My U.S. Border Nightmare - <AUTHOR> http://zakhomuth.com/my-us-border-nightmare <comment><USER3> Author seems a bit naive about international sovereignty, though I suppose one can't exactly blame him for it.

I grew up in Vancouver, a stone's throw from the border, so I suppose I take it for granted that we all learn very early on that CBP is a wretched hive of scum and villainy, and everyone knows _someone_ who was chewed out, berated, and generally treated like a criminal by them.

Seeing as how I work in the US now, it's probably fortunate that I grew up with such a cynical view about crossing international borders.

Anyways, let this be a lesson to Canadians (or I suppose more generally, all non-Americans) who want to cross the border for whatever reason: be prepared _always_ for the worst. If you are crossing for business, _always_ seek legal advice for your situation, and make sure _all_ of your ducks are lined up in a row. You have _no right_ to enter a country where you are not a citizen, regardless of what treaties and protocols your two nations have set up.

I do have a question for the author though: what kind of training involves setting up a US corp? Also, regardless of how you classify it in your head, I'm fairly certain that setting up and working for a US corp, for profit or education or just plain fun, _means you're working in the USA_ , and would be illegal without the relevant visas.

Without knowing the specifics about his situation, it would seem to me that he _was_ in fact trying to enter the US illegally - though he didn't seem to know this. Ignorance of the law won't help you very much when you're in a room with an irate CBP officer.

<comment><USER4> I will add an anecdote here. I have crossed the US-Canada land border _many_ times. I've only ever been 'chewed out' by Canadian Border Patrol _once_. I've had this happen _multiple_ times from the US Border Patrol _and I'm a US citizen._

The Canadian Border Patrol has always been calm, patient and understanding in my experience. The US border patrol is hit-or-miss. Some people are nice ( _once_ I was only asked two questions, and wasn't even required to show my passport, back in ~2005), while others obviously have a chip on their shoulder and are just looking for someway to nail to the wall... no matter how small or insignificant.

<comment><USER5> Some more anecdotes.

I've crossed into Canada twice, both times awful. The first time (crossing from Detroit, heading towards Toronto) required having my entire car searched. The people were extremely unpleasant. Probably took close to an hour at the border. Coming home through Buffalo took two seconds. Second time was heading to Montreal from NYC and the guard was just generally a dick. Again, returning home, the guard was very friendly and advised us of some bad weather.

Maybe there's a system to the dickery, but probably not. I think border guards are generally hit or miss, regardless of their country.

<comment><USER4>
      > Maybe there's a system to the dickery, but probably
      > not. I think border guards are generally hit or miss,
      > regardless of their country.

I generally find that I've had fewer bad experiences by avoiding the Ambassador Bridge (Detroit), the Peace Bridge (Buffalo), and the Lewiston- Kingston Bridge (north of Niagara Falls).

The only bad experience I had with Canadian Border Officers was at the Lewiston-Kingston Bridge.

To me, this seems to make sense. These crossings are higher traffic than the other crossings (Rainbow Bridge, Detroit-Windsor Tunnel) in those areas. There may be more pressure on the guards at those crossings to be extra cautious, or they just might find people trying to pull stupid stuff more often (which re- enforces the idea that anyone is a potential 'evil-doer').

The other pattern that I've noticed is that most of the officers with chips on their shoulders reek of ex-military, whereas the more reasonable people don't give off that vibe.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm a foreigner that has crossed into the USA 25+ times, about half of those at land borders from Canada (where I live, but I'm not Canadian)

>the border guard starts in on me hard. I mean he had it out for me. I still have no idea why I rubbed him the wrong way, but he sure didn't like me.

This happens to me 75% of the time I try to enter the USA.

The best one was when I had my usa-plated motorbike in Canada, and came back into the USA with it. The border guard yelled at me, literally yelled at me for 2 hours about how much trouble I was in. "You gunna get it, boy", etc. Whenever I politely asked what law I had broken, I was told to "shut the hell up, smartass". (I broke no law, and was eventually allowed on my way)

Another time in front of about 40 people the border guard booms "Can you read, Boy?". To which I replied "yes, sir", as he threw my passport across the room, hitting me on the chest and falling on the floor.

A while back I was flying out from LA to Melbourne, and upon looking at my international plane ticket, the border guard said "where's Melbourne?". I was then forced to sit in a dark room, by myself for 4 hours, until another guard came along and said "looks fine to me, on your way"

>he was trying to get me to talk and contradict myself - which I have to admit is pretty fucked up.

This is the case every time I cross the border.

For the record, I'm white.

<comment><USER7> Ouch, I'm not sure what that says that I immediately wondered if you were a minority.

Oh, and I had a similar experience re: Melbourne. I'm a US citizen living in Australia, and was landing in San Fran for a 3 week visit about 8 years ago. As required by law, I travel on my US passport in and out of the US, so no problem right? But no, I start getting the third degree about what I do with myself - "I'm a student at the University of Melbourne" - "What is that? A college? What's Melbourne?" - err, where I just came from, and its best known University.

<comment><USER8> It says you are familiar with the historical racist usage of "boy"?

(For non-Americans: a common racial slur in the southern US during the Jim Crow era was to call an adult black man "boy".)

<comment><USER9> There was a curious culture clash in the '60s when Muhammad Ali was in Australia doing a meet'n'greet and a local TV personality was doing a light- hearted interview with him, and threw in the phrase 'I like the boy', referring to Ali.

The phrase was a slogan for a product that the local celebrity had been involved with, and didn't have the connotations here that it did in Ali's home country... the interview went sour fast.

<comment><USER10> "I like the boy" really just refers to a young male the way its said here, in Australia anyway. However, having watched enough American films, people are exposed to the "something something, boy." usage and aware of its connotations. These days you might say "guy" instead of "boy" but for no particular reason except that languages change.

In older English films, you often hear "my boy", which also doesn't have the same connotations.

Across cultural boundaries, the same words can mean different things.

Nonetheless, I'd be offended if someone referred to me as "boy" when directly addressing me because of the connotations that come from a culture separate to my own.

<comment><USER9> I imagine being referred to as 'boy' while your passport is airborne is offensive everywhere :)

here's the video (can't confirm audio on this machine) <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWKyDGGptA4>

corrections to my story:

\- late '70s

\- misunderstanding was acknowledged and forgiven

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This is sadly a pretty obvious case. The author was moving to the US to start a company. It wasn't to travel, nor to pop in and out to conduct business, and calling yCombinator a training program is a stretch. It might be, but it's a 'training program' that helps you start a business. A simple google would have told the agent what was what.

Blame dumb visa requirements, not the agents who actually managed to catch you out. The laws need to be changed, and Obama actually got the point in his SOTU.

In my five years living in the US during the first dot com boom first a student then on an H1B visa I knew enough not to bother trying to start a business. I've since started or helped start over 10, but none in the USA. Their loss.

<comment><USER12> I would go so far as to say that calling YCombinator "training" is an outright lie. It's a business incubator and angel investment program; they pay you to develop a prototype, and introduce you to potential investors.

I feel misled after reading the article. Not knowing the context, I assumed that he was actually referring to some sort of training; something like business school, in which you pay to be taught. Instead, being given an initial investment to form a corporation, write a prototype, and shop it around to venture capitalists is pretty much the definition of "doing business," even if it is only the first few steps.

I can imagine why CBP officers would feel misled as well. And it doesn't help that he is saying he had no intention of keeping the business in the US. Starting up a business in the US just to take the capital and move the business overseas? This isn't something that a lot of border officers are going to take kindly to, nor is there likely to be much in the way of laws encouraging it.

I would absolutely like to make it easier for successful, smart, and educated people to immigrate to the US, and make it easy for people to immigrate to the US in order to start a business. But going to the US to hit up investors, work for three months to get a prototype going, and then move the business elsewhere? You're going to have a hard time selling that.

<comment><USER13> He's still making his US investors a huge profit in the process. Somebody else does the work, we get rich. How can you not want this? :-)

<comment><USER14> Right now America doesn't. You're making a philosophical argument in the context of a US Border cross where predetermined visa categories have already been established.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I have a certain amount of sympathy given that Japanese immigration features in all of my nightmares.

That said, attempting to cross borders for the purpose of working illegally (sorry, I don't like the law either, but there is no conceivable way that YC does not count as employment) will not endear you to law enforcement. I wish they had been more polite in the course of discovering your true purpose and refusing you entry, but if they hadn't, that would have been a crazy result under US immigration law.

