Can you still travel to America on the visa waiver program if you have been to Iran in transit?If I visit Iran, is there a risk of not being allowed to enter the USA anymore?How can the US immigration officials know one has visited Iraq, Syria, Iran, or Sudan?Overstaying on a US Visa Waiver ProgramGoing between Canada and America with the visa waiver programVisa Waiver Program Re-entryOverstaying US Visa Waiver ProgramUS E3 visa holder: can I still travel to the US on the visa waiver program?Taking courses under Visa Waiver ProgramHow long does the US Visa Waiver ban for people who travelled to Iran last?A second transit in U.S.A. under the Visa Waiver ProgramVisa Waiver Program - ending before 90 daysUnder the Visa Waiver program, can I leave by land in transit to Guatemala?
Why doesn’t a normal window produce an apparent rainbow?
Why only the fundamental frequency component is said to give useful power?
What is the `some` keyword in SwiftUI
Understanding the TeXlive release cycle: What is the meaning of a TeXlive release and is it ever 'finished'?
Does an ice chest packed full of frozen food need ice?
Why would future John risk sending back a T-800 to save his younger self?
Arriving at the same result with the opposite hypotheses
Random Unitary Matrices
What makes an item an artifact?
Is an early checkout possible at a hotel before its reception opens?
Why doesn't Adrian Toomes give up Spider-Man's identity?
Winning Strategy for the Magician and his Apprentice
How is water heavier than petrol, even though its molecular weight is less than petrol?
How did students remember what to practise between lessons without any sheet music?
Taxi Services at Didcot
Why was the Sega Genesis marketed as a 16-bit console?
Soft question: Examples where lack of mathematical rigour cause security breaches?
How Can I Tell The Difference Between Unmarked Sugar and Stevia?
Was there a priest on the Titanic who stayed on the ship giving confession to as many as he could?
PhD - Well known professor or well known school?
Can a user sell my software (MIT license) without modification?
Do any instruments not produce overtones?
At what point in time did Dumbledore ask Snape for this favor?
Are DSA and ECDSA provably secure assuming DL security?
Can you still travel to America on the visa waiver program if you have been to Iran in transit?
If I visit Iran, is there a risk of not being allowed to enter the USA anymore?How can the US immigration officials know one has visited Iraq, Syria, Iran, or Sudan?Overstaying on a US Visa Waiver ProgramGoing between Canada and America with the visa waiver programVisa Waiver Program Re-entryOverstaying US Visa Waiver ProgramUS E3 visa holder: can I still travel to the US on the visa waiver program?Taking courses under Visa Waiver ProgramHow long does the US Visa Waiver ban for people who travelled to Iran last?A second transit in U.S.A. under the Visa Waiver ProgramVisa Waiver Program - ending before 90 daysUnder the Visa Waiver program, can I leave by land in transit to Guatemala?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
Me and my wife travelled to South East Asia in 2017 and on the way back to the UK we had to do a layover in Iran. We didn't leave the airport nor did we get our passports stamped.
My wife would like to visit the USA soon but is wondering whether she will fail the ESTA application as it asks if you have travelled to countries like Iran since 2011? She would like to travel within the next two weeks and is aware that if she has to go through the US embassy route she might not make it in time. Please let me know your thoughts.
usa transit us-visa-waiver-program iran
edited May 28 at 13:32
k2moo4
3,9021427
asked May 21 at 8:51
Richard JewelsRichard Jewels
16115
add a comment |
Me and my wife travelled to South East Asia in 2017 and on the way back to the UK we had to do a layover in Iran. We didn't leave the airport nor did we get our passports stamped.
My wife would like to visit the USA soon but is wondering whether she will fail the ESTA application as it asks if you have travelled to countries like Iran since 2011? She would like to travel within the next two weeks and is aware that if she has to go through the US embassy route she might not make it in time. Please let me know your thoughts.
usa transit us-visa-waiver-program iran
edited May 28 at 13:32
k2moo4
3,9021427
asked May 21 at 8:51
Richard JewelsRichard Jewels
16115
May be related travel.stackexchange.com/questions/61663/…
– RedBaron
May 21 at 9:23
2
If I were your wife I would apply for a visa immediately, to maximize the chance of getting it before the anticipated departure.
– phoog
May 21 at 15:26
That would be quite the strange itinerary.
– Michael Hampton
May 21 at 16:52
2
@MichaelHampton Mahan Air has seasonal service to several Southeast Asian cities, so it's quite possible that for the OP's particular itinerary (or which we have no details), they were the best deal.
– choster
May 21 at 21:24
Also see travel.stackexchange.com/questions/100619/… . If you declare that you "visited" Iran, you may get the visa but the visit may be very uncomfortable from immigration point of view. If you don't declare and CBP at border determine you "visted" Iran and hence lied, you face a long entry ban to US.
– RedBaron
May 22 at 13:02
add a comment |
Me and my wife travelled to South East Asia in 2017 and on the way back to the UK we had to do a layover in Iran. We didn't leave the airport nor did we get our passports stamped.
My wife would like to visit the USA soon but is wondering whether she will fail the ESTA application as it asks if you have travelled to countries like Iran since 2011? She would like to travel within the next two weeks and is aware that if she has to go through the US embassy route she might not make it in time. Please let me know your thoughts.
usa transit us-visa-waiver-program iran
edited May 28 at 13:32
k2moo4
3,9021427
asked May 21 at 8:51
Richard JewelsRichard Jewels
16115
Me and my wife travelled to South East Asia in 2017 and on the way back to the UK we had to do a layover in Iran. We didn't leave the airport nor did we get our passports stamped.
