so...
No it doesn’t. Israel doesn’t routinely ask you if you’ve been to Iran, if they did, you answer tru fully if you know what’s good for you. Same if you go to Saudi.
The US specifically asks you if you have travelled to those countries. You can either lie, and that’s a serious risk at being jailed, deported, banned from ever going again, and having issues going to other countries, or you can tell the truth.
The same is in Norway, although one have to justify it. For example one cannot get a visa to China if one has a stamp from Taiwan. So if one needs to travel to both often, then one can apply for the second passport.
I don’t remember China asking if I’ve been to Taiwan. I’d be surprised too - there’s direct flights between the two. That said I normally visit China on a 168 hour transit visa and fly via Hong Kong, Tokyo or Seoul rather than the hassle of applying for a visa.
If you have an Iranian passport stamp, I would expect very pointed questions at US immigration. I can't find a specific citation that says you need a visa if you've been to Iran, but I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case.
> If you have an Iranian passport stamp, I would expect very pointed questions at US immigration
Or any number of things. I know of multiple French citizens born in "suspect" for the Americans places like Algiers and Beirut who have had extensive questioning on arrival at the US, including the mindbogglingly stupid " why were you born there?".
That honestly doesn’t sound like a dumb question to me. People don’t just get randomly born abroad for no reason, it’s typically because their families were doing something there.
It kind of is though, because Algeria was a part of France until 1962, and there are millions of people of Algerian descent who have French citizenship.
Potentially. But, families can also travel to places where they don't live. They can also engage in activities that are of interest to customs officials, regardless of their residency status.
Rather than guessing, it's prudent to simply ask the question, no?
That’s fine for visiting Israel (which rarely stamps nowadays) and Iran.
The US specifically asks “have you ever been to Iran”. You can lie, then get arrested in the US, or you can say “yes”, and have to go through the time and expense to get a US visa. Forever.
Absolutely finally. Why should a European take off their pants when traveling to the US, go through rude and racist immigration and Americans can easily enter the EU? Never understood that.
I want at least the same treatment for them, incl. pre checks, Information requests like social media accounts, pre registrations and a fee.
If Europeans had some power on the immigration decisions of the US it would be stupid to make it worse for others when you could just accept it to be worse only for yourself.
On the other hand, a lot of people that have never experienced something do not even realize that that problem even exists or is real. Maybe experiencing a little bit of difficulty will enrich the vision of those.
Still, I think the point should be that with this pre-approvals you have end up with an easier immigration process and less worries for both sides (less time at immigration and not being turned down in the last moment).
OP didn't state they were happy. But reciprocity might be the basis to develop fair relationship. Otherwise how would Americans realize their behavior is problematic?
Does the US border check still want all of your social media accounts and a scan of your phone and laptop contents? I've maintained US on my list of countries that I do not want to visit because they seem to want all of my personal data just to get into the country.
Yes. It’s optional. Even if you don’t answer they still do a brief look. I had a “ Public Safety Professional in the Law Enforcement industry from Washington DC-Baltimore Area” look at my linkedin when I got my latest ESTA a few weeks ago. Not sure if that’s because it had been 18 months since my previous one expired.
Luck and not behaving very Hispanic/Arab/Iranian. If you happen to behave like that, suddenly luck gets to be on your side.
Source: Hispanic that used to travel a lot the US and always got VERY LUCKY! (I should have bought Powerball in the US, for some reason being in the USA gave me luck.
Yeah I understand that. I was trying to put it nicely as talking about US immigration and border patrol policies make me very sad to be from the US.
It’s a complex issue but at the end of the day current policies end with people not being treated like humans.
My wife is from another country and the mental tax that going through the US immigration system has had on us took two years to recover from. The entire system is meant to be punitive and humiliating.
The latest version of the ESTA form make it almost impossible to know that these fields are not mandatory. Dark pattern can also be mastered by administration.
This has never happened to me or any if the couple of dozens of people I know who travelled to the US (this was all under ESTA though, maybe they ask for all of it if you need to apply for a visa)
Hm, well none of any of that would be additionally required for this new program, and I'd be willing to wager EU law prohibits the collection of social media account information.
EU law prohibits the collection of social media account information
I looked it up, and by my reading it does prohibit collection of social media account information. However, it's not clear to me that these protections apply to non-EU residents? Any actual lawyers able to chime in on this?
I guess at worst, any suspicious US citizens will have their internet details collected? Since we do the same to EU citizens, I guess I can't complain, but this creeping global data collection monster really gets under my skin.
Rather that getting into some random argument about which country is worse because of their visa policies, I'd ask another question:
Why have countries (US, Canada, now EU) moved to ESTA-like systems even for countries that are typically "low risk"?
I assume because the new system allows for a more in-depth background check and the pressure of immigration to make a decision in-real time at the border is eliminated. It's basically splitting the difference between inspection on arrival and forcing people to interview at consulates.