There's better ways to handle one's business and legal affairs tactically, but start with knowing that the US really doesn't have a visa category "People from countries we like, for any purposes whatsoever, no questions."

<comment><USER16> Any stories of Japanese immigration you'd like to link to/share that might help prepare someone planning on visiting the country?

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I think that the author is misleading his readers. YC is a far cry from a training program.

"Often this training involves setting up an American corporation for the startup activities - but I'll get to that later.".

Why didn't he just say he was accepted into a start-up incubator, and his company was being funded in exchange for a piece of the company that was being incorporated, and that they were going to make a real product and try to find customers for that product?

"We go through his whole list and at the very end, he very stubbornly says none of it matters because the real grounds for refusal are that I am trying to start a business in the US as according to the notes on my file by the Lewiston prosecutor. I refute this, explain the documentation prevents and disproves this, I explain and explain and explain and all to no effect."

What exactly are you doing in YC then...?

<comment><USER18> Agreed 200%. Classifying YC as a training program to immigration officials is bordering on fraud. He's lucky that he didn't get banned.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> _never enter the US with an unclear leaving date_

He makes it sound like this is an evil US policy. But in fact, every country I've ever visited outside the US, and I've visited a lot, asked me when I would be leaving and issued the appropriate visa. For example, if you visit the Philippines, the initial visa is 21 days. You can extend the visa, but again you must inform the government of your leave date. But if you mess around with Customs on this, you're likely to get in trouble all over the world, not just in the US.

<comment><USER20> Honestly, the same is true for _Canada_.

I was in Toronto for a week for work in December, and part of entering the country was presenting a letter signed by our Canadian office verifying that I really would be leaving on the set date, that my accommodations and travel out of Canada were already booked and paid for, etc.

<comment><USER21> Having travelled to both Canada and the US for a dodgy-looking (but in both cases totally legitimate) 3 month visit, I can tell you the Canadians are very much stricter than the American border guards.

<comment><USER22> This has not been my experience, but both are much stricter to those who are not their citizens, since they're pretty much charged to be. If you're an American entering Canada, expect to get asked why, and vice versa. It seemed like the OP was trying to enter on a non-work-authorized visa waiver, and that's just not kosher to USCBP. I say this as a US immigrant from Canada.

Always make sure you have your ducks in a row at the border. I still find it hard to believe that someone approved to YC would not know that. If you're doing anything more than _just_ visiting, you probably need to apply for a visa in advance. Lying to CBP (they call it "misrepresentation") is grounds for a lifetime ban from the US.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I'm a natural born U.S. citizen from the Canal Zone (former U.S. territory). I get harassed quite a bit whenever I come back to the U.S. from overseas. The last time I was brusquely asked if I was a natural born citizen or had been naturalized at some point. I responded, "I was born in the same hospital as John McCain." The officer let me through after that retort.

In my experience the CPB is the worst customs agency in the world and I'm an American. Natural born, of course.

<comment><USER24> > The last time I was brusquely asked if I was a natural born citizen or had > been naturalized at some point.

If you're naturalised, my understanding is that you have all the rights of a person originally born in the country, with everything that implies. Is there even a point of asking this question other than aggressiveness?

<comment><USER25> Not quite _all_ the same rights and privileges. If you are entering the USA for the purpose of working as POTUS, They have grounds to refuse you as ineligible ;-)

<comment><USER14> Well, presumably he does have the right to become POTUS if he was born in the same hospital as John McCain seeing as John McCain was a presidential candidate and thus his eligibility was already predetermined.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I couldn't get through that wall of incoherent text. But from what I read, he's 100% wrong...maybe the story gets really weird though...however..

Traveling to a country which you are not a citizen of is not a right, it's a privilege. There are places where you need to apply weeks (or months) in advanced just to visit. Every country has different types of visas, and each visa has restrictions on what sort of activity you can and cannot engage in. If you are unprepared, or worse, you get caught breaking these laws, whatever happens is your own fault.

Don't like the system? Don't like how a particular country enforces its laws or what the punishment can be? Don't travel.

<comment><USER27> This is completely true. If somebody's house stinks and is ugly, it's totally within his right to say to everybody: "don't like the stink? Don't come to my house!". However, the house doesn't stop to stink because of that :) I think US immigration policies could use a lot of improvement (using more polite expression here) and their implementation, including proneness of some personnel to power trips, could use a lot of improvement too. I myself crossed US border many times (not a citizen) and never had a bad experience, but I have read enough horror stories to conclude it happens much more often than it should have. And yes, nobody forces anybody to come to the US, and yes, it's totally within rights of the US to deny entry to any non-citizen and be as rude as they want while doing it. But that does not negate the facts expressed above, and I think US would significantly benefit if they fixed it. Saying "don't like our border guards - stay the hell out" won't benefit anybody.

<comment><USER28> Well, technically it benefits the citizens of the US if it prevents terrorists from coming in. Recall that the 9/11 terrorists came via the US/Canadian border. The first goal of the border agents is to prevent that from happening again. The 2nd goal is smooth service for all the non-terrorists. Unfortunately this is the world we live in.

<comment><USER29> _Recall that the 9/11 terrorists came via the US/Canadian border._

Not one of the 9/11 terrorists entered the US from Canada, and it is a startling indictment that there are people still so incredibly ignorant to make this claim.

Further the US has one of the most porous borders on the planet, with some 12 _million_ \+ illegals within its confines right now. They didn't get there from Canada -- they flew directly in from overseas, or walked across the land border from Mexico.

<comment><USER28> Excuse me, it was Ahmed Ressam. So just a terrorist, not a 9/11 terrorist. I guess that completely negates my point right?

<comment><USER29> It is an incredible mistake to make, so yes it does bring your perspective into question. Especially given that this story has absolutely nothing to do with "catching terrorists" -- even the most paranoid interpretation wouldn't go down that route -- and everything to do with immigration thinking he was going to be a lazy layabout who would end up working illegally in the US (or worse would end up resorting to petty crime to support himself)

<comment><USER28> The fact that you have only been a member here for 22 days is plainly apparent. Our community doesn't take the tone you are using.

I frankly don't think you understand one bit of what I was saying. You latched on to one part of my original statement - which particular terrorist it was that crossed the border - and missed the overall point. The border patrol is not there for travelers convience. The burdon is on the traveler to have their affairs in order. The officers are going to really dig into anyone who has a wierd story or raises red flags. The fact that you know you are innocent doesn't mean they know you are innocent.

Let me give you an example. The last time I crossed the border from Canada into the US, I was waiting in line in my car. I was probably 10 cars from the checkpoint when I realized that I had left my passport in its usual home in my suitcase - which was in the trunk. I thought, "oh, I'll go get that now so I don't have to waste time later and hold everyone up in this line" which seemed like the efficient thing to do. As soon as I got out of my car to open the trunk I had a pile of border patrol agents running at me yelling to put my hands up. I hadn't realized it, but apparently going for the trunk would be an obvious move to set off a car bomb.

Once they came over and we talked about what I was doing it was all cleared up and I had no issues, but at the moment what was an entirely innocent action to me appeared to be very suspicious to them. That is not an indictment of them, it is just a fact based on the red flags they are looking for. If you hit those red flags, whether you know you are innocent or not, you are viewed through the lense of their training.

Now if you got that from my original message and still think I'm an idiot, then thats your opinion. But that's my perspective on the matter and I'm almost certain that you are judging it without understanding it.

<comment><USER29> _The fact that you have only been a member here for 22 days is plainly apparent._

How utterly obnoxious. I suspect that few of the HN community would embrace your inability to accept your error.

 _You latched on to one part of my original statement - which particular terrorist it was that crossed the border - and missed the overall point._

You claimed that _all_ of those responsible for the worst terrorist incident in the US history came through Canada. Only none of them did. It's a pretty egregious claim.

The rest of your boring story is irrelevant. Terrorism has _nothing_ to do with this situation. Nothing at all. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> As someone who, up until recently, traveled to the United States on a regular basis (I'm Canadian), this doesn't surprise me at all. The author basically committed every mistake in the book.

Generally, every question that the CBP agent will ask revolves around money: who pays your salary, in what currency, are you attempting to get in to the USA to find a job, will someone be giving you money for whatever reason (e.g. honorarium for giving a talk at a conference), etc. Even if the question sounds innocuous or completely unrelated to money, chances are that depending on your response, a follow up question _would_ be. Additionally, if for whatever reason the agent decides that he doesn't like your story and believes that you are going to the USA and are going to be given money while you're there, you're basically shit out of luck.