My wife would like to visit the USA soon but is wondering whether she will fail the ESTA application as it asks if you have travelled to countries like Iran since 2011? She would like to travel within the next two weeks and is aware that if she has to go through the US embassy route she might not make it in time. Please let me know your thoughts.
usa transit us-visa-waiver-program iran
usa transit us-visa-waiver-program iran
edited May 28 at 13:32
k2moo4
3,9021427
asked May 21 at 8:51
Richard JewelsRichard Jewels
16115
edited May 28 at 13:32
k2moo4
3,9021427
asked May 21 at 8:51
Richard JewelsRichard Jewels
16115
edited May 28 at 13:32
k2moo4
3,9021427
edited May 28 at 13:32
k2moo4
3,9021427
edited May 28 at 13:32
k2moo4
3,9021427
3,9021427
asked May 21 at 8:51
Richard JewelsRichard Jewels
16115
asked May 21 at 8:51
Richard JewelsRichard Jewels
16115
asked May 21 at 8:51
Richard JewelsRichard Jewels
16115
16115
May be related travel.stackexchange.com/questions/61663/…
– RedBaron
May 21 at 9:23
2
If I were your wife I would apply for a visa immediately, to maximize the chance of getting it before the anticipated departure.
– phoog
May 21 at 15:26
That would be quite the strange itinerary.
– Michael Hampton
May 21 at 16:52
2
@MichaelHampton Mahan Air has seasonal service to several Southeast Asian cities, so it's quite possible that for the OP's particular itinerary (or which we have no details), they were the best deal.
– choster
May 21 at 21:24
Also see travel.stackexchange.com/questions/100619/… . If you declare that you "visited" Iran, you may get the visa but the visit may be very uncomfortable from immigration point of view. If you don't declare and CBP at border determine you "visted" Iran and hence lied, you face a long entry ban to US.
– RedBaron
May 22 at 13:02
add a comment |
May be related travel.stackexchange.com/questions/61663/…
– RedBaron
May 21 at 9:23
2
If I were your wife I would apply for a visa immediately, to maximize the chance of getting it before the anticipated departure.
– phoog
May 21 at 15:26
That would be quite the strange itinerary.
– Michael Hampton
May 21 at 16:52
2
@MichaelHampton Mahan Air has seasonal service to several Southeast Asian cities, so it's quite possible that for the OP's particular itinerary (or which we have no details), they were the best deal.
– choster
May 21 at 21:24
Also see travel.stackexchange.com/questions/100619/… . If you declare that you "visited" Iran, you may get the visa but the visit may be very uncomfortable from immigration point of view. If you don't declare and CBP at border determine you "visted" Iran and hence lied, you face a long entry ban to US.
– RedBaron
May 22 at 13:02
May be related travel.stackexchange.com/questions/61663/…
– RedBaron
May 21 at 9:23
May be related travel.stackexchange.com/questions/61663/…
– RedBaron
May 21 at 9:23
2
2
If I were your wife I would apply for a visa immediately, to maximize the chance of getting it before the anticipated departure.
– phoog
May 21 at 15:26
If I were your wife I would apply for a visa immediately, to maximize the chance of getting it before the anticipated departure.
– phoog
May 21 at 15:26
That would be quite the strange itinerary.
– Michael Hampton
May 21 at 16:52
That would be quite the strange itinerary.
– Michael Hampton
May 21 at 16:52
2
2
@MichaelHampton Mahan Air has seasonal service to several Southeast Asian cities, so it's quite possible that for the OP's particular itinerary (or which we have no details), they were the best deal.
– choster
May 21 at 21:24
@MichaelHampton Mahan Air has seasonal service to several Southeast Asian cities, so it's quite possible that for the OP's particular itinerary (or which we have no details), they were the best deal.
– choster
May 21 at 21:24
Also see travel.stackexchange.com/questions/100619/… . If you declare that you "visited" Iran, you may get the visa but the visit may be very uncomfortable from immigration point of view. If you don't declare and CBP at border determine you "visted" Iran and hence lied, you face a long entry ban to US.
– RedBaron
May 22 at 13:02
Also see travel.stackexchange.com/questions/100619/… . If you declare that you "visited" Iran, you may get the visa but the visit may be very uncomfortable from immigration point of view. If you don't declare and CBP at border determine you "visted" Iran and hence lied, you face a long entry ban to US.
– RedBaron
May 22 at 13:02
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
Some travelers are not eligible for ESTA. The US Customs and Border Protection FAQ says those travelers include:
Nationals of VWP countries who have traveled to or been present in Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, or Yemen at any time on or after March 1, 2011 (with limited exceptions); and
where those exceptions are
to represent your program country on official military orders or official government business
It depends on what the US definition of "travelled to or been present in" is, but taking that to be literal "set foot in the country" (the safest definition from your perspective), you and your wife would no longer qualify for an ESTA and would need to do a full visa application.
answered May 21 at 10:07
qechuaqechua
54018
25
This is a rather poor answer. The question is effectively asking for clarification on how the US defines "traveled to", and you don't provide any additional clarity on that point, aside from an unsupported "better safe than sorry" admonition [and you don't even expand on what "safest" implies here]. (It comes off a little like "Q: Do I qualify for the student discount?" "A: If you pay full price, you don't have to worry about the discount rules." - technically true, but not useful for answering the question at hand.)
– R.M.
May 21 at 19:45
1
@r.m. exactly. A better answer might look like, "According to Smith v. Shoppers Value Mart Student Benefit Programs, 'student' was defined as any person enrolled in high school or in credit-bearing university coursework. It was specifically held in this case that receiving private online tutoring in French grammar from an independently-operating retired public school teacher did not, in and of itself, constitute either high school or university study."
– Robert Columbia
May 21 at 20:47
4
@R.M. but in the absence of some authoritative statement on the US interpretation of "present in" with respect to transits without clearing immigration controls, this is the best answer one can get. I further think it unlikely that we'll find an authoritative statement of the US interpretation, and I note that answering "no" to the relevant ESTA eligibility question in these circumstances could be seen as deceptive and could therefore result in a finding of inadmissibility.
– phoog
May 21 at 21:05
4
@RobertColumbia I doubt there's been any litigation on this question. VWP-eligible travelers, like most nonimmigrant applicants for immigration benefits, have very limited access to US courts.
– phoog
May 21 at 21:06
1
@phoog I'd suspect that no authoritative statement will ever be given as this open and vague wording is very much in the favour of US CBP.
