Mark_T

I know what you mean.

For no apparent reason I was given a form printed in German while inbound from NRT.

I had almost completed it before I noticed it wasn't in English and I don't speak German

salut0

I have to admit, I think this "paperless" system is a very bad idea.

It's much more helpful for a traveler to have their own, paper-based record of when they entered and left, rather than leave it to the vagaries of the immigration services' computer systems. The simple reason is that even when they make a mistake, it is your problem not theirs.

Scenarios where having your own proof by means of a copy of the I94W receipt would be helpful include:

1) If the airline loses the stub you hand back, your departure isn't recorded. CBP think you overstayed, and send you to secondary screening on every subsequent visit until you can prove you left the US appropriately, by sending documentation to Kentucky.

2) You end up getting married to someone inside the USA, although you entered with only tourist intent on a visa waiver. Immigration-wise, this is a grey area and not really advisable, but people have done it. Recently, they've been cracking down on cases in which the adjustment of status paperwork was not entirely watertight (see here). Having your own proof of entry is far preferable here.

I'm sure others can think of other reasons why you'd want better proof. Finally, how many times have you had your passport stamped with the entry stamp only to notice that it is smudged?

Aus_Mal

I disagree. It is better that it is paperless. Keep a copy of your itinerary if you need to know when you last entered or left. Get your home country (or the next country you visit) to stamp your passport to prove you left.

GLA

Well, we are sitting on the tarmac at LHR on the delayed 215 to BOS (bubbly is nice and cold so can't complain!). The I94-Ws have already been handed out so guess I better fill it out just in case. Will let you know...

Markie

That explains why US Immigration threw my I94-W away in Shannon two weeks ago!^

frankvb

Yes, why would there be a problem with that? The immigration stamp in your passport will reflect in which status you entered.

Though in this specific case I don't see why you would like to enter under the VWP - only reason would be that you wouldn't enter for the purpose for which the visa B1/B2 visa was issued.

GLA

It's official: not required at BOS.

eltibu

Came in through JFK today. My I94W was not needed. They were, as has been suggested, phased out on 29 June.

FenLandK

The airlines (well, at least BA) not only scan your passport at check-in or bag drop, but also the UKBA scan your passport on arrival back in the UK. A copied I94W stub also would not really be proof of anything unless in situ in the passport.

The whole purpose of machine readable passports is to stop human error. I'd like to wager that, for a while now, although the airlines have been collecting the stubs, they ended up just throwing them in a bin afterwards.

FenLandK

Woot! Just the customs form now then!!

Camflyer

Aww... I'm going to miss those green forms.

It has been part of my routine to pick up two of the forms at check-in (always two in case you make a mistake - despite filling it in dozens of times) and then fill it in the bar/lounge so that I can smugly wave it when they hand them out on board saying "already done mine!". I just hated having to fill them out in a cramped seat when I could have better spent my time sleeping.

travlr89

I have a B1/B2 visa, which I've already used to enter the US in the past. Since then, my country participates the Visa Waiver Program. I'm going to travel again to the US soon (entering LAX, flying to JFK, exiting from JFK).

Given that the I-94W is no longer needed for those entering using the VWP, should I just complete the ESTA online and be done with it?

Will the immigration official ask me why I enter through the VWP, when I have a valid visa?

Will the different points of entry and exit, be properly recorded with VWP? I don't want to find myself in a future mess, since the paperless processing started only recently.

Any help is appreciated.

Roger

First, welcome to FT! I'd stick to using the visa and forget about ESTA. They've already checked you out, so this should mean less hassle at Immigration. (I've never had any.) Also, you're likely to get a 6-month stay if you want it rather than a 3-month stay as with the VWP.

It does mean filling out the dreaded I-94. Let's hope for its demise as soon as possible.

the810

It's up to you. If you have biometric passport (required for visa waiver programme), you can use ESTA, but as long as your passport and visa are valid, you don't need it and I'd recommend you to use visa.

Silver Fox

I agree that you are more likely to get the 6 month stay automatically, but my definition of "hassle" may be different to yours, and in my world when the CBP people ask me "why do you have a visa if you are not working here" then that is hassle in my book. I might be being too sensitive but it really gets my back up that they ask, and the reason for that is that afaiac I have gone through more rigorous vetting than some oik filling in just the ESTA and a VWP. And on the same passport that I have the visa I also have the ESTA so I should be waved through, nay nay and thrice nay, escorted around CBP !