Mi Amigo wrote:
All we can do is look at the anecdotal evidence from those who have posted their experiences on the board over the years. I realise that this doesn't give you an exact 'blueprint' for what you would like to do, but I'm sure you understand that this is not an exact science...(snip)...I would suggest that (if you haven't already done so) you use the search function above and have a read-up on similar threads, as this subject does come up fairly frequently.
Let's look at the evidence.
I read a number of recent (2011 to 2013) discussions on this site pertaining to regular visits, for up to 20 months, to Singapore on short term (up to 90 day) passes. The one that seemed most relevant to this thread was about a Korean passport holder. He alleged to visit SG 8 times in a 14 month period up to May 2012, including several trips of 60-90 days & others of 30 days, 7 days, etc. So, evidently, he spent over 7 months, or at least 50% of his time, in Singapore in a period over a year without any mention of immigration raising so much as an eyebrow, let alone ever questioning, interogating, warning, limiting, deporting or banning him. He came to visit his GF in SG & left for around a month after each visit.
The purpose of the thread he started was to inquire if he could keep on visiting in that way legally & without any problems. The responses by other posters were more or less favorable in that regard. Unfortunately, he did not as yet report back as to how he fared in the last 15 months. The thread title was "Flying in and out of Singapore on Tourist Visa" and can be read at:
http://forum.singaporeexpats.com/ftopic ... ight=visit
Looking at another thread, a young guy from the UK said on Dec. 30/2012 he had holidayed in SG "numerous times over the past 3-4 years" because he liked the country so much. He mentions no issues with immigration for this heinous crime:
"Thinking about migrating - Have a few queries."
http://forum.singaporeexpats.com/ftopic ... ight=visit
A third thread was about an Indonesian repeatedly visiting SG for 23-28 days before exiting for a week to his country. So he was in for 23-28 days & out for a week, over & over again, with no issues, for 20 months, till late July 2011. He claims that he was eventually stopped in SG & deported when he returned from a side trip to BKK for a few days. If SG immigration were so efficient, it is unclear why they allowed this obvious pattern to go on for so long. He details how he was interrogated, couldn't answer questions to immigrations satisfaction & was thrown in with many of the usual types you'd expect to be getting deported; no Koreans, Americans, Brits or any other first world passport holders.
He claimed to not be working in SG & that the purpose of his visits were to help his pregnant sister. I surmise that if he had been able to prove he had no need to work (i.e. financially independent or self-sufficient), as i can, his experience with immigration may have been quite the opposite. They may have offered him some candy, a cool one and a hot meal. This thread is titled "Refused from entering singapore, how long i can go back?" and found at:
http://forum.singaporeexpats.com/ftopic ... ight=visit
BTW the consensus opinions of the thread were that he'd only be banned from SG for a measly 6 months. In another instance of banning, a Korean lady got just one year for working illegally. Upon her return forum members suggested she might not even get a 30 day pass, yet as it turned out her husband claims she got 90:
http://forum.singaporeexpats.com/ftopic ... ight=visit
Any other very recent (as opposed to irrelevant 1990's) reports or "anecdotal evidence" i should consider?
Based on the evidence i've seen so far i think it likely i'll have no problems with immigration re regular long visits (30-90 days at a time) year after year, and will be well prepared in case they need proof i have sufficient funds and am not working in SG.
I see nothing on the ICA site saying such a behaviour is illegal. The only piece of info related to this topic is where they imply one should leave SG for 5 or more days before returning after a 60-90 day visit. Incidentally, a photocopy of that page might be useful for travellers who have issues with immigration & officers who claim to be unaware of it. Immigration should not expect the average traveller to be up to speed re the latest cutting edge info on online forums, but only with what is stated on their own website.
If at some point my visits are reduced, its not the end of the world, and I'll spend less time in SG and more in a place like KL or HKG. Who knows, having never been there i might even find those cities more desirable than SG. KL would most likely be quite a bit less expensive. But time will tell & a lot can change in a year or two.