– Richard
May 22 at 8:29
|
show 1 more comment
With the disclaimer that I'm not sure how the CBP interprets the rules for this edge case, for most practical purposes, if you never went through immigration, you've never been to Iran.
So in your shoes, I would say "no" in the ESTA application, and in the unlikely event of being questioned on arrival, I would simply state the above.
The other option would be to state "yes", which will likely cause the ESTA to be rejected, and then apply for a visa and explain the situation. However, while you will very likely get the visa this way, it may take so long that you miss the trip -- and if you've failed ESTA once, you now need to apply for a visa for the US for the rest of your life.
answered May 21 at 10:12
jpatokaljpatokal
120k19386547
5
Being at the airport, wouldn't OP be considered to have been present in Iran?
– RedBaron
May 21 at 10:25
11
@RedBaron I've sent a question to CBP, i'll post an answer when i get a reply, they're usually quick
– BritishSam
May 21 at 10:33
5
@jpatokal In the relevant act (Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015), the only wording is 'the alien has not been present in ...'. If 'been present' only referred to people residing for longer periods, the act would not apply to people on short visits, which it however obviously does.
– Tor-Einar Jarnbjo
May 21 at 11:06
4
@Tor-EinarJarnbjo I agree. It's possible that CBP will interpret a transit without clearing immigration controls as not constituting "presence in" Iran for the purpose of the VWP regulations, but it's also possible (if not likely) that they would take the opposite interpretation. If CBP somehow has access to the traveler's history, and the traveler says she hasn't been to Iran, she risks being found inadmissible for deception.
– phoog
May 21 at 15:27
2
@RedBaron that's the question, isn't it? Technically if you don't go through customs you may not have been in the country despite setting foot on its territory. That's how people can be denied entry into a country when arriving at an airport in that country and elect to return home without getting listed as having been deported too, an important factor in future visa applications.
– jwenting
May 22 at 3:38
|
show 7 more comments
I must agree with jpatokal with a small correction: unless you went or should have gone through immigration, you haven't been in Iran (otherwise illegal border crossings wouldn't count). Otherwise really strange questions arise. Like, if you have sailed through the Strait of Hormuz it is entirely possibly you have crossed waters Iran claims theirs but the United States disputes these claims. So, according to the United States have you been to Iran if you have been only on territory the United States doesn't recognize as a territory of Iran...? If your plane does an emergency landing in Iran, do you lose your ESTA rights for life? If your plane does a refuelling stop where you can't get off and noone can get on, have you been to Iran? The possibilities are endless...
Even more importantly, what happens if you enter a consulate of Iran? What definition can you find aside from an actual border crossing that differentiates from the territory of the embassy and the country itself?
edited May 24 at 18:26
phoog
80.6k13178261
answered May 22 at 2:39
chxchx
40.4k487199
3
Perhaps I could interest you in a career in the law...
– David
May 22 at 2:41
5
We have already been characterized as "bloodthirsty persnickety software developers". I don't need a degree in law to be persnickety beyond any reason.
– chx
May 22 at 2:44
2
“should have went”. Is that a typo?
– Anush
May 22 at 5:38
6
Consulates and embassies are not foreign soil, so considering a visit to an Iranian consulate as having been in Iran would be quite bizarre and not based on any internationally recognised definition. @Anush No, it’s just a dialectal US form.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
May 22 at 11:37
add a comment |
So my wife got a response back from ESTA after applying that the authorisation is still pending even though it's been more than 72 hours since she applied. This was the response from the CBP officer:-
Your application is pending additional administrative processing due to your previous travel to Iran. Applications that show travel to a restricted country can take considerably longer than the normal 72 hours to review. Alternatively, we strongly recommend applying for a visa at the nearest U.S. Embassy or Consulate.
The trip is in just under a week's time so it looks like she could miss out unfortunately
answered May 28 at 10:55
Richard JewelsRichard Jewels
16115
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "273"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftravel.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f138979%2fcan-you-still-travel-to-america-on-the-visa-waiver-program-if-you-have-been-to-i%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Some travelers are not eligible for ESTA. The US Customs and Border Protection FAQ says those travelers include:
Nationals of VWP countries who have traveled to or been present in Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, or Yemen at any time on or after March 1, 2011 (with limited exceptions); and
where those exceptions are
to represent your program country on official military orders or official government business
It depends on what the US definition of "travelled to or been present in" is, but taking that to be literal "set foot in the country" (the safest definition from your perspective), you and your wife would no longer qualify for an ESTA and would need to do a full visa application.
answered May 21 at 10:07
qechuaqechua
54018
25
This is a rather poor answer. The question is effectively asking for clarification on how the US defines "traveled to", and you don't provide any additional clarity on that point, aside from an unsupported "better safe than sorry" admonition [and you don't even expand on what "safest" implies here]. (It comes off a little like "Q: Do I qualify for the student discount?" "A: If you pay full price, you don't have to worry about the discount rules." - technically true, but not useful for answering the question at hand.)
– R.M.
May 21 at 19:45
1
@r.m. exactly. A better answer might look like, "According to Smith v. Shoppers Value Mart Student Benefit Programs, 'student' was defined as any person enrolled in high school or in credit-bearing university coursework. It was specifically held in this case that receiving private online tutoring in French grammar from an independently-operating retired public school teacher did not, in and of itself, constitute either high school or university study."
– Robert Columbia
May 21 at 20:47
4
@R.M. but in the absence of some authoritative statement on the US interpretation of "present in" with respect to transits without clearing immigration controls, this is the best answer one can get. I further think it unlikely that we'll find an authoritative statement of the US interpretation, and I note that answering "no" to the relevant ESTA eligibility question in these circumstances could be seen as deceptive and could therefore result in a finding of inadmissibility.
– phoog
May 21 at 21:05
4
@RobertColumbia I doubt there's been any litigation on this question. VWP-eligible travelers, like most nonimmigrant applicants for immigration benefits, have very limited access to US courts.
– phoog
May 21 at 21:06
1
@phoog I'd suspect that no authoritative statement will ever be given as this open and vague wording is very much in the favour of US CBP.