> I say Waterloo (totally out of habit) and that I left my job so its no issue > about the time off (just a pointer here - never enter the US with an unclear > leaving date, and no paying job).

As someone who got locked up in a tiny room for a few hours because I mentioned that (at the time) I had been self-employed, these are basically the _worst_ things that you can say.

I really do understand what the author went through, and I sympathize. But the reality of the situation is that entering a country where you are not a citizen is not a right, it's a _privilege_.

Remember: The CBP agents aren't there to let you in; there are there to keep people _out_.

<comment><USER31> _I really do understand what the author went through, and I sympathize. But the reality of the situation is that entering a country where you are not a citizen is not a right, it's a _privilege_._

The reality of the situation is that any country that treats its most productive guests in this way won't remain an attractive destination, regardless of whether those guests have the right or privilege of visiting.

<comment><USER32> I'm wondering when that's going to happen because it seems that the US has always treated people this way since nigh on the beginning of its time.

It's one of the few countries in existence with a century-long isolationist movement, and in decade after decade has had anti-immigration sentiment run high for one immigrant group after another.

<comment><USER33> Not really. The US-Canada border was far easier to cross pre-911. You didn't even need a passport to cross up until 2004.

<comment><USER34> At one point in the nineties I was driving from Canada to Maine and actually had to wake up the guard at the border crossing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Almost comical in how he did everything to seem more suspect (one way travel, long undefined stay, no job, etc.). As an American who went to university in Montreal and holder of the rare distinction of being called a "retard" by an officer in front of a crowded lobby at the Canadian Border, I have more opinions than healthy about the American-Canadian crossing experience. But as the officer who called me a retard told me in the back room, if you aren't a citizen, they are under no obligation to let you in. It is just best to be aware of what they want to hear (you aren't staying, you don't have a lot of cash/booze/cigs/perishable goods, all the papers have been filled, and you don't come across as deceitful) and give the version of the truth that fits that narrative the best.

<comment><USER36> > _you don't have a lot of cash_

...but you have enough that you're not going to need to start working to support yourself.

<comment><USER37> I think they mean as in literal cash on your person vs. access to cash or lines of credit to sustain your living condition.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> It would have gone much smoother like this:

Border Patrol: What is the purpose of your visit?

Liar: I'm helping my friend move

Border Patrol: How long are you staying?

Liar: Heading back on Monday.

Border Patrol: OK, have a good trip.

The problem is, well, primarily that he chose to lie when crossing the border. But, more specifically he chose the _wrong_ lie to tell. If you're crossing the border and planning to lie about the purpose of your visit, you'd be better off making it easy on yourself and lie about the length of your stay instead.

I don't mean to suggest to anyone that you _should_ lie at all - it is much smarter to just tell the truth. I'm just saying that if you are planning to lie because you have the wrong visa type or whatever, then at least be smart about it and think of better story. Otherwise you wind up trying to explain to a border patrol why you are entering the country with no return date and staying for 3 months just to "visit California."

</comment><comment><USER39> Some tips for border crossings, based on my Canada to US experiences:

The border agents don't like one-way flights. My sister was turned away at the border because she had a one-way flight to visit her boyfriend and they figured she was going to visit illegally. She also had "suspicious" things in her suitcase like a cookbook: "So you're going to take an illegal food service job?"

Make sure you can prove you have enough money to support yourself. The guy in line in front of me got sent back once because he couldn't prove this.

Avoid hard-to-explain travel arrangements, such as travelling in the US, crossing the border back into Canada to visit someone, then crossing back into the US to catch a plane. My best friend got stuck in Windsor because of this, although his scary hair and beard probably didn't help either.

If you have a green card, don't leave it at home by mistake. I got taken into the little room and had to pay a $265 administrative fee because of this.

Make sure you have documentation for everything. When my friends drove through the US to a wedding, I told them to make sure they had the invitation, hotel info, etc, to show customs so everything went smoothly.

Don't have a complex story that makes no sense. I'm sympathetic to the original author, but reading his post I couldn't figure out what he was really doing in the US and I'm not surprised he got turned away.

The strangest questioning I had crossing the border: "Where are you visiting?" "What's your father's name?" "What does your father do?" "A teacher? What school did he teach at?" By this point, I was wondering where this line of questioning was leading. But then the border guard said, "I know your father. He taught me in Grade 11."

While I'm on the subject of border crossing, I've opted out of TSA body scanning several times. I've seen complaints from others, but the patdown has always gone smoothly for me.

</comment><comment><USER40> > I still have no idea why I rubbed him the wrong way, but he sure didn't like > me.

Border guards are trained to make you feel uncomfortable, because they need to be driving with you to in a reactive state. They adapt to build psychological pressure. Don't get too hung up on them "singling" you out or targeting you, a lot of it is carefully choreographed and rote.

<comment><USER4> It is _not_ choreographed. Some of these people do actually have chips on their shoulders. I've seen the frustration they show towards fellow officers while off to the side that they didn't get a chance to 'nail me to the wall.'

I've also heard from a cabbie that crosses the land border often that sometimes the guys in the booth will send someone inside, _then come inside and request to deal with that person themselves._ This allows for massive amounts of abuse for assholes on power trips. If it has to go through multiple people, there's at least a chance for one officer to say, "WTF" if another is out-of-line.

Some people are super-nice, and others are complete assholes. This is not by design. If it was all choreographed, then the experience would be very much more homogeneous.

That said, there is a difference between a 'stern line of questioning,' and making an ass of yourself. Conversations like:

      Officer: Question1?
      Me: Answer, because...
      Officer: Stop trying to qualify your answers! I'm asking
               the questions here asshole. Just answer *exactly* what
               I ask you, are you stupid or something?

Are the office being an asshole. I've only had these conversations happen a handful of times, over a _ton_ of land-border crossings, but they do happen. Saying that it's all 'choreographed' just gives these guys a blank cheque to do whatever the hell they feel like and get away with it. Having a bad day? Just take it out on people crossing the border! It's not like they have any rights or anything once they get in line! No one will care if you abuse them! (This is obviously a recipe for only good things!)

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> You can't go anywhere in this post-9/11 world without the potential for being hassled by the gendarmes.

When I landed in Helsinki en route to Osaka, I was stopped by a border agent because my passport was not stamped. I was led back into a downright skeery waiting area for what looked like one of those good-cop-bad-cop, beat-the- crap-out-of-the-suspect interrogation rooms you see in cop shows and movies. She also had a pistol on her hip. No mere paper jockey, this one. She had to be ready to _shoot_ a motherfucker.

Now as it turns out I landed in France, and to the French, it seems, stamping your passport is something of an optional administrative detail that may be overlooked. So my passport was looked at but not stamped. That raised some WTF alarms when I landed in Finland. (Good old EU! A model of international cooperation!) I tried explaining this in the best way I knew how, me not knowing WTF was going on either since this was my first European landing, and waited, tensely, for 15 minutes while they decided whether to do the old good- cop-bad-cop routine on me.

Thankfully, they said I could go. But I was on pins and needles there for a while.

<comment><USER42> Out of curiosity, what was the starting point? Wherever you start from, France and Helsinki sounds like an unusual route if you're on the way to Japan.

<comment><USER41> Boston.

It was actually cheaper if I went that way around the planet via Finnair.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> I have no sympathy. This sounds like an unprepared traveller, who confused his story, and then was denied due to the suspicious nature of his story. I know, start-up rush and hustle, but do your homework. Customs and border protection are very formal, and it's your responsibility to explain your story clearly and accurately the first time.

<comment><USER44> Is he going to roll up to VCs offices and ask them to cut him a cheque because he doesn't know what investment instruments are?

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> Two hints for easily crossing the boarder:

1\. Enter via private plane. The staff at airfields handling private air traffic tend to be less stressed and way more relaxed. I've taxi'd right past the allotted space (Found it eventually) as well as made gitmo jokes with BP - they just laugh.

2\. Cross by car at a smaller crossing. Again staff tend to be less stressed and more accommodating.

3\. (I took CS!) Have all your ducks in a row before heading off. Really. No really, work it all out beforehand. Even if just going for lunch (Which is easy. "I'm going for lunch sir, I'll be leaving in 2 hours")

<comment><USER46> If the solution is to take a private plane, why not just suggest teleportation? It's as viable an option for most travelers.

