- This topic has 1 reply, 19 voices, and was last updated 16 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Looks like the new law was unanimously approved by committee and now goes to the “asemblea legislativa” for debate and vote. Committee members are confident it will pass. This will put Costa Rica out of reach to most all “foreigners” except for the very wealthy and/or you will see a dramatic increase in foreign births.
AM-CostaRica (today 26-11-2008): “Tourists are considered non-residents, and the draft continues the stipulation that they may not work in the country. However, like a previous draft, the revised version gives tourists the right to renew their stay for 90 days with the payment of $100. Tourists also are allowed an additional 90 days in which to apply for other immigration categories.”.
Live here like a “tourist”….. what’s the problem ?
The problem is NO CAJA FOR TOURISTS! With any luck I can get my permanent residency through the system sooner rather than later. OY OY OY. This is not good news for so many people.
I saw that caveat too sumaSAL. So does that mean for $400/year you can stay indefinitely? I hope Roger Petersen of Rick Philps post an article outlining the details. It seems to defeat the intent of the law they are trying to pass doesn’t it? How many people who planned to become “rentistas” will withdraw their cash from bank accounts? Could have an big impact on the foreign reserves for such a small country. This seems to be a lose-lose situation and makes investors extremely nervous. Definite emotional downer for us.
The A.M. Costa Rica article also mentioned that the Migracion police are being given equal status with other police forces in Costa Rica. That may foretell stricter enforcement of the law which clearly does not intend to permit people to live as tourists permanently. I can see a scenario in which the government decides that long-term “tourists” are not contributing to the CAJA and declines them re-entry after a number of cycles of tourist visas. It could be a rude awakening.
Worse case scenario; I could Stay at my CR property for three months, return to the States for a month and then come back to CR for three months. That would only be three visa stamps per year and certainly no problem. Best case scenario: they approve a perpetual tourist program to accommodate a large foreign national population.
I amnot moving to CR for insurance nor for economic advantages. I like the weather and the scenery and the people. Period.Relax folks… we’ve been here before! Let’s see what happens when it goes for debate and vote! Best guess, after consulting my crazy 8 ball… “My sources say wait and see”… 🙂
As for the $100 “extend your stay” tourist fee… not likely that they have created a legal PT program for those that want to stay 365 without leaving… that just doesn’t make ANY sense! If that were the case they would have made it more expensive since most folks spend more than $100 to leave for 72 hours!
The thinking or lack thereof + timing in a global financial crisis doesn’t make nay sense. The limits are crazy and significantly exceed the averages in the US or Europe. The average US social security recipient receives $1,090/mo. If the asemblea and the casa presidente are so concerned about immigration, maybe the focus should be on the biggest offenders, that also contribute the least in economic terms (other than agricultural labor), but are a burden on the system (Nicas). If it were a matter of contributing to the CAJA, then require all pensionados and rentistas to contribute to the CAJA the same as a resident and leave the limits as is. There is some other factor that is motivating this movement.
The $ 100 does make sence…. many “tourists” stay here and take the chance. Others pay some money to lawyers for a stamp. And others go to Panama, Nicaragua and St. Andres and spend their money there.
Now the government doesn’t receive much from these “tourists”….. Maybe they can make $ 400 out of each of ‘m.
grb, I agree that there is another motive besides lack OF CAJA contributions. It could be some covert co-operation between governments such as political pressure from the Chinese or the U.S., each with its own motives.
However, my biggest, and perhaps ONLY concern is that this might be coming from a general backlash of poplular sentiment towards foreign national residents. I can deal with the excessive financial requirements but there is nothing that can be done to change negativity of the attitude of the general populationa gainst us. I haven’t seen any anecdotal evidence of this but that is hardly conclusive. Has anyone else noticed a change in attitude towards us?
We’ve been here just over three years and we get around a lot. I can say unequivocally that we have experienced no animosity toward foreign nationals whatsoever with one exception. Costa Ricans tend to blame Nicaraguans for some of their problems including crime. But with regard to North Americans, we have sensed no hostility and expect none.
I am quite a way from retiring but it seems that it should not be to difficult for a couple to still retire here with the $2000 per month requirement.
On one of the other boards, a woman posted her story about how her neighbors got deported for having phony entry/exit stamps in their passport. I can’t remember the details of how they got caught — I think it was a some kind of sweep or something like that, and the migre, upon careful examination of the stamps in their passport, and a comparison of the computer records, figured out that this couple had not in fact left the country for 72 hours. The stamps were the wrong color, and there were other discrepancies. The couple were not even allowed to go home to get their things. They were herded to the airport and put on a plane to Miami, at their expense. So I wouldn’t trust a system that lets you pay for these stamps and then have something unforeseen happen in the future that gets you booted out of the country.
As for the new monetary requirements, yes it is more than possible that a couple could meet the new limits, but what about the single person who moved to Costa Rica? I know a lot of those and not a one of them gets two grand a month.
I had a long conversation with Javier about this new proposed law and he is convinced that if they were to make it retroactive that so many lawsuits would be filed to repeal it because as it states in the constitution it is illegal to make a law retroactive that would cause damage to any person. So I’ve stopped worry about this too much, although it is a concern for me, as is the recent crime wave we experienced in my neighborhood and the graffiti that said FUERA GRINGOS!
I empathize with anyone who moves to CR looking for a more affordable cost of living. But the only foreign nationals who would even consider living on $600 a month for a couple have to be financially desparate ones. Inevitable inflation WILL, sooner than later, put these people below the national standard of living. They would become a burden to the state.
I would not be able to live here in Miami on $2,000 a month unless I made some very drastic and unacceptable life style changes. My real estate taxes, real estate, health and car insurance and utilities would eat up $1800 a month. However, $2,000 a month in CR would comfortably carry me and my wife. I would not retire to CR unless I had at least that amount. Planning for emergencies and inflation dictates to me that I need quite a bit more, actually. The more I think about the new laws, the more reasonable they seem. Perhaps there is no motive other than the obvious economic concerns of avoiding indigent foreign nationals.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