– Richard
May 22 at 8:29
|
show 1 more comment
Some travelers are not eligible for ESTA. The US Customs and Border Protection FAQ says those travelers include:
Nationals of VWP countries who have traveled to or been present in Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, or Yemen at any time on or after March 1, 2011 (with limited exceptions); and
where those exceptions are
to represent your program country on official military orders or official government business
It depends on what the US definition of "travelled to or been present in" is, but taking that to be literal "set foot in the country" (the safest definition from your perspective), you and your wife would no longer qualify for an ESTA and would need to do a full visa application.
answered May 21 at 10:07
qechuaqechua
54018
25
This is a rather poor answer. The question is effectively asking for clarification on how the US defines "traveled to", and you don't provide any additional clarity on that point, aside from an unsupported "better safe than sorry" admonition [and you don't even expand on what "safest" implies here]. (It comes off a little like "Q: Do I qualify for the student discount?" "A: If you pay full price, you don't have to worry about the discount rules." - technically true, but not useful for answering the question at hand.)
– R.M.
May 21 at 19:45
1
@r.m. exactly. A better answer might look like, "According to Smith v. Shoppers Value Mart Student Benefit Programs, 'student' was defined as any person enrolled in high school or in credit-bearing university coursework. It was specifically held in this case that receiving private online tutoring in French grammar from an independently-operating retired public school teacher did not, in and of itself, constitute either high school or university study."
– Robert Columbia
May 21 at 20:47
4
@R.M. but in the absence of some authoritative statement on the US interpretation of "present in" with respect to transits without clearing immigration controls, this is the best answer one can get. I further think it unlikely that we'll find an authoritative statement of the US interpretation, and I note that answering "no" to the relevant ESTA eligibility question in these circumstances could be seen as deceptive and could therefore result in a finding of inadmissibility.
– phoog
May 21 at 21:05
4
@RobertColumbia I doubt there's been any litigation on this question. VWP-eligible travelers, like most nonimmigrant applicants for immigration benefits, have very limited access to US courts.
– phoog
May 21 at 21:06
1
@phoog I'd suspect that no authoritative statement will ever be given as this open and vague wording is very much in the favour of US CBP.
– Richard
May 22 at 8:29
|
show 1 more comment
Some travelers are not eligible for ESTA. The US Customs and Border Protection FAQ says those travelers include:
Nationals of VWP countries who have traveled to or been present in Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, or Yemen at any time on or after March 1, 2011 (with limited exceptions); and
where those exceptions are
to represent your program country on official military orders or official government business
It depends on what the US definition of "travelled to or been present in" is, but taking that to be literal "set foot in the country" (the safest definition from your perspective), you and your wife would no longer qualify for an ESTA and would need to do a full visa application.
answered May 21 at 10:07
qechuaqechua
54018
Some travelers are not eligible for ESTA. The US Customs and Border Protection FAQ says those travelers include:
Nationals of VWP countries who have traveled to or been present in Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, or Yemen at any time on or after March 1, 2011 (with limited exceptions); and
where those exceptions are
to represent your program country on official military orders or official government business
It depends on what the US definition of "travelled to or been present in" is, but taking that to be literal "set foot in the country" (the safest definition from your perspective), you and your wife would no longer qualify for an ESTA and would need to do a full visa application.
answered May 21 at 10:07
qechuaqechua
54018
edited May 22 at 8:45
answered May 21 at 10:07
qechuaqechua
54018
answered May 21 at 10:07
qechuaqechua
54018
answered May 21 at 10:07
qechuaqechua
54018
54018
25
This is a rather poor answer. The question is effectively asking for clarification on how the US defines "traveled to", and you don't provide any additional clarity on that point, aside from an unsupported "better safe than sorry" admonition [and you don't even expand on what "safest" implies here]. (It comes off a little like "Q: Do I qualify for the student discount?" "A: If you pay full price, you don't have to worry about the discount rules." - technically true, but not useful for answering the question at hand.)
– R.M.
May 21 at 19:45
1
@r.m. exactly. A better answer might look like, "According to Smith v. Shoppers Value Mart Student Benefit Programs, 'student' was defined as any person enrolled in high school or in credit-bearing university coursework. It was specifically held in this case that receiving private online tutoring in French grammar from an independently-operating retired public school teacher did not, in and of itself, constitute either high school or university study."
– Robert Columbia
May 21 at 20:47
4
@R.M. but in the absence of some authoritative statement on the US interpretation of "present in" with respect to transits without clearing immigration controls, this is the best answer one can get. I further think it unlikely that we'll find an authoritative statement of the US interpretation, and I note that answering "no" to the relevant ESTA eligibility question in these circumstances could be seen as deceptive and could therefore result in a finding of inadmissibility.
– phoog
May 21 at 21:05
4
@RobertColumbia I doubt there's been any litigation on this question. VWP-eligible travelers, like most nonimmigrant applicants for immigration benefits, have very limited access to US courts.
– phoog
May 21 at 21:06
1
@phoog I'd suspect that no authoritative statement will ever be given as this open and vague wording is very much in the favour of US CBP.
– Richard
May 22 at 8:29
|
show 1 more comment
25
This is a rather poor answer. The question is effectively asking for clarification on how the US defines "traveled to", and you don't provide any additional clarity on that point, aside from an unsupported "better safe than sorry" admonition [and you don't even expand on what "safest" implies here]. (It comes off a little like "Q: Do I qualify for the student discount?" "A: If you pay full price, you don't have to worry about the discount rules." - technically true, but not useful for answering the question at hand.)
– R.M.
May 21 at 19:45
1
@r.m. exactly. A better answer might look like, "According to Smith v. Shoppers Value Mart Student Benefit Programs, 'student' was defined as any person enrolled in high school or in credit-bearing university coursework. It was specifically held in this case that receiving private online tutoring in French grammar from an independently-operating retired public school teacher did not, in and of itself, constitute either high school or university study."
– Robert Columbia
May 21 at 20:47
4
@R.M. but in the absence of some authoritative statement on the US interpretation of "present in" with respect to transits without clearing immigration controls, this is the best answer one can get. I further think it unlikely that we'll find an authoritative statement of the US interpretation, and I note that answering "no" to the relevant ESTA eligibility question in these circumstances could be seen as deceptive and could therefore result in a finding of inadmissibility.
