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.
Yes to all of this. I always rehearse what I'm going to say entering any country legally. They will grind you to find inconsistencies and sometimes you just say honest mistakes that will take you to a second round of interrogation.
For example: after a series of tough questions, the border was just about to stamp my passport, he held the stamp in the air and then asked "have you been in the US before"? And I flustered, because I said no, but I corrected myself because I had crossed the border at Niagara Falls for a day trip. I explained this to the agent which granted me an extra round of questioning.
But I felt most offended when I went to Canada (I'm a Canadian citizen and I hadn't been there in years) and the agent asked me what was my reason for going to Canada. As if I needed an excuse.
You don't. Section 6 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms means that, as a Canadian citizen, you don't need to explain why you are travelling within, leaving or re-entering Canada. Not only that, but that section cannot be overwritten by the notwithstanding clause.
You do have to provide a basic customs declaration though.
Good advice. I experienced the same thing when coming into Canada recently as a non-Canadian. The agent asked me if I had been to Canada before and I said know.
He then found a stamp on my passport (which was only there because I got a connecting flight to Chicago from Toronto - I never left the airport) I got another round of questions and even further questioning by a second immigration officer.
Granted, I am staying for almost the maximum time allowed without a visa (6 months) but such a minor slip-up can lead to a lot of extra questions and if you slip-up on them you could be on your way home. It's always good to know what you are going to say before you reach the desk, at least as much as possible.
I spent about 3 hours in Canada Immigration on my first trip to Canada, I now live here. IMO Toronto Pearson's border control are the worst I've ever experienced.
I made the honest mistake of being honest. I was working as an electrician for my fathers company, which meant I had a plenty of money and as much holiday time as I wanted (I declared I was taking 2 weeks, and the officer acted like this was a lot).
My second mistake was being nervous. I came from the UK where our police, even at the border, are professional, courteous and aren't carrying handguns. The Canadian border officer was extremely rude (In dealing with 5 female officers and 4 male officers I found the male ones are the only professional and courteous officers employed by CBP).
After being questioned for an hour I was taken to get my bags searched. The male officer doing the searching was extremely polite and professional. He opened my suitcase (for a very messy person, my luggage is always meticulously packed to maximize space) and automatically adopted "We're not going to find anything here" mode, like you visibly saw the guy relax and he started chatting about the books I'd brought with me (one was a manga that he bought his kid).
I then got questioned further, and taken back to the immigration desk and asked to wait. This is when I overheard another male officer say "He's got nothing, you should have known that in the first five minutes. Just let him go." So she asked for the contact information, accused me of them being false when they didn't immediately answer (noisy terminal and 2 hours waiting). I asked if I could text them, and got grilled for her accusing me of keeping my phone on. I basically threw my phone over the desk at her and said "No it's been turned off for the past ten hours!" Then her attitude changed.
Since then I've rehearsed everything I've said. Act pissed off and say as little as possible. When I get to the person who checks my claims I say, sounding extremely pissed off "Hey, how are you?" I take the same policy whenever I get sent to the actual officers (it happens way to frequently, I have no clue why, apparently being completely white bread I look like a major terrorist threat - actually with my knowledge of chemistry and physics I'm probably a bigger risk than any of the guys who hijacked the planes on 9/11 as I actually know how to make a nuclear bomb - probably a very, very dirty bomb - and explosives).
I was detained for several hours at the Montreal airport trying to enter Canada. The immigration officer at one point started yelling at me about Wal-Mart and how Canada isn't like Wal-Mart and the workers in Canada have rights! None of which had anything to do with me. I assume she was having a bad day and decided to take it out on the first American she came across.
She began insisting that I pay $1000 cash to enter the country with my laptop and printer. I refused to give her cash but offered to pay with a credit card. That got me detained for another hour, sitting alone locked in a room.
Finally she brought someone else out that wasn't irrationally mad at me and she charged my credit card $250. The entire thing was surreal.