<comment><USER45> I specifically said private plane instead of private jet for a reason. They make very useful business tools and they're a lot more accessible than people think. A used Cessna 172 goes for about $20K these days. While charters can be had for $200 and up - for three+ passengers.

This can be a serious advantage if you do a lot of business within 1000 mile range of home base.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> My wife works for Air Canada in the US and consequently when traveling we see both US and Canadian immigration on a regular basis. I can assure you that there are royal dicks working in both offices. And also great people. There's some skill and some luck involved in getting more of the latter then the former.

One memorable occasion: Just over a year ago I booked a ticket at the last moment, traveling one way and by myself to join my wife for New Years. I couldn't find my passport but with nothing to lose I gave it a shot with no picture ID on me except a 19 year old expired passport and a Costco card. Shockingly, through massive understanding and goodwill, I was able to pass through both Canadian and US security and immigration, albeit not without a few extra questions. Did I mention my mixed background is often mistaken for Middle Eastern and I have a scary drifter beard that sometimes causes my neighbors to politely decline riding in the elevator with me (lest they be mugged or assraped apparently).

So yeah, when I read this article, my impression is the whole story might be a _little_ different. If you could also get the story as told by (1) the guys he was traveling with, (2) the guard, (3) the guard's wife and (4) the spirit medium well might be a cool movie in there.

</comment><comment><USER48> The biggest mistake made here is the inconsistency. He was invited to do business training yet has no job to go back to.

At least he didn't do anything stupid enough to get banned for ten years.

Next time: Try being nice to the border guard. Let them do their job but at the same time try to engage in some conversation that is of interest to them. Don't try to engage to much. Social engineering goes a lot further than the rule book.

Don't forget border guards know how to use the the internet and read his blog/website/Resume. Which leads to the question, if he wasn't working for upverter anymore, what exactly was he wanting to do in the US.

</comment><comment><USER49> I'm a US Citizen. I recently went through the process of setting up a Canadian subsidiary of my US company, and obtaining a work permit to oversee Canadian operations temporarily.

The process was ridiculously stressful and daunting. My company is not exactly a huge economic driver in Canada (right now I'm bringing about $500k per year in local economic investment to BC), but it's amazingly time-consuming to get all the paperwork right and get a work permit.

After going through this process to enter Canada, I am considerably more sympathetic and tuned-in to the discussion of immigration reform in the USA. Zak may have technically been in the wrong here (and the border officers may have been correct in turning him away according to the law) but I think the law is profoundly sub-optimal, and it saddens me to see that my native country is this economically backward.

</comment><comment><USER28> You need a laywer. Plain and simple. There are very good lawyers for this type of stuff - unfortunately they are not cheap and I assume the cost would eat most of the YC investment. But it can be cleared up and worked out if you want to.

Having done business across this border before I'm sorry to say this is a very typical story. Recreational travel across the US/Canada border is quite simple but both sides are sticklers for business travel. People have crossed 50 times to go skiing or visit family without a problem and get used to that process, and then show up the 51st time saying they're on a business trip and end up getting refused because they don't have the right visa.

<comment><USER50> It's really not that complicated, at least when going between the US and Canada. A lawyer is perhaps a good idea for getting an H1-B, but beyond that, not so much. Immigration law is more straightforward than other areas, it seems. Perhaps because it's less adversarial.

I used this guy's website to successfully (and without hassle) get a US work visa: <http://www.grasmick.com/>

I'm constantly back-and-forth between the US and Canada, on a variety of visas. Generally, US customs officials based in Canada are far nicer. It's good to try and minimize the possibility that they'll be cranky or see you as suspect. I never feel like I have a right to enter the country I'm not a citizen of.

Also, if you're frequently back-and-forth between the US and Canada, you might consider getting a NEXUS pass. If you're Canadian it's just $50, good for five years, and should minimize border agent hassle.

</comment></comment><comment> k-mcgrady After reading this it seems like a lot of the guys problems could have been avoided and were his own fault.

Now, I think the behaviour of some of the border patrol agents seems unacceptable, but he was trying to enter the US for 3 months with no proof of ties to home and no return flight.

Putting the business visa aside, that alone is enough to be rejected. If you have no job, and do not own a house or have a mortgage, and have not booked a return flight home (and I don't believe he had any documents to prove he could afford one) you are going to be rejected.

Normally I wouldn't side with border patrol but despite the poor treatment he received he brought a lot of it on himself through poor planning.

</comment><comment><USER51> Having been born in the UK and travelled to Europe a lot, jeez do we get it easy there. You can drive across ten countries in a month and have nobody blink twice. They see the coat of arms on the UK passport and just wave you through.

The one time I did go to America was precisely through the port the OP did - from Niagara into Buffalo. I got asked some pretty awkward questions and made to feel quite uncomfortable - at the time I thought they were massive bunch of assholes.

He really didn't understand that we were just going over the border for 2 hours to eat chicken wings!

<comment><USER52> It's just different. The lower 48 is roughly twice the size of the Schengen area, without any border control anywhere.

Throw in Mexico, Canada and Alaska and you are up to 6 times the area, with 3 borders (and the Canada-Alaska border is sort of its own thing).

"It's a big place" doesn't really relate back to border control policy, but the borders of the U.S. and Canada aren't really all that similar to the borders of countries like the Netherlands or Spain.

<comment><USER33> "the borders of the U.S. and Canada aren't really all that similar to the borders of countries like the Netherlands or Spain"

They used to be.

<comment><USER52> Yeah. I was thinking more about the physical scope of it and the variety and amount of traffic.

I imagine it would be far less expensive for the U.S. and Canada to just open the border and spend some of the savings on policing any problems from that, but I don't really expect that to happen in the near future.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> I've never had an awful lot of sympathy for people who assume that because they know they're not up to anything dodgy that the immigration people will know too. I was married in the US and knew that when I went on my honeymoon I better have letters from my employer in the UK as well as my return ticket or I might get refused entry to the US when I was heading back to where my new wife lived. Predictably I ended up in secondary checks, they were fine and I moved on. I've had the same half a dozen times when traveling for funerals, weddings or just holidays. My wife was also interrogated by British immigration for two hours before we got married. Again they want proof that you're up to no harm and it's your job to do that.

A former colleague of mine tried to get his American girlfriend to the UK and they had massively different stories when she arrived. She got a 1-month holiday visa and a severe threat that both (he was a US citizen) would be deported if she overstayed by even a single day.

The onus is on the person crossing the border to know what they're doing. There's plenty of info, particularly on going to the US and no excuse not to prepare, especially if you're going for work not a holiday.

</comment><comment><USER54> Things have changed dramatically since 9/11 . I remember coming back to the US via the same Lewiston bridge, after a night of partying in Canada, and on occasions not even being asked for an ID (I was not a US citizen then, and I'm not white). Maybe it was the car's registration. And a couple of times I was just asked to show my student ID (I was on an F1 visa then).

</comment><comment><USER55> > Thats right ladies and gentlemen, if I told him the truth he would fight for > me, but agreeing to his truth is in conflict with my originally story, and > thus I have committed fraud

Yikes. You really walked into that one. The more I kept reading the more I was cringing. The good cop, bad cop routine, letting you sit for hours, "let me talk to the supervisor" thing.

<comment><USER56> The thing that struck out at me on first read was the new officer that was "working hard for you, provided you told him the real truth". Smelled fishy to me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> It was easier and more fun to get into communist Hungary and Czech Republic in the nineteen eighties.

</comment><comment><USER58> Ow. Please put in some paragraph breaks, it's a nightmare to try to read a long wall of text like that without some kind of landmark to latch on to.

<comment><USER59> You read that and your first reaction is punctuation?

<comment><USER60> It is mentally arduous to try to parse through it. I really tried but had to give up.

Punctuation exists for good reason.

<comment><USER59> OK, fair enough. I thought you were just nitpicking. And after reading about his ordeal, I wasn't really open to nitpicking. As one human to another, I would suggest that when commenting on a highly-emotional blog post like this one, where the author has lived through a difficult experience, prefacing your criticism on their punctuation/grammar with a simple "wow, tough experience" or some other kind words would go a long way. Chances are high that this individual will read your words.

We can debate whether or not the ordeal was deserved or not, but I don't think many of us can honestly deny that he lived through a tough experience.