– phoog
May 21 at 21:05
4
@RobertColumbia I doubt there's been any litigation on this question. VWP-eligible travelers, like most nonimmigrant applicants for immigration benefits, have very limited access to US courts.
– phoog
May 21 at 21:06
1
@phoog I'd suspect that no authoritative statement will ever be given as this open and vague wording is very much in the favour of US CBP.
– Richard
May 22 at 8:29
25
25
This is a rather poor answer. The question is effectively asking for clarification on how the US defines "traveled to", and you don't provide any additional clarity on that point, aside from an unsupported "better safe than sorry" admonition [and you don't even expand on what "safest" implies here]. (It comes off a little like "Q: Do I qualify for the student discount?" "A: If you pay full price, you don't have to worry about the discount rules." - technically true, but not useful for answering the question at hand.)
– R.M.
May 21 at 19:45
This is a rather poor answer. The question is effectively asking for clarification on how the US defines "traveled to", and you don't provide any additional clarity on that point, aside from an unsupported "better safe than sorry" admonition [and you don't even expand on what "safest" implies here]. (It comes off a little like "Q: Do I qualify for the student discount?" "A: If you pay full price, you don't have to worry about the discount rules." - technically true, but not useful for answering the question at hand.)
– R.M.
May 21 at 19:45
1
1
@r.m. exactly. A better answer might look like, "According to Smith v. Shoppers Value Mart Student Benefit Programs, 'student' was defined as any person enrolled in high school or in credit-bearing university coursework. It was specifically held in this case that receiving private online tutoring in French grammar from an independently-operating retired public school teacher did not, in and of itself, constitute either high school or university study."
– Robert Columbia
May 21 at 20:47
@r.m. exactly. A better answer might look like, "According to Smith v. Shoppers Value Mart Student Benefit Programs, 'student' was defined as any person enrolled in high school or in credit-bearing university coursework. It was specifically held in this case that receiving private online tutoring in French grammar from an independently-operating retired public school teacher did not, in and of itself, constitute either high school or university study."
– Robert Columbia
May 21 at 20:47
4
4
@R.M. but in the absence of some authoritative statement on the US interpretation of "present in" with respect to transits without clearing immigration controls, this is the best answer one can get. I further think it unlikely that we'll find an authoritative statement of the US interpretation, and I note that answering "no" to the relevant ESTA eligibility question in these circumstances could be seen as deceptive and could therefore result in a finding of inadmissibility.
– phoog
May 21 at 21:05
@R.M. but in the absence of some authoritative statement on the US interpretation of "present in" with respect to transits without clearing immigration controls, this is the best answer one can get. I further think it unlikely that we'll find an authoritative statement of the US interpretation, and I note that answering "no" to the relevant ESTA eligibility question in these circumstances could be seen as deceptive and could therefore result in a finding of inadmissibility.
– phoog
May 21 at 21:05
4
4
@RobertColumbia I doubt there's been any litigation on this question. VWP-eligible travelers, like most nonimmigrant applicants for immigration benefits, have very limited access to US courts.
– phoog
May 21 at 21:06
@RobertColumbia I doubt there's been any litigation on this question. VWP-eligible travelers, like most nonimmigrant applicants for immigration benefits, have very limited access to US courts.
– phoog
May 21 at 21:06
1
1
@phoog I'd suspect that no authoritative statement will ever be given as this open and vague wording is very much in the favour of US CBP.
– Richard
May 22 at 8:29
@phoog I'd suspect that no authoritative statement will ever be given as this open and vague wording is very much in the favour of US CBP.
– Richard
May 22 at 8:29
|
show 1 more comment
With the disclaimer that I'm not sure how the CBP interprets the rules for this edge case, for most practical purposes, if you never went through immigration, you've never been to Iran.
So in your shoes, I would say "no" in the ESTA application, and in the unlikely event of being questioned on arrival, I would simply state the above.
The other option would be to state "yes", which will likely cause the ESTA to be rejected, and then apply for a visa and explain the situation. However, while you will very likely get the visa this way, it may take so long that you miss the trip -- and if you've failed ESTA once, you now need to apply for a visa for the US for the rest of your life.
answered May 21 at 10:12
jpatokaljpatokal
120k19386547
5
Being at the airport, wouldn't OP be considered to have been present in Iran?
– RedBaron
May 21 at 10:25
11
@RedBaron I've sent a question to CBP, i'll post an answer when i get a reply, they're usually quick
– BritishSam
May 21 at 10:33
5
@jpatokal In the relevant act (Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015), the only wording is 'the alien has not been present in ...'. If 'been present' only referred to people residing for longer periods, the act would not apply to people on short visits, which it however obviously does.
– Tor-Einar Jarnbjo
May 21 at 11:06
4
@Tor-EinarJarnbjo I agree. It's possible that CBP will interpret a transit without clearing immigration controls as not constituting "presence in" Iran for the purpose of the VWP regulations, but it's also possible (if not likely) that they would take the opposite interpretation. If CBP somehow has access to the traveler's history, and the traveler says she hasn't been to Iran, she risks being found inadmissible for deception.
– phoog
May 21 at 15:27
2
@RedBaron that's the question, isn't it? Technically if you don't go through customs you may not have been in the country despite setting foot on its territory. That's how people can be denied entry into a country when arriving at an airport in that country and elect to return home without getting listed as having been deported too, an important factor in future visa applications.
– jwenting
May 22 at 3:38
|
show 7 more comments
With the disclaimer that I'm not sure how the CBP interprets the rules for this edge case, for most practical purposes, if you never went through immigration, you've never been to Iran.
So in your shoes, I would say "no" in the ESTA application, and in the unlikely event of being questioned on arrival, I would simply state the above.
The other option would be to state "yes", which will likely cause the ESTA to be rejected, and then apply for a visa and explain the situation. However, while you will very likely get the visa this way, it may take so long that you miss the trip -- and if you've failed ESTA once, you now need to apply for a visa for the US for the rest of your life.
answered May 21 at 10:12
jpatokaljpatokal
120k19386547
5
Being at the airport, wouldn't OP be considered to have been present in Iran?