Had the same experience in Europe. I'm Austrian citizen, but live in the US. During my last flight back to Austria (via Amsterdam), the border-agent in Amsterdam asked me quite in detail about why I'm entering the European Union. Wonder what would have happened if I had refused to answer.
From my experience, that seems to be the policy in Amsterdam. I am en EU citizen, but live in the Netherlands. If I fly to the US I can reliably expect lengthy and silly questions. Example:
Agent: why did you come the Netherlands six years ago?
Me: to study
A: where's your student id?
M: that was six years ago...
Cool. A random stranger asks you an incredible amount of horribly silly questions in an aggressive/bored/annoyed tone and they expect your reaction to be something else than "WTF? Leave me alone." If this really were about your reaction to questions the staff at border stations would be trained to look for more than "has a beard, looks around nervously" and the questions would be tailored to actually invoke some observable reaction.
Have you had training in what questions to ask in order to properly gauge a person's reaction to said question to determine the likelihood of that person to commit a crime or other undesirable act?
I would imagine in most cases the "WTF? Leave me alone." response would not mark you as anything other than a law-abiding citizen that's just annoyed with the process. They ask the horribly silly questions for a reason. Well, most of the time, sometimes you just get someone who's having a bad day or maybe just an overall jerk high on abusing his authority.
I think tintin is right - your complaint is that it's not effective, which is also probably true. But they just want to get you talking, and your current plans are an easy topic that at least are relevant.
As long as you have a EU (Schengen) passport, another EU (Schengen) member state can only deny your entry if its authorities can prove that you pose a "genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat". The burden of proof is on them. It's very likely that even if you have refused to answer eventually the border control officer would have granted you entry.
"genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat". Reading: they can stop anyone for any reason anytime at any place. EU is not much better than US. I hold Polish, German and US citizenships. Europe is actually worse because they think that they treat people better when in reality they are much worse it just doesn't get as much attention because it is not US.
Funny, I'm an American working in the EU and my experience has been loads better than when I go back to the US. Growing up in the places I have you learn to say as little as possible to authorities (ie, don't give too much rope to hang yourself).
In every country I've visited it's known your flight number, know your hotel address, know your return date, and if anyone asks, you are just visiting. Getting into specifics just invites more and more questions.
> Growing up in the places I have you learn to say as little as possible to authorities (ie, don't give too much rope to hang yourself)
It's very true. There's a reason that, when your Miranda rights are read upon a rest, they say "...anything you say can and will be used against you.."
I'll leave it up to the viewer to judge this video with a defense attorney talking about why it's never good to talk to the Police: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
How do you have german citizenship and two others at the same time? I thought germany was a one citizenship state. Or is it in practice that you can avoid that rule fairly easily?
In some country you are given the nationality of your father, in germany it is the mother and in the US it is the country. My brother has three nationalities because of that. I have two but not the US nationality.
There are now also agreements between some european countries that you don't have to drop your previous nationality when you adopt a new nationality. So I should get three nationalities in a few months.
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.
I worked for Microsoft in the Seattle area for ~6 years in the early 2000s. My wife and I (both US citizens) went up to Richmond and Vancouver, BC every few months to spend a weekend eating great chinese food.
Every single time, the trip into Canada was great ("enjoy your visit!") and the return and US Border Patrol Experience was horrible. I had people try and catch me on whether Kirkland was on the east or west side of Lake Washington; deep grilling on the specific chinese buns we ate; it goes on and on. I don't think I ever made it through with less than five minutes of solid grilling. I never ended up in secondary questioning, but if it weren't for my wife's love of good Chinese food, I certainly wouldn't have made the drive --- just because of that.
I've crossed into Canada numerous times. On the Buffalo border, if you basically said "I'm going to the casino" or "I'm going to the strip clubs", they just waived you right in.