To those downvoting me, that's fine. But please realize that I was trying to uphold one of this community's core tenets, which is don't write things you wouldn't say to someone in real life (paraphrasing). I don't know groggles, but I'm guessing that he/she is an emotionally-mature adult, and so I can't imagine him/her saying to someone who just described being jailed and harassed by customs, "Please enunciate better when you talk -- I had a hard time understanding you". To me at least, this kind of attitude represents a major reason for the decline of online communities. Sometimes I just can't watch it happen without saying something.

<comment><USER61> Whether intentionally or not, your own post came off as fairly rude, in my opinion much moreso than the parent, which is probably why you were downvoted.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> I can only read so many comments, so if this has been covered, apologies.

I don't think any one begrudges countries their border paranoia. But what is utterly un-necessary is the rude, psychotic, OTT behaviour of the border people. Fine that they want to check people out, but to scream, shot, and abuse people visiting is frankly outrageous.

I've rarely left my country, and every time it was no pain what so ever. But after reading that, which confirms all the negative press, has confirmed that I will never ever travel to the USA. Why would any one want to risk that?

</comment><comment><USER63> I keep seeing a bunch of US Citizens posting here about issues they have with CBP/DHS on re-entering the US. Just a quick note + a link - you are protected by the fifth amendment and are not required to say a word to any officer at any time. You are NOT protected by the 4th amendment at the border and your consent is not required for any search.

[http://nomadlaw.com/2010/09/more-law-refusing-answer- questio...](http://nomadlaw.com/2010/09/more-law-refusing-answer-questions-at- passport-control/)

</comment><comment><USER9> _Thats right ladies and gentlemen, if I told him the truth he would fight for me, but agreeing to his truth is in conflict with my originally story, and thus I have committed fraud - I believe that is called a catch-22._

This reminds me of the difference between Australia and the US in regards to the right to withhold comment. With similar legal backgrounds, there are similar rights about being questioned, but there are subtle differences.

In the US there's the good old 5th amendment that everyone knows (from TV if nowhere else). You don't have to comment, and your unwillingness to comment cannot be used against you in court. However the police can quite freely and happily lie to you to get what they want.

There are subtle differences here in Australia. You can reserve the right not to comment. You don't have to speak, but depending on circumstance, withholding comment _can_ be used against you in court (I guess for things like "I refuse to say where I was on the night of my wife's murder" kind of stuff, I don't know for sure).

But on the other hand, when questioned by police, they have to tell you what they're questioning you about at the start of the interview. If they're questioning you about a robbery down the street and you let slip that you have illegal drugs in the house, it's not connected to their reason for interview and technically they can't use it. There are exceptions for very serious crimes like murder, of course.

It means that authorities do not have the right to go on 'fishing expeditions', though I don't know whether it applies to border control.

disclaimer: I don't follow law in much detail, just read the above from an Australian law site when I was wondering what our version of "the 5th" was...

<comment><USER64> The 5th amendment covers US citizens, not foreign nationals attempting to enter country.

<comment><USER65> Actually I believe foreign nationals are provided many of the same rights that citizens enjoy when within US territory. This comes from the language of the 5th and 14th amendments, they refer to "persons" and not "citizens". Also I recall reading that the 5th amendment right against self incrimination doesn't apply at border crossings for anyone.

<comment><USER22> Border crossings are a legal no-man's-land. You aren't guaranteed any protections under either Constitution, as I understand it. Once you're in the country, you're afforded all the protections (as you said, "persons" not "citizens"), but the border is a different matter entirely.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER66> I don't get why it's so difficult to travel from Canada to the U.S.

I'm from France and I can travel everywhere in Europe without having to show any identification and without having to prove something...

Right now I'm near Toronto and planning to go to the U.S. in a couple of weeks... Heard so many stories about other students buying their plane tickets and then being stucked at the border, and now this rant, I'm shitting myself.

<comment><USER67> Calm down. Just have your papers in order, be polite and courteous and you'll be fine.

Enjoy your trip!

</comment></comment><comment><USER68> So what we learn is that it doesn't really matter if you're trying to be honest down to details or enter with illegal plans to stay in the US: what matters is _not appearing_ different, and hopefully be equipped with a rehearsed canned explanation that comes with paperwork to back it up.

The border officers ask generic questions and try to see how you respond to them. This is good because the response will reveal more than your words.

However, the caveat is that if you honestly enter with a reason that is somewhat out of ordinary then you just make it more complex the more honest details you spit out. On the other hand, if you manage to appear like the thousand other people who went across the border the same day, you can have lots of things that you never need to or want to explain.

So, it comes down to playing a role. Rehearsing answers to likely questions helps not because you'd want to learn to lie to the border officials but to keep the process smooth by sticking to its rules. Unfortunately, the same rehearsal will allow you to cover a purpose of the trip you don't want to reveal.

<comment><USER13> _So, it comes down to playing a role._

That's why they call it "security theatre".

</comment></comment><comment><USER69> I'm filing this in a long list of "be careful about crossing borders" articles.

Seriously folks, this isn't like walking to the corner grocery. Know what documents to have, what to say, how to act -- everything -- before you cross the border. There are lots of people who get paid everyday to "protect" their country, and they would like nothing more than to have an excuse to fuck with you.

Now you may not like that. I do not like that at all. As an American, I really wish we could be more friendly about these things. I love my country and am proud of it, but I am also ashamed about it in many ways. This is one of them. But whether we like it or not or whether we're ashamed of it or not -- you still gotta know what the hell you are doing when you go to cross a border.

I wish I could upvote this, but sadly it's just too much like a bunch of other articles.

</comment><comment><USER70> I always wonder about legalities when I hear of foreign nationals doing, or applying for, YCombinator or the like. I have a hard time seeing a legal route for them to do it. What is the correct way to do it? Is there one, or are they all bending the rules?

</comment><comment><USER71> At the Vancouver to US border, when I was was on vacation, I had a bit of trouble not to laugh: _all_ these guys were very big dudes in uniforms with glasses and mustaches. They all looked exactly alike. Anyway; it was an interesting experience.

</comment><comment><USER72> My girlfriend has traveled to 60+ countries around the world, and she said that the US border experience was worse than any other country she has been to by a long margin.

It's a pity that the first welcome people get amounts to "we don't want you here".

</comment><comment><USER73> Pardon me, but why are there so many stories on Upverter / related to them today?

</comment><comment><USER74> First, as a Canadian, you probably have more right to come here then most others. So I apologize for how they treated you. If it is any consolation, cops do that to us all the time. I don't know why, what is benefit of locking someone innocent or making people accuse themselves (remember, do you know how fast you were driving). Anyhow, sorry, enjoy Canada, who knows why this was good for you. Also, it is not your fault, system is rigged to be abused by everyone else who will work illegally, but you who will not. So now I am ranting.

<comment><USER74> I have to add this as well. Going to foreign countries is always unpleasant experience because you are without your support structure. In that regard you were naive and not prepared.

I still think we should have agreement with Canada and people should move more easily.

</comment></comment><comment><USER75> I'm sorry for the author's experience but knowledge and preparation is the key to winning the war i.e. getting in the US and/or stay for certain amount of times. I'm not a lawyer but I have filed visa applications and petitions with the US Immigration Office USCIS many times by myself and have always been successful despite the fact that my country used to be in a war with the US. The laws are complicated if you don't read ahead and prep. If you do, it's a breeze. Hope this helps someone: visajourney dot com

</comment><comment><USER76> It's important to frame your story in a way they can understand. e.g. if you are an entrepreneur winging it to the USA. Just make sure that you frame it in terms they understand, instead of relying on your version of the truth to save you.

e.g. most border guards believe you need a 9-5 job for life and if you don't have that you are probably up to no good. So answer with that in mind. Don't include irrelevant details that don't fit what they can understand.

The more stuff you say they don't understand the worse off you will be.

</comment><comment><USER77> Having gotten a secondary inspection myself because of forgetting to bring a letter from my internship that I was going to, I know what it's like, but if you don't have a suspicious story or one that's easy to track down, it shou;d be fine.

Another post mentions money: they just want you to have enough till you get out and not be a burden. They asked me what my parents occupation was (they were my backers), and I did have documentation as to that (their payslips), not that they cared much.

</comment><comment><USER78> I can't believe how many people are defending this because "those are the rules".

FYI: If a visitor from a friendly first world nation tries to enter your country carrying a valid passport, the appropriate response at the border should be: "welcome".

The one in a million who wants to enter the country with the intention of outstaying their welcome can do this so easily by booking a hotel and having a return ticket that is is really not worth harassing all the other visitors for.

</comment><comment><USER79> Wow _you_ got funded for running a company? That's inspiring.