– RedBaron
May 21 at 10:25
11
@RedBaron I've sent a question to CBP, i'll post an answer when i get a reply, they're usually quick
– BritishSam
May 21 at 10:33
5
@jpatokal In the relevant act (Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015), the only wording is 'the alien has not been present in ...'. If 'been present' only referred to people residing for longer periods, the act would not apply to people on short visits, which it however obviously does.
– Tor-Einar Jarnbjo
May 21 at 11:06
4
@Tor-EinarJarnbjo I agree. It's possible that CBP will interpret a transit without clearing immigration controls as not constituting "presence in" Iran for the purpose of the VWP regulations, but it's also possible (if not likely) that they would take the opposite interpretation. If CBP somehow has access to the traveler's history, and the traveler says she hasn't been to Iran, she risks being found inadmissible for deception.
– phoog
May 21 at 15:27
2
@RedBaron that's the question, isn't it? Technically if you don't go through customs you may not have been in the country despite setting foot on its territory. That's how people can be denied entry into a country when arriving at an airport in that country and elect to return home without getting listed as having been deported too, an important factor in future visa applications.
– jwenting
May 22 at 3:38
|
show 7 more comments
With the disclaimer that I'm not sure how the CBP interprets the rules for this edge case, for most practical purposes, if you never went through immigration, you've never been to Iran.
So in your shoes, I would say "no" in the ESTA application, and in the unlikely event of being questioned on arrival, I would simply state the above.
The other option would be to state "yes", which will likely cause the ESTA to be rejected, and then apply for a visa and explain the situation. However, while you will very likely get the visa this way, it may take so long that you miss the trip -- and if you've failed ESTA once, you now need to apply for a visa for the US for the rest of your life.
answered May 21 at 10:12
jpatokaljpatokal
120k19386547
With the disclaimer that I'm not sure how the CBP interprets the rules for this edge case, for most practical purposes, if you never went through immigration, you've never been to Iran.
So in your shoes, I would say "no" in the ESTA application, and in the unlikely event of being questioned on arrival, I would simply state the above.
The other option would be to state "yes", which will likely cause the ESTA to be rejected, and then apply for a visa and explain the situation. However, while you will very likely get the visa this way, it may take so long that you miss the trip -- and if you've failed ESTA once, you now need to apply for a visa for the US for the rest of your life.
answered May 21 at 10:12
jpatokaljpatokal
120k19386547
answered May 21 at 10:12
jpatokaljpatokal
120k19386547
answered May 21 at 10:12
jpatokaljpatokal
120k19386547
answered May 21 at 10:12
jpatokaljpatokal
120k19386547
120k19386547
5
Being at the airport, wouldn't OP be considered to have been present in Iran?
– RedBaron
May 21 at 10:25
11
@RedBaron I've sent a question to CBP, i'll post an answer when i get a reply, they're usually quick
– BritishSam
May 21 at 10:33
5
@jpatokal In the relevant act (Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015), the only wording is 'the alien has not been present in ...'. If 'been present' only referred to people residing for longer periods, the act would not apply to people on short visits, which it however obviously does.
– Tor-Einar Jarnbjo
May 21 at 11:06
4
@Tor-EinarJarnbjo I agree. It's possible that CBP will interpret a transit without clearing immigration controls as not constituting "presence in" Iran for the purpose of the VWP regulations, but it's also possible (if not likely) that they would take the opposite interpretation. If CBP somehow has access to the traveler's history, and the traveler says she hasn't been to Iran, she risks being found inadmissible for deception.
– phoog
May 21 at 15:27
2
@RedBaron that's the question, isn't it? Technically if you don't go through customs you may not have been in the country despite setting foot on its territory. That's how people can be denied entry into a country when arriving at an airport in that country and elect to return home without getting listed as having been deported too, an important factor in future visa applications.
– jwenting
May 22 at 3:38
|
show 7 more comments
5
Being at the airport, wouldn't OP be considered to have been present in Iran?
– RedBaron
May 21 at 10:25
11
@RedBaron I've sent a question to CBP, i'll post an answer when i get a reply, they're usually quick
– BritishSam
May 21 at 10:33
5
@jpatokal In the relevant act (Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015), the only wording is 'the alien has not been present in ...'. If 'been present' only referred to people residing for longer periods, the act would not apply to people on short visits, which it however obviously does.
– Tor-Einar Jarnbjo
May 21 at 11:06
4
@Tor-EinarJarnbjo I agree. It's possible that CBP will interpret a transit without clearing immigration controls as not constituting "presence in" Iran for the purpose of the VWP regulations, but it's also possible (if not likely) that they would take the opposite interpretation. If CBP somehow has access to the traveler's history, and the traveler says she hasn't been to Iran, she risks being found inadmissible for deception.
– phoog
May 21 at 15:27
2
@RedBaron that's the question, isn't it? Technically if you don't go through customs you may not have been in the country despite setting foot on its territory. That's how people can be denied entry into a country when arriving at an airport in that country and elect to return home without getting listed as having been deported too, an important factor in future visa applications.
– jwenting
May 22 at 3:38
5
5
Being at the airport, wouldn't OP be considered to have been present in Iran?
– RedBaron
May 21 at 10:25
Being at the airport, wouldn't OP be considered to have been present in Iran?
– RedBaron
May 21 at 10:25
11
11
@RedBaron I've sent a question to CBP, i'll post an answer when i get a reply, they're usually quick
– BritishSam
May 21 at 10:33
@RedBaron I've sent a question to CBP, i'll post an answer when i get a reply, they're usually quick
– BritishSam
May 21 at 10:33
5
5
@jpatokal In the relevant act (Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015), the only wording is 'the alien has not been present in ...'. If 'been present' only referred to people residing for longer periods, the act would not apply to people on short visits, which it however obviously does.
– Tor-Einar Jarnbjo
May 21 at 11:06
@jpatokal In the relevant act (Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015), the only wording is 'the alien has not been present in ...'. If 'been present' only referred to people residing for longer periods, the act would not apply to people on short visits, which it however obviously does.