On the way back, depending on the person at the booth, it could either be a stern questioning, or a waive through. You learned to guess the demeanor of the agents by looking at the lines of cars; if one line was moving very slowly, it was best avoided. As a general rule of thumb, the less you say, the better (of course, it shouldn't be _obvious_ that you're biting your tongue and withholding information; just be polite, courteous and to-the-point).
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.
> 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.
I wouldn't be surprised if there is a system and your name popped. Years ago, going through US customs wasn't a big deal for me. Now, I've got loads more stamps and visas in the passport I get questioned more, every time. They'll ask about countries I've been in 20-25 flights ago. I give them the "fuck if I know" face.
Legally, they can't prevent me from entering the US, but they sure love to slow me down.
US citizen, I used to cross to Vancouver BC occasionally in the eighties. I loved going up, the CBP was always nice and welcoming. I hated coming back, the US guards were rude and terrible. Shameful.
US border guards are primarily ex-military. Canadian border guards are often civilians (in fact, a good friend of mind worked at CBSA during summers between semesters at university). This lends a lot to the attitudes of the guards.
That said, I've always had an easy time going through the border, and have rarely had more than a couple questions asked to me over the many many crossings (this may be because I have a student visa in my passport and I believe that answers most questions for the guards before they ask them). One tip in contrast from a post above -- Don't think too much about what you're going to say, because if they ask something else you won't be prepared. Imagine border guards are actually people and you're just having a conversation with them!
Ex-military, like everyone else in the world, are individuals. Being in the military doesn't turn you into an asshole, although it could amplify that tendency if you went in with it. Military and ex-military are not exotic aliens, they're us, nothing more and nothing less.
I think it's more likely that poor treatment at the border is institutional.
The Stanford Prison Experiment seems to contradict your claim that normal people can't/won't be conditioned to develop hostility in "us vs them" scenarios.
I don't claim that normal people can't or won't be conditioned to develop hostility in us vs them scenarios.
I also don't claim that being in the military doesn't change people. Everything changes people, and the change in the military can be profound; in my opinion that change will most often be positive. I am biased, being ex-Navy.
What I'm saying is that the military doesn't produce assholes to the extent that you can reliably explain that behavior as a result of having been in the military. They're individuals.
I do not agree that a military, ex-military, border agent, or other law-enforcement agent's inherent personality can be separated from his personality "on the job".
All sorts of executive-branch military or law enforcement posts seem to encourage "us vs them" thinking, while shifting the bright line in the "us" direction. Accepted norms become narrower, while "the other" becomes correspondingly broader.
That change is not confined to on-the-job attitudes and behaviors.
In this context "CBP" probably refers to Customs and Border Protection, the name at the bottom of the DHS stamp shown in the first picture, rather than Canadian Border Patrol.
I've been questioned pretty strongly the few times I flew to YYC (Calgary) from the US. All times it was for business, and I was pushed quite hard to admit that my work could have been done remotely from the US.
Granted, I am a developer, but my work couldn't have been done remotely - I had to be physically present. The CBP at the airport were generally unpleasant and surly.
Of course, there's also US Border Patrol in YYC's airport for the return back to the US, and I will say that the US border guards were pretty surly as well.
While we are adding anecdotes - my experience has been the opposite. While trying to enter Canada (Vancouver), the Canadian border guy asked me and my friends all kinds of detailed questions (How long do you know each other, how do you know this guy etc) Entering the US was as simple as looking at my passport and waving me through. (The only time I've been asked a bunch of questions while trying to enter the US was when I was walking across the border from Mexico)
The funny part is I've seen the same thing, in reverse!
I'm a Canadian citizen and I get no end of grief from the Canadian Border Patrol. "Are you trying to bring this car in illegally?" or "Visiting family? What do you mean by family?".
Then I return to the US and all I get is "Welcome home!".
It makes sense if you think about it. Who in the gov't cares if one of their citizens complain? It's not like you're going to stop coming back to your home country.
National Sovereignty = natural arseholes? Not necessarily.