</comment><comment><USER80> Damn this country is disgusting. For what little it's worth I apologize for those that refuse to.

Yes I know there are worse places in the world but that doesn't mean we have to be a-holes ourselves.

And stop apologizing for border guards - they don't take that occupation to do anything noble, they take it because they get off on it.

</comment><comment><USER81> I am from Honduras and last year I spent 3 months in NYC on the DreamIt incubator program, I just told the customs officer that I was going on a 3 months workshop, he just asked me where I was going to stay, my other 4 friends did the same we all got a 6 month business visa. We got lucky I guess.

</comment><comment><USER82> I travel a lot and I've never had as much problem traveling internationally as I do dealing with Canadian border guards. Oy vey. I always seem to get pulled over. I've since learned to practice my answers in a terse cold unfriendly manner. Smiles and friendly doesn't work.

</comment><comment><USER83> For what it's worth, setting up a C corp in the USA as a non-resident, which is technically legal, will almost certainly flag you for further interrogation by DHS. If they can find any reason to refuse entry, they will. It's happened to me. [I'm now a US citizen.]

</comment><comment><USER84> Its not so hard: get a Visa before you go to the US. Don't just assume you can cross the border like its some sort of drive-through situation. If you know you need to visit the US, go to the US Embassy in your country and file your paperwork.

</comment><comment><USER85> I was flying to San Francisco one day at Pearson and was faced with a similiar situation. I was turned down and asked to be withdrawn. I had all the necessary paper work and even brought my degree / lawyer look over my papers.

<comment><USER3> Were you applying for a TN via YYZ? That's one of the most notoriously difficult TN gateways, I'm surprised your lawyers let you fly through there.

I've seen people go YVR-YOW-ORD-... just to avoid going through either YVR or YYZ.

<comment><USER86> I was told once it's better to drive to Niagara Falls, cross the border by car, get the TN there, drive back home, and fly to the US by plane a few days later.

TNs are best requested when you don't have a plane to catch in an hour.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER87> Huh? I thought Virgin America canceled their routes between SFO and YYZ a year ago?

<comment><USER88> They did. The date of the blog post is Jan 2011. I used to fly that a couple of times. I even upgraded to first class a couple of times because it was only $250 extra. I'm actually very disappointed they cancelled that route.

<comment><USER89> God damn it. I would of loved that route!

<comment><USER3> FWIW, they didn't cancel it due to poor ridership - VX decided to concentrate on other routes while their fleet was still small. AFAIK there are still plans to restore the YYZ route once the fleet size is up to par.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER90> Are people in the US aware that visitors have to agree to be fingerprinted to enter the country? When I told an (American) friend about this the last time I visited the US, she refused to believe it.

<comment><USER50> No, not all of them. Not all the time. Canadians entering from Canada, and usually people entering on a tourist visa, don't need to be fingerprinted.

<comment><USER89> I got it for my first TN visa, although I really don't know if that was necessary, since she seem a bit new. She was really nice too!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER91> If you're ever locked in a jail cell, I have one word of advice: lawyer.

<comment><USER6> As a foreigner being detained in the US, with no official status in the US, he had no right to a lawyer.

<comment><USER92> Theoretically, the constitution applies to all people in the united states jurisdiction, not just citizens. certain rights, like voting, are given only to citizens, but the Bill of Rights (which gives the right to a lawyer) applies to any person inside the US.

Practically, there are a few exceptions to this, eg 4th amendment rights are suspended from everyone at the border and within 100 miles of the border.

<comment><USER6> >applies to any person inside the US.

When detained at a border, a person is not considered inside the US.

>Theoretically, the constitution applies to all people in the united states jurisdiction

That is absolutely not correct. When I enter the USA on the visa waiver program, it very, very clearly says I have no rights while in the USA. No right to a lawyer, no right to appeal, no right to anything. I must sign that to be allowed in.

<comment><USER93> > That is absolutely not correct. When I enter the USA on the visa waiver > program, it very, very clearly says I have no rights while in the USA. No > right to a lawyer, no right to appeal, no right to anything.

No, it does not.

I've traveled to the US on the visa waiver program around 20 times or so, and your claim sounded bizarre, so I actually checked the form to see whether I could truly have misremembered it that badly.

The visa waiver - form I-94W contains _no_ language even remotely as extreme as what you portray it as.

It does contain a waiver of rights that states that you waive any right to appeal or review a US CBP officials determination of whether or not to admit you, or to contest deportation other than on grounds of a request for asylum.

In other words, you only waive rights related to preventing them from refusing you entry and sending you back. Once you're in, you're still subject to most of the the same protections.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER94> All I can wish you is great success wherever you are. You can wait for a couple of months before coming back. Try a H1B for November 1.

</comment><comment><USER95> Is it just me, or have we become the Evil Empire Reagan warned us about?

<comment><USER96> no worries: every empire fall before (you can downvote me now)

</comment></comment><comment><USER97> If this guy showed up at Australia's border with no return flight, incorrect visa and everything else he screwed up, I'd wager he'd have the same experience.

Do your homework, be a smart traveler!

<comment><USER6> I'm Australian, so I see where you are coming from.

Living here in Canada, so close to the border with the USA, it's totally different. It's so close and easy, I drive to Alaska twice a month in the summer just to get good Thai food.

And from my own experience I can tell you this - he may have been denied entry to Aus or at least had a few issues, but I'll bet my bottom dollar he wouldn't have been belittled and made to feel like the scum of the earth for hours and hours.

<comment><USER98> He wasn't just popping in for some "Thai food" though, he was going to be staying for 3 months, he should have been better prepared.

edit: Too add that especially after 9/11 and all the border fervor, it unreasonable to not be prepared when crossing.

<comment><USER99> "3 to 4 months" according to the original article - I don't know what the usual thing to allow casual visits by Canadians to the US is, but I travel there from Australia fairly regularly for vacation and visiting family and friends under the visa waiver program, and I know I'm limited to 90 days - <USER2> I want to stay longer than that I need to get a visa.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER100> How did this guy start a business in the US, as a Canadian? I know there are proxy services where you are a minority shareholder, but that wasn't mentioned.

If you start a business, you _are_ an employee of that business. People who say, "I'm self employed," are technically wrong. They are actually employed by the business they started.

It's sad that the border between the US and Canada isn't as wonderfully open as it once was. I, myself, have been annoyed by border agents (particularly when arriving late at night on a bicycle, for a poorly-planned trip down the Pacific coast). However, this guy just walked into it _soo_ badly. It's like he didn't give a moment's thought to the fact he was _entering another country_ to conduct his business.

By the way, always arrive in a country with either return airfare or a printout of bank balances to show you can support yourself for the duration of your stay.

<comment><USER101> Anyone can start an LLC, there's no restriction. There's no law that says a foreigner can't own majority shares in US companies (apart from airlines).

You aren't necessary an employee of a company you start. If you aren't on the payroll, you aren't an employee. If you start a company, then take profits as dividends, you aren't an employee. You may not even be working as you might just be an investor with a bunch of smart nationals you want to hire.

None of this has anything to do with immigration. You might or might not be 'working' but that has nothing to do with being an employee. 'Working' includes working for free.

I know someone who came to the US for 6 months on a B1 visa after explaining to the US embassy he would be 'meeting with engineers', 'negotiating contract' and 'communicating with team back in home country'. This is not working, this is a 'business visit'.

On top of this these are perfectly fine reasons for certain nationals (think western Europe) while someone from India would very likely be declined.

<comment><USER100> _Anyone can start an LLC, there's no restriction_

I believe that is false. In order to start a company, you need a federal employer ID number. In order to get an EIN, you need an officer who has a social security number.

I believe you are talking about a setup where a lawyer is the principal officer of your company and has agreed to defer to you. This is nothing at all like starting a company within your own state, as a US citizen, which is a simple and (generally) inexpensive affair.

 _You aren't necessary an employee of a company you start._

In fact, you are. If you perform any services, you are an employee of the company, regardless of how you are compensated.

I would give you a link, but it's from a Nolo Press book. And no offense, but I trust Nolo Press more than I trust you. :-)

<comment><USER101> Always talk to a lawyer :)

LLCs can be pass-through entities or corporations.

EIN application is not a requirement for all company structures. See 'disregarded entities' or single member LLCs. Resident single members can use their SSN instead of an EIN though that's not normally a good idea as it erodes limited liability. In this case, and in the case of a partnership, you are definitely not an employee in the eyes of the IRS.

