Another Preserving Residency Question

consider the following situation.

Landed on January 1st, 2008 as a new immigrant.
stayed in Canada continuously till leaving Canada on January 3rd, 2010.

If I stay outside Canada and come back on January 3rd, 2015, will the immigration officer conclude that I no longer maintain residency requirements? Yes/No and why please.

In my thinking, I stayed more than 730 days in the first 5 year period. If I come back in January 3rd, 2015, I will still have enough time to live another 730 days before completing the second 5 year period. Am I wrong?

Thank you

Hi Beaver,

Are you sure about the five year period does not go in cycles?

Also, when you said, I must show up in Canada again between December 2012 and January 2013, do I have then to stay another 730 total to maintain PR? kindly explain. Thank you

Hi pmm, I don't understand. Do you mean "yes" the immigration officers will determine that I no longer maintain Canadian residency requirements when I arrive back to Canada on January 3rd, 2010? if so, how then can I stay till January 3rd, 2017? thanks

Vlad -

Beaver is correct. Read through dpenabill's reply as well.

If you do what you have proposed in your original post, then you will lose your PR status.

Clarification: I believe that February 29 (in a leap year) does not count, either way. Does not count as a day in Canada. Does not count in calculating days absent. I am sure it does not count in the calculation for citizenship purposes, so I expect the same analysis applies to the residency obligation. However, it may not loom as importantly given the H & C discretion applicable to a PR residency obligation decision, in which one significant factor is the number of days by which the PR fails to meet the obligation . . . but see cautions about cutting it close in general. In contrast, for citizenship, the residency calculation is a fixed, qualifying criteria, no discretion (other than the discretion inherent in the fact-finding aspect); an applicant with less than 1095 days is, simply, not eligible.

As for returning within a day or few days of a date necessary to meet the residency obligation --

Anyone who was in Europe ten days ago and had less than ten days to return to meet their obligation blew it (the volcano in Iceland blew it for them, shutting down air travel for over a week). Stuff happens. Airlines do not always fly. Stuff can happen to an individual as well, a minor accident on the way to the airport, missed the flight, can't get another one for a week or even more. An unexpected illness, particularly a respiratory one (for which one might not be allowed on a plane). And so on.

Moreover, and importantly, if a PR shows up at a POE and has obviously been gone for 1090 days, or even 1000 days, they are quite likely to be examined very closely about their actual "in Canada" time, and if they cannot document the 730 days in Canada, the odds of a removal order are high . . . remembering, again, the burden is on the PR to prove days in Canada. This makes sense. Someone who has spent over two years abroad from Canada has not shown that they have permanently settled in Canada. Under the previous law even that length of absence would have likely resulted in removal (revocation of PR). The current law is intended to be very generous. So cutting it close is not a good idea. The longer a PR is away, the more skeptical CBSA is likely to be in conducting a residency obligation examination at the POE, and the more skeptical they are likely to be of minimal proffers of proof of the days one says they were in Canada. The rational is obvious. Permanent residency is, well, for residency in Canada and if someone with PR status, by their absences from Canada, has demonstrated residency elsewhere, of course the level of scrutiny as to meeting the minimum residency in Canada obligation will be, as it should, very much elevated.