I have a friend who in the pre-Euro days only realised he had drunkenly stumbled over the Netherlands-Belgium border when he went into a fish'n'chip shop and thought 'wow, the prices are really high here'.
My own experience with the US border guards was mixed. Inland in Texas, I met a guard who ruined my day at a checkpoint (though I wasn't in danger of being detained). But at the border at Nogales, the entry to Mexico is just a turnstile, and on the entry back to the US, the guard just waved me through with a bored look on his face, passport unexamined.
I agree though that you have to be prepared, and you have to just shut up and play the game if they're being fractious.
I rode my bike over the Italy/Austria border once (along the Drava river), and the only way you could tell was that the signs stopped being in Italian & German and were only in German
I'm really, really tired of the line "You have no right to X if Y". That's false; somebody might not recognise your rights, but that doesn't mean you don't have them.
I personally believe everyone has a right to move across arbitrary lines written on some map by wealthy people in the past few centuries. I believe it is a natural right for every human being, as much as the right to participate in the organization of your community (e.g. voting), the right not to be unduly harassed without habeas corpus, the right to be treated with dignity etc etc.
The fact that some specific law of some specific land recognises some rights and not others does not mean we should resign to the fact that this is how it ought to be. Otherwise, we might as well roll back to theocracy or some other rubbish way of life.
It comes down to that inside the internal rule system of a very powerful, hopefully consistent and ultimately violent organization known as government, they won't hold back in these border crossing situation vs how they would inside their borders.
As someone growing up at a border (1 mile from the Austrian / Swiss border) - I have to say that this is a whole different thing in Europe (between Switzerland / Austria / Germany for sure).
Well you get checked for the stuff and if you are over the allowed quantities for the stuff you have with you - and you may have to show your ID but that's it. If you didn't do any wrong you have no problems.
For me (and many families in my town) it was completely normal to shop in Switzerland, or go to the gym there. I've once switched the border every day just to use the swiss highway, cause my commute was shorter and faster this way.
Reminder: Switzerland is not part of the EU (european union)
Reminder: Switzerland is not part of the EU (european union)
That's true, but Switzerland is certainly part of the Schengen treaty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schengen_Agreement), which regulates border crossing throughout the participating countries (there is no formal border control, between those countries).
Leaving from Zurich to most European destinations by plane I usually don't even need an id.
The UK and Ireland are both outside the Schengen treaty.
When you take the ferry from Britain to Ireland, if I remember rightly, the customs ask you if you are British or Irish. British / Irish citizens don't have to show a passport, but everyone else does. The beautiful thing is that you are just relied upon to tell the truth.
In fact, I have never been asked anyway, they just wave everyone through.
I was really impressed by this story. I never wanted to go the U.S.A. anyway, but my decision is even more strongly reinforced now, I certainly will never go with my children. (Mostly I didn't want to be finger-printed like a common criminal.)
Travelling between the Schengen countries, in my experience, the worst country is Germany, the second worst is Switzerland. Travelling between Spain, France, Italy, Holland, Belgium, Portugal and Austria I don't remember being ever asked even to produce a passport. (In Germany you are though - although Germany is supposed to be a Schengen country, unfortunately the police are still bastards. They make a big rude show of themselves, and like to feel important. We decided after that never to travel through Germany again if possible.)
Also, Australian customs - really friendly. Japanese customs, also nice.
Switzerland abolished border controls (and started issuing Schengen visas) only a few years ago (in 2008 if memory serves). Also, there may be no border control (=they don't check your entry permits if you're coming from a Schengen country), but customs isn't going anywhere.
What you describe is pretty common on many parts of the US-Canada border, too. There are towns that are split down the middle, and it's normal for locals to cross the border several times a day without any hassle. When I was growing up (1990s) the guards would simply wave locals through because they knew their cars.
The major highway and airport crossings that deal with many thousands of visitors a day are obviously a different matter.
In my own experience as a US passport holder, the absolute hell that is entering at Heathrow far exceeds anything that my European friends have encountered coming to the US. Border crossings are often unpleasant. Europe isn't different.
