I know I'm allowed to stay 6 months in Canada as a UK citizen, but my travel plan is to stay in Quebec for a few months, then go across to the US for about 2 months, then come back for my return flight out of Montreal. However, I'm always nervous about going across the US border even though I've gotten through before. If for some reason I got turned away from the US, I'd then be staying in Canada until my return flight back which would be more than 90 days. So, do I just put 90 days as my length of time as that's what my travel plan is, or would it confuse them if I put something like 90-150 days?

  • 3
    I would put the full length of time until your return flight. (I assume you bought it already?) You don't even have to bring up you're planning on going to the US. Leaving this as a comment because someone more knowledgeable might have a reason not do this. May 22, 2016 at 20:55

1 Answer 1


I would just put the amount of time you are actually planning on staying in Canada. The important thing is that you don't overstay the date stamped in your passport.

Anything else is not really the truth, and that can get you into trouble. Suppose they look at your stuff and you have things associated with going to the U.S.- your credibility could be in question. And your fears of being refused entry at the U.S. border- do you really want to open that can of worms?

You will have to meet the requirements for admissibility, in the opinion of the CBSA, in any case, of course.

  • I can imagine the conversation: "Well I plan to stay about a week, but it will be more if the US refuses me." "Why would the US refuse you?" "Oh no reason." And then you look rather suspicious indeed. The vast majority of UK citizens are admitted to the US. Do you have any reason to believe you would be rejected? May 24, 2016 at 18:27
  • @ZachLipton maybe the asker is Muslim, and is asking about a trip planned for Feb 2017...
    – AakashM
    May 25, 2016 at 7:42
  • 1
    @AakashM The profoundly disturbing thing is that there's actually a serious probability that could be the case, not that a lot of people aren't trying very hard in this election to ensure that our level of discrimination remains at the standard "profiling" level rather than "full on bigot." May 25, 2016 at 7:53

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .