Talk:E-3 visa

quota figures correct? / wrong impression
The article says "although there is a separate annual quota of 10,500 E-3 visas" Then it says "9,294 admissions were recorded in US Fiscal Year 2007 (October 2006 through September 2007)" Now if you look the latest 2008 figures, for same column in the table: "Treaty traders and investors: Australian Free Trade Agreement" 2007 = 9294 2008 = 12739

The impression I got is that the "admissions recorded" was relating to same thing as the annual quota. Are these talking about same thing and if they are, has the annual quota changed since 12739 > 10500?

Another thing is:

Does the "Treaty traders and investors: Australian Free Trade Agreement" number mean the same thing as "US Department of Homeland Security recorded .... admissions of Australian citizens as E-3 status foreign workers under the treaty". I wouldn't have understood it that way. Unless there's some explanation I would assume it's a bogus number.

If there's an explanation for "Treaty traders and investors" that could clear things up for this 2nd issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.195.253 (talk) 17:34, 3 May 2009 (UTC)


 * There is a distinction here, since, once having a visa issued, one may enter the USA (be "admitted") multiple times during the visa's validity. Thus the admission number would be typically higher than the number of visa issued. Besides, people admitted in a given year may have entered with visas issued in previous years. Say, the US consulate has issued a person a visa in September 2007. This probably would be a multiple-entry visa, valid for multiple entries during 2 years (as per http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/reciprocity/reciprocity_3504.html ). That would count as 1 visa issued under the fiscal year 2007 visa issuance quota. Then the visa holder may end up:


 * Changing his mind and never taking the job after all (that 0 admissions will result from him having that visa)
 * Entering the US in September 2007, and just staying within the US for 3 years. So one amdission (in F.Y. 2007) will be counted.
 * Entering the US in November 2007, and just staying within the US for 3 years. So one amdission (but in F.Y. 2008) will be counted.
 * Entering the US, and taking a job that requires him to fly to Europe or Asia every couple months over the 2 years of your employment - so he'll be counted as a dozen of admissions over the next 3 fiscal years.


 * (Travel to Mexico or Canada is typically treated by US authorities as not quite foreign travel, meaning that when a visa holder returns to the US from a trip to that "contiguously adjacent" territory, he is usually not issued a new arrival/departure record I-94, and thus the entry is not counted under the year's "admission count"). Vmenkov (talk) 04:01, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

generousity
This seems like a very generous deal, any information on whether it is indeed working in practice? Mediterraneo 16:57, 6 July 2006 (UTC)Mediterraneo
 * It is a generous deal. The E-3 is as legitmate a visa as a H-1B (ie, passed by US legislation, procedure for application has been documented) so there is no reason to assume it is not working.  Robert Brockway 21:38, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Just a follow-up. A friend of mine has been working in the US for several months on an E-3, so yes it is working in practice. Robert Brockway 06:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

The article fails to appreciate that the principle of reciprocity is key to Australian immigration policy and is rigorously applied in treaty negotiations with other countries. If the US did not create this visa class then their citizens would have had worse access to Australia than prior to the AUSFTA. That was an undesirable outcome of a "free trade treaty" for the USA and they acted to correct it.

If the result appears generous to Australians seeking to enter the USA then that is because similar generosity is extended to US citizens seeking to enter Australia. The number of Australians taking up the US visa is less than the number of US citizens taking up the equivalent Australian visa. If the US acted to reduce the cap of the number E-3 visas (perhaps seeing it as excessive) then the Australia's cap on the reciprocal visa would be lowered by the same amount. The now-excessive number of US citizens would be ejected from Australia as their visas expired.

For that reason a lowering of the number of allowable US E-3 visas is unlikely to change -- the US would be hurting its own interests. If anything the cap may rise as the US seeks to allow more of its citizens to have long term work in Australia.

It's also worth noting that the US doesn't see Australia as a source of pent-up migration demand, and vice-versa. Also that the two nations get along well, and at the time of the AUSFTA negotiations there was a firm relationship between US President GW Bush and Australian PM Howard. Gdt (talk) 08:31, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Dead link
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!


 * http://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/us/e3_visa.html (archive)
 * In E-3 visa on 2008-01-11 17:46:52, 410 Gone
 * In E-3 visa on 2008-01-22 22:59:47, 410 Gone

The web page has been saved by the Internet Archive. Please consider linking to an appropriate archived version:. -- Stwalkerbot 23:00, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone know what the current status is of this visa after the elections last year? The dfat website seems to think that the status is under review. Julia 9th March 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.77.80.161 (talk) 17:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on E-3 visa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090830182600/https://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/YrBk06NI.shtm to https://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/YrBk06NI.shtm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091020195523/https://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/YrBk07NI.shtm to https://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/YrBk07NI.shtm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:58, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on E-3 visa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111028105502/http://canberra.usembassy.gov/e3visa/qualifying.html to http://canberra.usembassy.gov/e3visa/qualifying.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100408053914/http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableXVI_B.pdf to http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableXVI_B.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100318144245/http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_4594.html to http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_4594.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150527030710/http://canberra.usembassy.gov/e3visa.html to http://canberra.usembassy.gov/e3visa.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:12, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on E-3 visa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110605081018/http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=b51aed9300f7aa8f4f5dadc9bd12e183&rgn=div5&view=text&node=22:1.0.1.5.27&idno=22 to http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=b5a2eb4d23abf54fbe73d5b74b974fed&rgn=div5&view=text&node=22:1.0.1.5.27&idno=22

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:47, 9 January 2018 (UTC)