– Tor-Einar Jarnbjo
May 21 at 11:06
4
4
@Tor-EinarJarnbjo I agree. It's possible that CBP will interpret a transit without clearing immigration controls as not constituting "presence in" Iran for the purpose of the VWP regulations, but it's also possible (if not likely) that they would take the opposite interpretation. If CBP somehow has access to the traveler's history, and the traveler says she hasn't been to Iran, she risks being found inadmissible for deception.
– phoog
May 21 at 15:27
@Tor-EinarJarnbjo I agree. It's possible that CBP will interpret a transit without clearing immigration controls as not constituting "presence in" Iran for the purpose of the VWP regulations, but it's also possible (if not likely) that they would take the opposite interpretation. If CBP somehow has access to the traveler's history, and the traveler says she hasn't been to Iran, she risks being found inadmissible for deception.
– phoog
May 21 at 15:27
2
2
@RedBaron that's the question, isn't it? Technically if you don't go through customs you may not have been in the country despite setting foot on its territory. That's how people can be denied entry into a country when arriving at an airport in that country and elect to return home without getting listed as having been deported too, an important factor in future visa applications.
– jwenting
May 22 at 3:38
@RedBaron that's the question, isn't it? Technically if you don't go through customs you may not have been in the country despite setting foot on its territory. That's how people can be denied entry into a country when arriving at an airport in that country and elect to return home without getting listed as having been deported too, an important factor in future visa applications.
– jwenting
May 22 at 3:38
|
show 7 more comments
I must agree with jpatokal with a small correction: unless you went or should have gone through immigration, you haven't been in Iran (otherwise illegal border crossings wouldn't count). Otherwise really strange questions arise. Like, if you have sailed through the Strait of Hormuz it is entirely possibly you have crossed waters Iran claims theirs but the United States disputes these claims. So, according to the United States have you been to Iran if you have been only on territory the United States doesn't recognize as a territory of Iran...? If your plane does an emergency landing in Iran, do you lose your ESTA rights for life? If your plane does a refuelling stop where you can't get off and noone can get on, have you been to Iran? The possibilities are endless...
Even more importantly, what happens if you enter a consulate of Iran? What definition can you find aside from an actual border crossing that differentiates from the territory of the embassy and the country itself?
edited May 24 at 18:26
phoog
80.6k13178261
answered May 22 at 2:39
chxchx
40.4k487199
3
Perhaps I could interest you in a career in the law...
– David
May 22 at 2:41
5
We have already been characterized as "bloodthirsty persnickety software developers". I don't need a degree in law to be persnickety beyond any reason.
– chx
May 22 at 2:44
2
“should have went”. Is that a typo?
– Anush
May 22 at 5:38
6
Consulates and embassies are not foreign soil, so considering a visit to an Iranian consulate as having been in Iran would be quite bizarre and not based on any internationally recognised definition. @Anush No, it’s just a dialectal US form.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
May 22 at 11:37
add a comment |
I must agree with jpatokal with a small correction: unless you went or should have gone through immigration, you haven't been in Iran (otherwise illegal border crossings wouldn't count). Otherwise really strange questions arise. Like, if you have sailed through the Strait of Hormuz it is entirely possibly you have crossed waters Iran claims theirs but the United States disputes these claims. So, according to the United States have you been to Iran if you have been only on territory the United States doesn't recognize as a territory of Iran...? If your plane does an emergency landing in Iran, do you lose your ESTA rights for life? If your plane does a refuelling stop where you can't get off and noone can get on, have you been to Iran? The possibilities are endless...
Even more importantly, what happens if you enter a consulate of Iran? What definition can you find aside from an actual border crossing that differentiates from the territory of the embassy and the country itself?
edited May 24 at 18:26
phoog
80.6k13178261
answered May 22 at 2:39
chxchx
40.4k487199
3
Perhaps I could interest you in a career in the law...
– David
May 22 at 2:41
5
We have already been characterized as "bloodthirsty persnickety software developers". I don't need a degree in law to be persnickety beyond any reason.
– chx
May 22 at 2:44
2
“should have went”. Is that a typo?
– Anush
May 22 at 5:38
6
Consulates and embassies are not foreign soil, so considering a visit to an Iranian consulate as having been in Iran would be quite bizarre and not based on any internationally recognised definition. @Anush No, it’s just a dialectal US form.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
May 22 at 11:37
add a comment |
I must agree with jpatokal with a small correction: unless you went or should have gone through immigration, you haven't been in Iran (otherwise illegal border crossings wouldn't count). Otherwise really strange questions arise. Like, if you have sailed through the Strait of Hormuz it is entirely possibly you have crossed waters Iran claims theirs but the United States disputes these claims. So, according to the United States have you been to Iran if you have been only on territory the United States doesn't recognize as a territory of Iran...? If your plane does an emergency landing in Iran, do you lose your ESTA rights for life? If your plane does a refuelling stop where you can't get off and noone can get on, have you been to Iran? The possibilities are endless...
Even more importantly, what happens if you enter a consulate of Iran? What definition can you find aside from an actual border crossing that differentiates from the territory of the embassy and the country itself?
edited May 24 at 18:26
phoog
80.6k13178261
answered May 22 at 2:39
chxchx
40.4k487199
I must agree with jpatokal with a small correction: unless you went or should have gone through immigration, you haven't been in Iran (otherwise illegal border crossings wouldn't count). Otherwise really strange questions arise. Like, if you have sailed through the Strait of Hormuz it is entirely possibly you have crossed waters Iran claims theirs but the United States disputes these claims. So, according to the United States have you been to Iran if you have been only on territory the United States doesn't recognize as a territory of Iran...? If your plane does an emergency landing in Iran, do you lose your ESTA rights for life? If your plane does a refuelling stop where you can't get off and noone can get on, have you been to Iran? The possibilities are endless...