The US is scared of immigrants from outside of the US. Europe is scared of immigrants from outside of Europe. Europe is not scared of immigrants from inside Europe.
Not entirely true - there was a lot of scaremongering in the UK when Eastern European countries (like Poland) joined the EU because of fears about an influx of immigrants working for cheap wages.
I am British and live in the UK, I remember this happening, and I had it in mind when I wrote the comment above.
If you take Europe as a whole, it's not scared of immigration between member countries. The UK is simply more racist and narcissistic than the rest of Europe.
I'm British, and I've lived between Holland, Italy and France for a few years. I don't think it's really true that the British are more racist or narcissistic. I think they are more fake, and more arrogant. I think the racism is really a reflection of the British newspapers than the people.
A thing that British people forget is that our country is the only in Europe where there are no ID cards (yet). In Italy, Holland and France people think it's strange when I tell them that it's not only that you don't have to carry an ID with you in Britain, but that it's not even compulsory to own an ID (passports, driving licenses, etc. are all optional). Furthermore, you are not required to register your address in Britain, like you are in, for example, Austria, Italy, and Holland. In Britain, the state doesn't know for sure how many people there are, and where they all live because there is no national database. They have the voting register, NHS database, DVLA database, whatever the Inland Revenue has, and the census, but it's a mess and they don't really care.
In comparison, when I moved from Holland to France recently, we had to de-register (in Holland), and we took great care to say that we were travelling (not true) and we gave no address. We didn't even give the country. But they found out anyway, because they sent us letters and stuff, even though we didn't have to register in France. The Dutch state is extremely efficient, data is shared widely and easily between state organizations. It's vaguely fascist. The British system, in comparison, is chaotic.
In my opinion, the British don't appreciate how liberal their state is.
"not only that you don't have to carry an ID with you in Britain, but that it's not even compulsory to own an ID (passports, driving licenses, etc. are all optional)"
That's probably because the cameras spying on you wherever you go already know who you are.
"In my opinion, the British don't appreciate how liberal their state is."
Liberal in some ways. But there's no freedom of speech guaranteed in the British constitution, protesters are atrociously abused, and the British libel laws are outrageous. I would not call either of these things very liberal.
Of course, the British system is more liberal in some ways than some countries -- particularly in regards to their NHS -- but more conservative in other ways (see above, plus the push to privatize more and more over recent decades -- Britain is getting more and more conservative).
There's certainly some sectors where that happened (transportation comes to mind). Now some relatively overpaid UK/EU people are out of work, and some Polish families have much better living circumstances. It's just a determination of where you put your social borders.
Well you get checked for the stuff and if you are over the allowed quantities for the stuff you have with you - and you may have to show your ID but that's it.
I've only crossed in Switzerland once (from Italy) on a motorbike, and they didn't even stop me. I slowed down approaching the border post, and the guy just waved me through. Likewise when leaving Switzerland going into France it was quite easy. That's cause the French border post was empty and we just drive through.
He is the founder of YC-funded upverter. At the time of the blog post they were still in stealth mode and didn't want to reveal this. A story about their YC experience is currently on the HN homepage
> what kind of training involves setting up a US corp?
Y Combinator. The company he mentions has a post on the front page right now mentioning "[their] Y Combinator experience". Calling it "business training" seems an overly simplistic description, but I don't think it's technically inaccurate. It's certainly the wrong thing to call it at the border.
But there's absolutely no question that it involves working in America, and would require a business visa. I'm not sure how one could a) be smart enough to get into YC, and b) not realize that coming to SF for 3 months to work presumably as a C-level director for an American business requires a work visa.
EDIT: And neither B1 nor B2 is the right visa, so CBP was right to send him home. The OP needed a working visa.
