Advisory: working on the internet

I'm on my phone so will reply in more detail later, but Garry, I think the best solution for this issue is to limit visits to 90 days.  Six months is too long to be a genuine visitor.  3 is far more manageable and logical given the visitor reqs.  Academic, business or other special visitors could remain at 6.  Any chance of this?  I seem to remember that you've suggested it before . . . ?

I'm on my phone so will reply in more detail later, but Garry, I think the best solution for this issue is to limit visits to 90 days.  Six months is too long to be a genuine visitor.  3 is far more manageable and logical given the visitor reqs.  Academic, business or other special visitors could remain at 6.  Any chance of this?  I seem to remember that you've suggested it before . . . ?

Yes, I actually discussed this with them in a proper sit-down meeting.  It turns out it's *THEM* who doesn't want to make it 90 days.  The rationale is that if they did it, they would be over swamped with paperwork (and we all know what that means).  So all the proposals to limit the visitor to 90 days died on the vine.  The same thing happened several years ago with the bail bond for family visitors.  Too much paperwork.

The coalition government has never even mentioned it.   

I'd just like to point out that there are a large number of US academics who come to the UK either regularly or occasionally to do research for their books and journal articles, and who probably enter as general visitors.  I know several professors of English Literature who come to do research in the British Library or at the Bodleian, etc.  They are not usually on sabbatical (as people on an academic visitor visa are), they just take a couple of weeks during the summer break to do the next bit of research.  They would almost never make any money from publishing their research (indeed, sometimes academics have to pay a fee to a scholarly journal to cover costs), and they don't get any extra pay from their university employers.

How would these people be affected by this ruling?  Anyone who is a professor of English Literature or British History, etc. could be affected ... surely the UKBA wouldn't want to shut down research on Shakespeare, Chaucer, Churchill, etc.?

How would these people be affected by this ruling?  Anyone who is a professor of English Literature or British History, etc. could be affected ... surely the UKBA wouldn't want to shut down research on Shakespeare, Chaucer, Churchill, etc.?

That would come under a different question.  I put 6 different questions to them having to do with internet vis-a-vis people who were admitted in a category that does not allow work.

Academics wanting to poke about the British Library is an altogether different can of worms from working on the net.

I think that this whole issue needs to be more clearly labelled on there website it does say not intend to take any work that could lead people to believe not take any work in the uk and not work which they are already doing in the US. 

That is how I would have interpreted it if you are going to take it literally.

Six months is a long time not to do anywork as histeryeon says (sp) soz   because you have to be able to support yourself without recourse to public funds so you have got to be getting paid from somewhere and not many people are fortunate enough to get paid for six months without doing anything.  Of course some people have loads and loads of savings which they can spend whilst over here but as we all know bank accounts drain quickly without being replenished by something does this make sense.

love pads x

There's a grand gathering of the clan on Wednesday and nearly every high street law firm in London is sending one of their heavy hitters to participate.  I will raise the topic about working on the net and pass around UKBA's commentary.  That will provide some informed feedback from the other side of the fence. 

Any chance of this thread getting stickied?  It's a common question. 

Any chance of this thread getting stickied?  It's a common question. 

second.

How does this apply to people who are legally entitled to work while in the UK? My husband will be accompanying me on a Tier 4 Dependant visa and his current employer is considering keeping him on as a telecommuter while we're abroad. He's legally allowed to work in the UK under the Tier 4 visa, is it a sticky situation if he's paying paid in USD into a US bank account?

The visa part only relates to people who aren't entitled to work, like visitors and fiancés. There are, however, issues with HMRC (the UK version of the IRS basically) and he will probably need to get his tax situation sorted out.

There's a grand gathering of the clan on Wednesday and nearly every high street law firm in London is sending one of their heavy hitters to participate.  I will raise the topic about working on the net and pass around UKBA's commentary.  That will provide some informed feedback from the other side of the fence. 

Update on this...

I made photocopies of UKBA's email and passed them around for comment.  They read it and basically agreed with it, some even wondering why there was any doubt to begin with.  So what does that tell us? 

So is working on the internet, say as a freelance marketing assistant/artist or whatever specifically forbidden, even if it's for a short time or just to complete a project? I think there should be some flexibility for short term contracts. I mean, if the money is in USD and is going in a USD bank account, and as long as taxes are paid in country of origin, is it still a big issue?

So is working on the internet, say as a freelance marketing assistant/artist or whatever specifically forbidden, even if it's for a short time or just to complete a project? I think there should be some flexibility for short term contracts. I mean, if the money is in USD and is going in a USD bank account, and as long as taxes are paid in country of origin, is it still a big issue?

You're British citizen so this doesn't affect you

Update.   

Now that the Supreme Court has clarified some of the grey areas, people should be real careful to note when they become a resident for tax purposes.  Stuff like renting a flat, buying a house, or just visiting lots of times can all tip the balance.

Remember that immigration status has NOTHING AT ALL to do with tax status, and a UK tax liability can result whilst here visiting.    

Now that HMRC has successfully prosecuted visitors who didn't pay their taxes, people should note that now they can get *two* agencies upset.

Just a word to the wise.   

 

Update.   

Now that the Supreme Court has clarified some of the grey areas, people should be real careful to note when they become a resident for tax purposes.  Stuff like renting a flat, buying a house, or just visiting lots of times can all tip the balance.

Remember that immigration status has NOTHING AT ALL to do with tax status, and a UK tax liability can result whilst here visiting.    

Now that HMRC has successfully prosecuted visitors who didn't pay their taxes, people should note that now they can get *two* agencies upset.

Just a word to the wise.   

 

Interesting. I came over in July to visit my hubby. I did sign a tenancy agreement at that time, even though I had no official immigration status and had no NIN. Let's say I went back to the US in Sept. and worked part time, then returned back to the UK on my visa in Oct. Would the money that I earned working in the US be taxable by HMRC?