Mi Amigo wrote:
Just in regards to the part I quoted above, the Singapore government is indeed very interested in having tourists visit Singapore as it has been identified as a key part of the country's economic development for the future. However, there is a distinction to be made between a 'frequent visitor' and a 'part-time resident' - clearly the dividing line is not clear-cut and there is a grey area at the boundary.
What's the difference between the two? I'm living here for 3 months, not just visiting for 3 days, as granted by SG immigration. When a person stays 3 months every year for 3, 5, or 10 years, what should that be labelled? BTW someone said that a visitor could see all there is to see of the island in a week. So why give 3 months?
Why do many nationalities require a visa to get into the country for much shorter visits, while others require no visa at all & get to stay 90 days? Clearly there are desirables & much more desirables & they should not all be lumped together when considering issues such as staying in SG for 2-6 months every year on visit passes of 30-90 days. Generally speaking first world passport holders are the latter, wouldn't you agree?
Mi Amigo wrote:
You need to consider this discussion in the context of the populace's general unhappiness at there being (in their minds) "too many foreigners" here. They are generally referring to people who 'live' here rather than tourists, but again, people who come and go frequently are also under the spotlight. Therefore the 'gahmen' wants to be seen to being firm about controlling who 'visits' on a regular basis, as well as those to whom it grants employment passes, PR, LTVPs, etc.
What kind of a "spotlight" were the above mentioned, frequent visiting, Korean, Brit & Indonesian under?
There are obviously many Singapore citizens who are happy to see visiting foreigners in their country. After all, it's their foregn dollars that keep numerous people in SG from being unemployed. So as far as these employees & the local businesses that hire them are concerned, the more (tourists) the merrier.
The hotel i'm staying in seems half empty all the time & delighted to have me. Likewise with various other businesses i frequent to buy food, clothes & stuff. I'm not a freeloader like someone's mom coming from a third world poor country or "subcontinent" & contributing nothing to the prosperity of the city-state, & just being a burden (financially speaking) on someone who's already living here. If i weren't here the hotel room would be empty & the hotel short a few thousand dollars each month.
Mi Amigo wrote:
So it's not only about whether people are coming here to work - we have heard of increasing difficulty for some folks (particularly from the subcontinent it appears) in obtaining LTVPs for parents, etc. Those people don't want to work either, just live with their families, but the internal critieria (whatever they may be) seem to have been tightened in this area too. I wouldn't be at all surprised if some folks are trying to get around this by doing the 'x' months here / 'y' months elsewhere thing. Hence this kind of activity will always be on the radar.
People who want to "live with their families...don't want to work either". These are often freeloaders, who offer the SG economy nothing & take up space & resources that effects SG citizens, quite a different matter from my proposed course of visiting SG, or that of the OP for employment purposes. I trust immigration can & will be able to make the distinction between the two, as well as between a Pakastani & USA passport holder.
Mi Amigo wrote:
One thing you might want to consider is calling the ICA, explaining your situation, desired goals and asking their advice. In my experience, they have always tried to be helpful, without of course revealing their internal processes or criteria, which they will never do. If you do that, please consider sharing any information you obtain here, for the benefit of others in future.
I intend not to be like others who have failed to report back with their experiences after benefiting from this site. It's the civilized thing to do, to give back, after all the help i've recieved here. Not sure i want to contact ICA, though. Perhaps someone with nothing to lose, such as an expat in Singapore, can pick up the phone & make the 5 minute call, for the enlightenment of the site. Maybe say you're phoning re a friend, interested parties, or a popular forum, & have a question: how may months a year is it acceptable for a USA or first world passport holder to visit Singapore? Two, three, four, six months a year, or as often as they like? What kinds of evidence will satisfy immigration concerns about frequent visitors of this type? For example would seeing pension documents of a certain income level satisfy them that one is financially self-sufficient and not working in SG? Or are they not worried about people from 1st world nations that they treat with special privileges, like VIPs, and offer the possibility to stay for 90 days at a time?
Mi Amigo wrote:
It can be frustrating for the regulars here too, when we get repeatedly asked these kinds of questions (hence SMS' last comments).
A sticky at the top of the page with links to particular sub topics related to the subject might help. Something regulars could refer people to & update as new info comes in. Something country specific, like this, perhaps:
http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/189 ... he-region/