Any foreign corporation can be a member of an LLC. In a single member configuration the LLC would have zero US filing requirement.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER102> If you are from Waterloo, presumably you went to UWaterloo. Don't they teach you what to say at the border?</comment>


Ask HN: What is your preferred registrar? - <AUTHOR>

Recently I found out that namecheap forces you to contact them and get domains with the word "hacker" in them approved by one of their staff.
(I was trying to register raspihacker.com [as in: raspberry pi], and got told that I can't until they approve it.)
This really rubbed me the wrong way, and I'd rather not give money to a company that equates hackers with criminals.
Who are you using?  I've heard of some fabled google registrar, but have never seen it.  Are there any that don't try to upsell you on a bunch of things during checkout? <comment><USER2> I opened an OpenSRS reseller account the other day ($99 one-time fee but I had a 50% coupon). Not the prettiest management panel but they give you lots of control over your domains with their API. Plus, free WHOIS privacy for every domain every year.

Compared with Namecheap renewals, .com on OpenSRS ($11.03) is actually a couple cents cheaper than a renewal + WhoisGuard on Namecheap ($10.69 + $2.88).

The primary reason I went with them was because they're a domain provider for resellers; they leave all the shenanigans of domain registrations up to you. They don't interfere with your operations unless they're legally obligated to do so. Also, you don't have to be a "reseller" to sign up.

I don't want to sound like I'm being paid to endorse them, but it's been a month so far and I like it.

\---

Also there's internet.bs. I'm not sure how they are but a friend suggested them to me. They have an API too and are 2 dollars cheaper than OpenSRS.

</comment><comment><USER3> I'm in the process of moving all of my domains from GoDaddy to DNSimple.com. They have very definitely nailed the "straightforward and easy to use" aspects of a registrar.

Two additional things that I hadn't really heard about them until a friend recommended them:

1\. They have DNS Setup 'templates' - basically one click setup for things like Heroku or GitHub Pages.

2\. They offer two-factor authentication (via Authy) which when you think about just how bad things could go if somebody got hold of your DNS Settings seems like something more registrars should do.

Biggest downside is that they are a little more expensive than GoDaddy or Namecheap, but I guess it's rounding errors in the scheme of things.

<https://dnsimple.com> or <https://dnsimple.com/r/1d932aeba20283> if you don't mind a referral code.

</comment><comment><USER4> Moniker. I've used them for years and haven't had any issues. Haven't really looked into it, but at least they give out the impression that security is really tight and that both your domains and your privacy are protected.

I've also used Name.com, but not enough to be able to recommend it to someone else.

</comment><comment><USER5> I've recently heard good things about Hover. <https://www.hover.com/>

I'm still using Dotster. They're not awesome, and they're not the cheapest, but they've never done anything that would make me want to leave, either.

</comment><comment><USER6> If you've got a lot of domains or are willing to pay their crazy retail prices - Fabulous.com.

I've been with them for many years and have hundreds of domains with them. Best service and feature set I've experienced (and price, but I am not sure you will qualify). They've had the features other companies are just 'launching' for 5+ years. I can even see things like how many times people are hitting my WHOIS lookup for a domain (go ahead, copy that feature, it's awesome).

They have free privacy and can setup all sorts of authentication to change domains if you want to add that level of security.

</comment><comment><USER7> Personally I've switched to Namecheap, but that's interesting that they require approval for domains like that...

I used to use 1&1, and my only advice is to _not_ use them. I've had so much trouble switching DNS around on their system that it's just not worth it. It often will take the full 48 hours for DNS to switch for me, whereas other registrars have it done in minutes. I'm not a DNS guy so I couldn't tell you if it was their system or some other issue with _my_ DNS, but I've had enough experiences with them to avoid buying anything new.

</comment><comment><USER8> I very much appreciate gandi.net. Read their no bullshit™ policy :) <https://www.gandi.net/no-bullshit>

<comment><USER9> I was told to avoid registering and hosting at the same company. What do you think about that?

<comment><USER10> Sounds like good advice to me.

<comment><USER8> Please elaborate, thanks :)

<comment><USER10> Well for a start, using the same company will make it much harder to move. Often the price shoots up after a year too. And then there is the risk of somebody getting access, it is easier usually to hack a website than a registrar so a cracker or their could get access to your domain through a security flaw in your website. Also, companies are usually either better at domain management or hosting rather than both, I have huge respect for good support teams like Krystal Hosting have,which is easier when they are focused.

I'm not saying don't use the same company, but I always tend to prefer them separate.

<comment><USER8> I understood question:

"I was told to avoid registering and hosting at the same company. What do you think about that?"

as

"I was told to avoid registering and hosting at gandi.net. What do you think about that?"

If it was meant as asked than there maybe some truth to it. But than again if you are confident in how some company handles one area than that may give some credibility of their work in other areas.

When I started using gandi they were just a domain registrar. And I am yet to use them as hosting provider.

I agree somewhat with your view, it can be true in some cases :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I would like to mention mediatemple.net. I have been using them for quite a while and they seem to be really good. But my requirement are also very limited. Just register a domain and occasionally fiddle with the name server settings.

PS: they do not offer registration for all the TLDs.

</comment><comment><USER10> I am a massive fan of namecheap, best registrar I have used. Their support team is great too.

<comment><USER12> I like namecheap. My biggest concern with them is they don't offer any sort of two factor authentication. It has made me look around for my more valuable domains.

<comment><USER10> True, but they have been proactive in retrieving stolen domains. I know 123reg and others have been known tho not do anything.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I've used name.com and never had any problems

</comment><comment><USER14> DNSImple (dnsimple.com) (but the backend is enom). Run by two brothers - really great guys!</comment>


How they work: Viximo (Wistia video series on startup culture) - <AUTHOR> http://wistia.com/blog/how-they-work-viximo/

<comment><USER2> I worked with them for a few months doing a contract job and I can say that it really is a great place to work. If I wasn't so obsessed with starting my own company, I totally could have seen myself working there longer term. I think they hit the nail on the head in the video, they get s*$! done while having a good time. Good stuff :)

</comment><comment><USER3> These guys are pros, creating good environments and experiences wherever they are. No surprise they'd do the same at their place of employment. Not sure why they couldn't find some appropriate background music though.

</comment><comment><USER4> Love that video. Chris and the Wistia team did a fantastic job.

</comment><comment><USER5> I was real impressed by the Wistia guys when they came in; they do some great work. Of course, in my humble opinion, they had some good material to work with.

</comment><comment><USER6> This has the potential to be a good series, and a pretty nice tool for recruitment.

<comment><USER7> Not just for recruitment, but for other startups looking to build their environment too. I think Viximo's shows through really well here.</comment></comment>


More Details Emerge About the Soylent Food Bars Making People Sick - <AUTHOR> https://gizmodo.com/more-details-emerge-about-the-soylent-food-bars-making-1787546685 <comment><USER3> Food products suspected of food poisoning should be reported to the FDA.[1] If it involved an emergency room visit or a serious health event, call the FDA's emergency line: 866-300-4374 or 301-796-8240. Even if it's a false alarm, they want to know. If they get multiple reports, it's clear there's a problem.

There's no recall for a Soylent product listed on the FDA's recall page.[2] So this hasn't been properly recalled.

[1] [https://www.foodsafety.gov/report/problem/index.html](https://www.foodsafety.gov/report/problem/index.html) [2] [http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/default.htm](http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/default.htm)

</comment><comment><USER4> This sort of thing is premature fear mongering to sell clicks.

A useful summary:

\- Some people have gotten sick. There is no indication as to why or how. Likely possibilities include:

      - circumstantial/no causation

      - contamination of the batch (biological or chemical)

      - allergic reaction to an ingredient (happening 'now' could be a result of accumulation)

\- This was all from the same batch (per current evidence)

\- This batch has been recalled and they are trying to figure out what went wrong. (the thing we expect any food manufacturer to do when something like this happens)

I expect Soylent is an interesting exercise in people finding out they have allergies they did not know about, but I am going to wait and see before I hunting for spare pitchforks.

<comment><USER5> > I expect Soylent is an interesting exercise in people finding out they have > allergies they did not know about, but I am going to wait and see before I > hunting for spare pitchforks.

Bit frustrating for those people when one of the selling points from the kickstarter was

> > "For anyone that struggles with allergies, heartburn, acid reflux or > digestion, has trouble controlling weight or cholesterol, or simply doesn't > have the means to eat well, soylent is for you."

