|
Originally Posted by HIDDY
(Post 20521875)
I wouldn't take everything in that article at face value......I suspect there is some truth in it but nothing as serious as they're making it out to be.
At the end of the day it's really up to the traveller to sort these things out before travelling here....the fee has been in place for several years now so although the collection process has changed it's nothing new. Maybe instead of turning people away it would have been prudent of them to keep a pay on arrival system (with an added charge) at least for several more months. It's actually been just a smidge over three years (not quite several)... although to be fair they've been talking about it for several years, and initially it seems they meant to implement the fee at least a year earlier, but backed away at the last minute. As for collection process changing, that is indeed new, and I don't have the impression it was announced with much lead time. There was a thread here about three months in advance of the switch, but it also had the effective date wrong and was initiated based on something not published beyond the Argentine migraciones site. Scanning that thread it seemed like it was well through November before anyone seemed to have any idea what - if anything - was going to happen. For travellers who plan their trips several months in advance (as a couple that visited just last month did), the rules had most certainly changed between the time they planned their trip, went to process their Brazilian visa (part of the same trip, and needs to be planned well ahead in many parts of the US due to consular backlogs), and eventually found themselves departing for Argentina under the impression that their research several months earlier had not in fact already expired. Fortunately the airline carrying them from the US caught the omission on check-in, directed them to a fly-by-night (no pun intended) internet operator at the airport, who in turn permitted them to go online for about three minutes, print one page per person, and charge around US$20 per person for the convenience. Of course once they got here they realized that planning anything more than three months ahead is something only a masochist would choose to do here - and proceeded to have a delightful vacation. :) |
Originally Posted by Vasco
(Post 20514742)
This is very true, and I agree with you 100%. However, there is significant difference in international law between a proper Visa and a "reciprocity fee." Argentina is behaving as though the reciprocity fee were a Visa, with all attendant penalties on passenger and airline, without actually going the full step
of causing the diplomatic headache of imposing a Visa requirement. Turning people around upon arrival is a problem that can be easily solved in letting the passenger connect to the internet and pay the fee on the spot if they failed to do so before boarding. Five minutes of wi-fi access and the problem is solved for passenger, airline, government and tourism promoters. To me, it seems Argentina is purposely seeking to penalize for reasons I don't quite yet understand. (Forgive me, I've only lived here for 3 years...) No one loses by letting the person pay on the spot via the internet, yet the article linked above suggests this is actively prevented. But Alex, you're absolutely right: at this point passengers, and especially the airlines, should know better. The fee has been in place for years, and the requirement to do it online prior to departure has been in place for a few months. However, in my opinion the government needs to stop playing this silly game and just impose a proper Visa requirement, if they're going to start behaving like a proper Visa is being issued. At the moment a "reciprocity fee" carries no real weight at all in international law anywhere. Deporting people on these grounds is very shaky, and airlines might be well within their rights to start pushing back soon. Once the airlines' lawyers have decided they have charged enough hours for "research," you'll start seeing some push back on this. |
Originally Posted by Gaucho100K
(Post 20532617)
Your raise some excellent points which I as a legal layman (I only play a lawyer on a couple of low budget internet SoapOperas) had failed to consider. The legal push back by the airlines is an interesting angle... although I wonder if the carriers would dare take such steps, its not like I see the Argentine Authorities not just letting deportees just stay in a limbo and create a couple of diplomatic incidents... it would not be the first time... :rolleyes:
|
Originally Posted by Eastbay1K
(Post 20533050)
It is an easy revenue enhancement program for the government, as each airline is probably fined a sizable sum for each "instant deportation." I'd be curious to know how the occasional affected AR passenger is treated.
|
Originally Posted by Gaucho100K
(Post 20541143)
I hadn't thought about the potential Fines... is this how is works in the USA...?
|
Originally Posted by Eastbay1K
(Post 20541397)
I believe most of the world works that way.
That is also precisely why I thought initially that any operating carrier, which had presumably already neglected to check documents as they should have prior to accepting a passenger for boarding, would at the very least be able to escort the passenger to a transit passenger area, get the passenger's credit card to a computer terminal, print out a receipt and escort the passenger back to immigration. No, it should not be happening all the time, and the passenger should be doing this on their own before getting on a flight to Argentina. But the carrier certainly carries some fault for having accepted a passenger whose documents had not been adequately checked, which is a reason why they are fined when they carry a passenger requiring a visa, but who doesn't hold one. I don't know for a fact that these cases in Argentina are treated in the same way when it comes to airlines being liable for fines, since for Argentina it's not a visa... it's just being treated as one for purposes of entry, and costs the same as one, but is being administered in a manner that Argentina doesn't have to incur the labor and expense involved with actually employing consular office resources to process them. |
Originally Posted by Schultzois
(Post 20526910)
(emphasis added)
It's actually been just a smidge over three years (not quite several)... Yes it's up to the airlines to sort this out before allowing people to board. TAM tried their best to stop me from checking in for a flight to GRU from EZE a couple of years ago...."But I'm British" I told them. After much carry-on I was finally allowed to check-in. :confused: |
Originally Posted by HIDDY
(Post 20543178)
Well in my Oxford Dictionary the definition of several is "more than two". ;)
|
Originally Posted by Schultzois
(Post 20546569)
Hmmm... so it is, so it is. Obviously custom of usage more than anything... I place few (rightly or wrongly) between a couple and several. Various references without the unflappable authority of Oxford term several as "more than two or three," which aligns more with my somewhat arbitrary thinking! ;)
|
Originally Posted by HIDDY
(Post 20549082)
Well I'm British so my usage must be correct. :p
|
Originally Posted by Gaucho100K
(Post 20554942)
But aren't you Scottish....?????
|
Originally Posted by HIDDY
(Post 20558190)
Yes and the Scots know several whiskies are definitely more than two. :D
Is it OK to call a Scottsman a Brit...? What about calling an Irishman a Brit...? What gives with the Welsh....? Don't call and Argentine a Chileno (unless you want to risk losing your front teeth).... so I could use some clarification on which parts of the Isles you are able to lump together and which you'd better not.... Gracias !!! ^ |
Originally Posted by Frinkiac7
(Post 20523474)
I assume DL let you board with no problems?
|
Originally Posted by Gaucho100K
(Post 20562116)
Sorry to go OT, but....
Is it OK to call a Scottsman a Brit...? What about calling an Irishman a Brit...? What gives with the Welsh....? Don't call and Argentine a Chileno (unless you want to risk losing your front teeth).... so I could use some clarification on which parts of the Isles you are able to lump together and which you'd better not.... Gracias !!! ^ Now back to your regularly scheduled Prepaid Reciprocity Fee Payment Program. |
Originally Posted by Gaucho100K
(Post 20562116)
Sorry to go OT, but....
Is it OK to call a Scottsman a Brit...? What about calling an Irishman a Brit...? What gives with the Welsh....? Don't call and Argentine a Chileno (unless you want to risk losing your front teeth).... so I could use some clarification on which parts of the Isles you are able to lump together and which you'd better not.... Gracias !!! ^ |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 8:52 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.