Even more importantly, what happens if you enter a consulate of Iran? What definition can you find aside from an actual border crossing that differentiates from the territory of the embassy and the country itself?
edited May 24 at 18:26
phoog
80.6k13178261
answered May 22 at 2:39
chxchx
40.4k487199
edited May 24 at 18:26
phoog
80.6k13178261
edited May 24 at 18:26
phoog
80.6k13178261
edited May 24 at 18:26
phoog
80.6k13178261
80.6k13178261
answered May 22 at 2:39
chxchx
40.4k487199
answered May 22 at 2:39
chxchx
40.4k487199
answered May 22 at 2:39
chxchx
40.4k487199
40.4k487199
3
Perhaps I could interest you in a career in the law...
– David
May 22 at 2:41
5
We have already been characterized as "bloodthirsty persnickety software developers". I don't need a degree in law to be persnickety beyond any reason.
– chx
May 22 at 2:44
2
“should have went”. Is that a typo?
– Anush
May 22 at 5:38
6
Consulates and embassies are not foreign soil, so considering a visit to an Iranian consulate as having been in Iran would be quite bizarre and not based on any internationally recognised definition. @Anush No, it’s just a dialectal US form.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
May 22 at 11:37
add a comment |
3
Perhaps I could interest you in a career in the law...
– David
May 22 at 2:41
5
We have already been characterized as "bloodthirsty persnickety software developers". I don't need a degree in law to be persnickety beyond any reason.
– chx
May 22 at 2:44
2
“should have went”. Is that a typo?
– Anush
May 22 at 5:38
6
Consulates and embassies are not foreign soil, so considering a visit to an Iranian consulate as having been in Iran would be quite bizarre and not based on any internationally recognised definition. @Anush No, it’s just a dialectal US form.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
May 22 at 11:37
3
3
Perhaps I could interest you in a career in the law...
– David
May 22 at 2:41
Perhaps I could interest you in a career in the law...
– David
May 22 at 2:41
5
5
We have already been characterized as "bloodthirsty persnickety software developers". I don't need a degree in law to be persnickety beyond any reason.
– chx
May 22 at 2:44
We have already been characterized as "bloodthirsty persnickety software developers". I don't need a degree in law to be persnickety beyond any reason.
– chx
May 22 at 2:44
2
2
“should have went”. Is that a typo?
– Anush
May 22 at 5:38
“should have went”. Is that a typo?
– Anush
May 22 at 5:38
6
6
Consulates and embassies are not foreign soil, so considering a visit to an Iranian consulate as having been in Iran would be quite bizarre and not based on any internationally recognised definition. @Anush No, it’s just a dialectal US form.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
May 22 at 11:37
Consulates and embassies are not foreign soil, so considering a visit to an Iranian consulate as having been in Iran would be quite bizarre and not based on any internationally recognised definition. @Anush No, it’s just a dialectal US form.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
May 22 at 11:37
add a comment |
So my wife got a response back from ESTA after applying that the authorisation is still pending even though it's been more than 72 hours since she applied. This was the response from the CBP officer:-
Your application is pending additional administrative processing due to your previous travel to Iran. Applications that show travel to a restricted country can take considerably longer than the normal 72 hours to review. Alternatively, we strongly recommend applying for a visa at the nearest U.S. Embassy or Consulate.
The trip is in just under a week's time so it looks like she could miss out unfortunately
answered May 28 at 10:55
Richard JewelsRichard Jewels
16115
add a comment |
So my wife got a response back from ESTA after applying that the authorisation is still pending even though it's been more than 72 hours since she applied. This was the response from the CBP officer:-
Your application is pending additional administrative processing due to your previous travel to Iran. Applications that show travel to a restricted country can take considerably longer than the normal 72 hours to review. Alternatively, we strongly recommend applying for a visa at the nearest U.S. Embassy or Consulate.
The trip is in just under a week's time so it looks like she could miss out unfortunately
answered May 28 at 10:55
Richard JewelsRichard Jewels
16115
add a comment |
So my wife got a response back from ESTA after applying that the authorisation is still pending even though it's been more than 72 hours since she applied. This was the response from the CBP officer:-
Your application is pending additional administrative processing due to your previous travel to Iran. Applications that show travel to a restricted country can take considerably longer than the normal 72 hours to review. Alternatively, we strongly recommend applying for a visa at the nearest U.S. Embassy or Consulate.
The trip is in just under a week's time so it looks like she could miss out unfortunately
answered May 28 at 10:55
Richard JewelsRichard Jewels
16115
So my wife got a response back from ESTA after applying that the authorisation is still pending even though it's been more than 72 hours since she applied. This was the response from the CBP officer:-
Your application is pending additional administrative processing due to your previous travel to Iran. Applications that show travel to a restricted country can take considerably longer than the normal 72 hours to review. Alternatively, we strongly recommend applying for a visa at the nearest U.S. Embassy or Consulate.
The trip is in just under a week's time so it looks like she could miss out unfortunately
answered May 28 at 10:55
Richard JewelsRichard Jewels
16115
answered May 28 at 10:55
Richard JewelsRichard Jewels
16115
answered May 28 at 10:55
Richard JewelsRichard Jewels
16115
answered May 28 at 10:55
Richard JewelsRichard Jewels
16115
16115
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Travel Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftravel.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f138979%2fcan-you-still-travel-to-america-on-the-visa-waiver-program-if-you-have-been-to-i%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
May be related travel.stackexchange.com/questions/61663/…
– RedBaron
May 21 at 9:23
2
If I were your wife I would apply for a visa immediately, to maximize the chance of getting it before the anticipated departure.
– phoog
May 21 at 15:26
That would be quite the strange itinerary.
– Michael Hampton
May 21 at 16:52
2
@MichaelHampton Mahan Air has seasonal service to several Southeast Asian cities, so it's quite possible that for the OP's particular itinerary (or which we have no details), they were the best deal.
– choster
May 21 at 21:24
Also see travel.stackexchange.com/questions/100619/… . If you declare that you "visited" Iran, you may get the visa but the visit may be very uncomfortable from immigration point of view. If you don't declare and CBP at border determine you "visted" Iran and hence lied, you face a long entry ban to US.
– RedBaron
May 22 at 13:02