Just to be precise here: it probably requires an employment visa, which is in a different category than business visas. You can come to the US and talk contracts with a company your company wants to do business with: that's (probably) B-1 (business). If you're doing work in the US, you need a work-capable visa. Some options would be TN-1 ("Hello Mr. Canadian professional"), L-1 (intracompany transferee), and J-1 (specialist).
I have some accidental knowledge about this because I used to help finangle things for Japanese folks affiliated with an employer of mine, but if you have any doubt about this sort of stuff, get a lawyer. The very fact of having a lawyer makes it less likely you will get tripped up because they know how the game is played and they will provide consequential bits of advice like "Give anyone asking questions the minimum information required and refer them to the stack of official documents you will carry with you." (Bureaucracies are state machines: you give them the minimum information necessary to get the state transition you desire.) They will also to be able to give advice such as "Given your circumstances, one way we could hypothetically do things is X but the on-the-ground reality would be exactly the same as if we classified it as Y and Y is orders-of-magnitude easier to pass scrutiny for."
I didn't mean to imply it wouldn't require a business visa (or employment visa and/or status, per patio11). When I said calling it "business training" was technically accurate, I meant just that. YC technically helps train you to create and run a business, but it's only part of the equation.
I certainly agree that he should have known better. How can you honestly say (or think) "I'm going to the states for a couple months to do business training, and yes those are documents to set up a US business, but no I'm not here on business."
The author noted why - he said as he wasn't financially benefiting [or acting as an agent to procure direct financial benefit presumably] he assumed it didn't count as business. TBH that's the measure most people use for "is this a business thing".
It could get quite tricky. For example part of what I do for money involves working with ceramics. I get inspiration in all sorts of places. If on a holiday to USA I happen to see a nice piece of ceramic art that inspires me then suddenly I've learnt something that benefits my business and one could argue it is in part a trip "for business". Perhaps that's too weak, but where's the cross-over ... if I go to visit a pottery? If I attend a seminar? If I go to a workshop [an event where one learns new techniques]? If I actively participate in a workshop?
Is the problem that USA don't want to let people learn things in the USA and leave the country with that knowledge just in case they give away some commercial advantage?
I also hadn't realized he meant Y Combinator, because calling it "training" is hugely inaccurate. The goal of participants of Y Combinator is to start a business in the US. They don't setup the corporation on a lark, or as a "learning experience."
I agree. I am a dual-citizen of Canada and the U.S., and I hate travelling to the U.S. because > 50% of my interactions with the U.S. border folks are suspicious of me because I'm a dual citizen. There is something wrong with a system that is set up to assume that people are lying to you when in reality they may be confused.
IMO, better people training is required—but that requires spending money on soft-skill stuff that the U.S. doesn't want to spend on either CBP or TSA agents.
The absolute single biggest problem with the way CBP works (especially for non-citizens) is that a CBP agent with a bad attitude can decide to reject your entry for no reason whatsoever and no right of appeal. (The second problem, at least at Toronto Pearson, is that some of these folks apparently hate working in Canada. If you hate it, get a fucking transfer. You're a guest in Canada, and it's a great place to live. Stop being a sourpuss because your bad attitude is making it worse for all of the people you interact with, and you're a representative for the U.S. Do you really want to give a negative impression of the U.S. based on your attitude?)
This is one of those instances where it's useful to clearly separate descriptive arguments (the way things are) from normative arguments (the way things should be). I agree that the best strategy to deal with the border, as it is, is to expect and prepare for the worst. But I sympathize with the author that, in a better world, it wouldn't be this way.
> You have no right to enter a country where you are not a citizen,
As an European, I'll be forgiven if I start to forget this. After all plenty of our traffic posts, some older then US, have been turned into cafes.
We should watch this as hackers - and as hackers, this looks a lot like a process that's failing at its job. The point is not to make crossing the border an unpleasant experience (unless it is, and then it's doing a great job) but to do whatever it has to do as transparently as possibly. And regardless of other constraints, it can _at least_ do it politely.
No matter how you look at it, somebody isn't doing his job here.
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.