But is there anything more than that? To be honest, it seems a bit like overkill for any country to "pre-screen" all arrivals from what seems like very low risk countries.
No doubt there is some DHS policy paper that explains all this.
What’s odd is that you still have to provide a ton of information via your airline when you do go to the US, pretty much everything you provide with Esta anyway.
It's not EU, it's Schengen. So it includes non-EU Schengen area countries like Switzerland, and does not include EU non-Schengen area countries like Ireland.
Americans are literally called Americans despite the fact that America is two vast continents, and yet this whole thread is full of people complaining of this article saying "Europe" instead of "Schengen area".
In the same way, the title should say "US citizens" then?
It's also the meaning that's starting to shift - for many in France "Europe" means the EU, not the continent. Like the Brits who talk about "us and Europe".
Yesterday I passed passport control at Amsterdam airport and was told by the attendant "European passports" should use the automated kiosks. I queued and got to the machine, and after scanning my passport it told me I need to queue again in the "non EU" line. Lesson learnt.
> With the arrival of ETIAS expected in 2023, passport holders of 59 of the 62 countries that currently travel visa-free, will require an ETIAS waiver to travel to Europe for the purposes of tourism, business, or transit for a 90 days stay in any 180-day period.
Which three countries will be visa-free and ETIAS-free?
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/schengen-bor... says "ETIAS and the entry/exit system do not apply to nationals of Andorra, Monaco and San Marino and holders of a passport issued by the Vatican City State or the Holy See". Those are all microstates entirely surrounded by other countries that are part of the Schengen area.
Ok, so, The Great Race 2023 a sporting program where competitors try to get into as many of these non-schengen countries in Europe without requiring ETIAS to do so.
Can one balloon across a country without requiring a passport?
I guess a diplomatic passport would make you immune from requiring ETIAS. Those can more or less be bought from some countries (e.g. from the USA. Heavily sponsor a president’s election and before you know it you’re ambassador in some European country)
Alternatively, apply for asylum in one of the countries and start traveling to other EU countries (that’s not allowed, but not because it requires ETIAS, I think)
Also, parachuting in is relatively easy, but how do you get out?
You are reading it backwards. Citizens of those countries don't need this waiver to travel into Schengen countries. The other 59 countries who can currently travel visa-free will need the waiver.
I guess aside from those, countries in Europe that are probably not requiring ETIAS, Great Britain of course, Bosnia, Croatia, Macedonia - the countries that once comprised Macedonia. So I guess if you can get to those countries without passing through EU you're ok? Just a guess though.
Delightful. Let’s take the reciprocity one step further: send a few travellers back from the airport on a whim and refer to them as “illegals” while doing it.
Could you please stop posting unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments to HN? You've been doing it repeatedly, and we ban that sort of account, because we're trying for a different sort of forum here.
@dang i was speaking from experience. It happened to me. Including the part where they call you an "Illegal" and treat you like garbage, for a technicality that was later considered their fault.
I might make it sound frivolous but let me assure you its a very grievous injustice that people are subject to. And its worthing bringing to light.
And it happens way more often than you would like to think. Google it.
Sure, I believe you and have no quarrel with what you're saying here. The problem is that you didn't include any of that information in the GP comment, so there was no way to disambiguate it from garden-variety flamebait.
Since that's internet default when it comes to inflammatory topics, that's what a comment like the GP will pattern-match to, unless you explicitly disambiguate it (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...). The fact that your comment also added snark made this even more likely, as well as the fact that you've been posting unsubstantive and flamebait comments already.
Imagine destroying an industry (travel), peoples livelihoods (tourism), and one of the major hallmarks of human experience (seeing the world) all because you want power over peoples lives.
This benefits NO ONE.
EDIT: And before anyone says it, the American system needs to be removed too!
Although you may be against this plan, objectively we know that it will not destroy any of those things. It didn't destroy them in the United States, which continues to welcome many tourists with almost the same system.
Interesting take. Do you know that a vast majority of the world is required to obtain a visa to the US & Europe? Obtaining a visa is a horribly long, painful, expensive and sometimes humiliating process. The visa fees for a US visitor visa are $190. What do you think about that?
> Obtaining a visa is a horribly long, painful, expensive and sometimes humiliating process.
Indeed, as someone who lost a finger when I was a kid, it is humiliating for me every time I go through the US border and the officers order me to place my fingers for "fingerprinting". Particularly when they ask me "WHAT HAPPENED TO YOU". I hate traveling to the US and my problem is that I'm stuck on this side of the Atlantic. When I was living in Europe it was a pleasure to travel between countries. They don't assume you are a criminal, and the border officers are more intelligent/educated in Europe (even the ones in places like Bulgaria were cool).
My wife is Chinese. My father is Chilean. I added a specific section in my comment saying the USA needs to remove its policies too.
Thus, why would you comment as such? Why would you assume that I support visas and restrictions, when I have CLEARLY expressed the EXACT OPPOSITE opinion?