<comment><USER6> Writing that is totally irresponsible and betrays how little knowledge the creators have about general nutrition and allergen health. Nearly very single item in their product is a well-known allergen, which includes soy, oat, canoloa, chocolate, etc.

<comment><USER4> Well, they are ALL on the label. So if you have a known allergy not on the label I can see the viability of using soylent to have a ready food supply known to be safe.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Soylent seems to have disturbing contamination issues that haven't been experienced even by companies like the lovely weirdos at Joylent - <USER2> contracted with an actual food bar manufacturer to make their Twennybar.

<comment><USER8> I have to say that Joylent's Twennybar actually tastes great and feels balanced. You feel great after eating the bar.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> They've narrowed it down to a batch of bars that are good thru 2017. They got some sent back and tested and didn't find anything. So they're saying it's allergic reactions.

So what does a huge food company do when it releases a new product?

Say Quaker Oats rolled out a flavorless Granola Bar, do they just expect a certain number of ER visits?

<comment><USER5> In UK companies list typical allergens in bold on the packet.

They also list whether the production line is shared with other products that might contain allergens.

This is pretty important, since food allergies can kill. (Not many, only about 150 - 200 per year die form peanut allergies in the US.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Who's the market for Soylent bars? Is it people who don't have time to eat/prepare complete meals and need a fast alternative? I find it hard to believe Soylent can provide all the nutrition you need.

Is it to satisfy your hunger in the afternoon of midday as a snack? If so why not just buy granola or protein bars that at least have some flavor?

<comment><USER11> >I find it hard to believe Soylent can provide all the nutrition you need.

Why?

<comment><USER12> We have no idea what all the important components of a balanced diet are on a chemical level, it is incredibly naive to think that soylent can mix up a cocktail that would be optimal.

<comment><USER13> Soylent bars are made out of food, specifically a variety of foods we know that people need all mixed together. It's not like they're mining rocks from the Earth and using complicated chemical reactions to turn raw inorganic materials into food.

Also, what does "optimal" even mean? You're setting the bar too high; as long as they're healthier than typical alternatives of eating lots of fast food and processed packaged foods then their addressable market is huge.

<comment><USER12> > Soy protein, Algal oil, Isomaltulose, Vitamins & minerals

You call that food? Suddenly the 'balanced diet' everyone seems to be pushing is not applicable? Yeah ok, I agree that if you are coming from a mcdonalds- only diet, you might do better, but they are positioning themselves as a healthy meal replacement.

<comment><USER13> It's worth looking at the full ingredients list rather than just a select few. See here: [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a2/Ba...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a2/Bar_Nutrition_Facts_US_REV_NC-01.png/300px- Bar_Nutrition_Facts_US_REV_NC-01.png)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'm disappointed with Gizmodo, and started unsubscribing to them. Has anyone else notice a decline in their articles? No one reports up-to-date facts or investigations any more. This article seems more of a bash-piece then a real fact based piece. I want to see some real investigating and not references to a subreddit. I don't care if Soylent is making people sick, tell me why and what's being done about it.

<comment><USER15> Gizmodo is/was part of Gawker Media (yes, _that_ Gawker Media). As their whole business model was sensationalist, click-baity articles all along, expecting serious journalism from them is more an unrealistic expectation on your part than anything else.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I truly appreciate the idea behind Soylent. Long before they sold the product I was already making something similar on my own using the nutrient/vitamin/mineral quantities that the body supposedly requires.

Problem is, many of those quantities (specially vitamins) are a wild guess to medical science. If you go check the literature about certain minerals/vitamins you should consume, the values vary a lot, the effects on the organism from too much or too little aren't well understood, and worst, you can't be sure you are actually ingesting all the necessary types of vitamins/minerals/??? you need to have a healthy life... there are still too many unknowns.

I did that for about 3-4 months (every other weekend I would go to my parents home and had "real" food), and in the beginning I felt good, but after about 2.5-3 months I didn't feel so good anymore.

TL;DR: I really think that something like Soylent (this one, not the one from the novel) will be the future for a good part of mankind, but that will happen a long time from now when medical science and biology advance quite a bit.

</comment><comment><USER3> If you want food bars with a better reputation, there's Calorie Mate Balanced Food Block, the lunch bar of Japanese salarymen. Manufactured by Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Toyko. Amazon sells them. The bars taste like shortbread, and their biggest component is wheat flour.

</comment><comment><USER17> > "What does this all mean? It means if you have a Food Bar with the > expiration date July 14, 2017, it might benefit you to throw it away."

That seems a bit reactionary. A large number of the bars will have the same expiration date even if they were produced in different batches or facilities.

This whole piece seems to be designed to stir up emotions rather than provide real analysis. It is fine to express concern when people are getting sick, but this seems more like a attack. The default assumption seems to be that the Soylent team is hiding something, which does not seem consistent with Rosa Labs' previous disclosures about production issues.

Anyway I have been eating bars from a box with the same labeling (B1-00CAR BEST BY 1966 14JUL17 0716) for weeks with no ill effects. Rather than throwing all their product away if someone is worried they can try consuming a small portion of a bar first and then wait to see if there are any ill effects.

</comment><comment> a-b "After these reports, we have retrieved remaining bars from our consumers and have personally consumed many of the remaining bars without adverse effects."

Lol, did they just admitted 135 PC - Destroying or Concealing Evidence ? ;)

</comment><comment><USER18> Guide to eating healthy: Avoid anything with a barcode on it.

<comment><USER19> eat strange things, get strange diseases.</comment></comment>


Who to blame for K = 1024? - <AUTHOR> http://superuser.com/q/287375/4377

<comment><USER2> The use of the Binary Digit is natural in Information Theory, and the use of powers of two that lead to K, M... naturally stems from it. No one is to blame if not the educative system for letting students believe that counting in base 10 is always the best solution.

</comment><comment><USER3> In the subject line, "praise" is misspelled as "blame".

The approximation that 2^10 == 10^3 is incredibly useful in many contexts. The "kilo" prefix just makes it clearer and easier to remember.

</comment><comment><USER4> I am reminded of a movement by some government agency perhaps 15 years ago to regulate what people called a 2x4 (two-by-four). Since it wasn't exactly 2" by 4", there was some punitive-sounding regulation attempt at acting on this. This is a basic element in every wooden building, and everyone involved with buildings knows that it is not exactly two inches by four inches after planing. Fortunately, the idea did not go very far.

Let's not make our own individual confusion into some rule of law.

</comment><comment><USER5> I find it an excellent shorthand. I don't need to use much brain juice to remember that:

2^10 ~ thousand

2^20 ~ million

2^30 ~ billion

2^32 ~ 4 billion

</comment><comment><USER6> Is it Friday already? :-)

Its binary short hand for 2^{10/20/30/40/50/60/...} where 10 bits stands in for 3 decimal orders of magnitude.

And since 2^10 comes closest to 10^3 we get kilo.

Don't expect if you ask for 50K salary as a programmer that you'll be paid $51,200 / year :-)

</comment><comment><USER7> Another interesting unit is the Kusec used for Wi-Fi beacons. 1 Kusec is 1024 micro-seconds and the default value is usually 100. So you end up with 102.4 milliseconds for your typical beacon interval.</comment>


Accessing Amazon Alexa via the browser - <AUTHOR> http://sammachin.com/hacks-and-projects/alexa-in-the-browser/ <comment><USER2> You can also run Alexa from your desktop and integrate Alexa to any other physical device besides the Echo with the Alexa Voice Service. Great for those who want to play with Alexa, but don't want to shell out money for an Echo. Amazon has an easy to follow reference implementation for this. [https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/alexa/alexa- vo...](https://developer.amazon.com/public/solutions/alexa/alexa-voice- service/docs/reference-implementation-guide)

</comment><comment><USER3> great, been looking for ways to use Alexa outside Echo (which isn't out in the UK).

I've got a couple of old android phones lying about which I'd like to use as DIY Echos - is there a way to get it working with "OK Alexa" rather than a mouseclick?</comment>


How to Scrape AngelList Using Import.io - <AUTHOR> http://processstreet.com/checklist/how-to-scrape-angellist-for-investors-in-a-particular-city-using-import-io/

<comment><USER2> Protip: Don't manually click more just run a little javascript in the console.

        setInterval(function(){$(".more").click()},200)

</comment><comment><USER3> Owsome tool easy to use i use this tool to scarp web Directories

</comment><comment><USER4> Awesome I will use this! :)</comment>