Because I'm Canadian. There's three places I won't go, the US, Israel and Russia. Happy to work remotely for US, but won't set foot in the place.

The fact you're being questioned about this is insane.

There used to be a 0% chance of being tossed on a plane and deported somewhere else in the world when visiting the US. That chance is now non-zero, which is an unacceptable level of risk for many.

That and everything else going on. There's a reason Canadians have stopped traveling down south...

Business travel from CAN to US has remained stable (see: https://globalnews.ca/video/11436758/business-travel-to-u-s-...). It's leisure that is declining.

Meanwhile, total spending in the US from int'l visitor tourism is up in the US (see: https://www.hotel-online.com/press_releases/release/internat...).

Honestly, I think macro factors -- namely, poor Canadian household finances due to increasing cost of living and declining real incomes in Canada coupled with a strengthening US dollar against the Loonie -- are what are killing tourism from CAN to US right now.

As a Canadian, living shoulder to shoulder with the very folks who used to frequently travel to the US (and being one myself).

I firmly disagree.

Ok; all I can say is what the statistics indicate. It seems like at least some Canadians accept assignments which result in business travel to the US. As with the OC, this may result in more desirable employees to Canadian employers who wish to continue to do business with the US, hence the original question.

In other words, Canadians aren’t going to the US unless someone pays them for it. That’s pretty negative sentiment.

Oh sure. But the important thing -- especially for the OC, who is having a rough time in the job market -- is getting paid to do it.

All of my personal network has stopped non-mandatory travel to the US. I wouldn’t be surprised people wouldn’t resist if their employer told them to go for business, but many Canadians are simply opting out of leisure travel to the United States.

There are plenty of other places to travel is the rationale. besides, if a strong greenback was the reason for decrease of leisure, wouldn’t it also be responsible for a decrease in business travel, too? Certainly businesses are also bound to macroeconomic shifts.

I don't know what to tell you but on the front of:

> There are plenty of other places to travel is the rationale. besides, if a strong greenback was the reason for decrease of leisure, wouldn’t it also be responsible for a decrease in business travel, too? Certainly businesses are also bound to macroeconomic shifts.

Canada has shockingly little choice when it comes to trade partners. They are literally physically attached to the US and trade is much simpler when working with the US, whether Canada likes it or not. CETA hasn't yet been ratified; Canada has bungled trade with China since harper; Mexico is at best a cheap labor destination that can replace India for Canada. The only real staying power Canada has is exporting raw materials, and even that effectively turns Canada into a resource extraction colony. That's not a happy ending, either.

Canadian businesses have fewer options than many would like to admit, so it makes sense they are keeping up their economic activity with the US.

The left hand of the chart in the 2nd link provides some perspective for this year's numbers.

July 2024 through Jan 2025, the YoY numbers are always in the 7%-9% range. Averages to 7.7% across those months.

Feb 2025 to July 2025, there's only a single month (April) in that range. We've got 2 months at 1% YoY growth, one break even, and two negative. Those months average out to about 0.7%. If you include Jan 2025 to align to the calendar year 2025, you get 1.57%, which seems to be the number that becomes 'nearly 2 percent' in the text under the chart.

While it is still positive growth, it's 20% of the YoY growth trend for several months heading up to 2025. If you take out Jan 2025 (2/3 of which Trump was not yet president), it's only 10%.

Their comment about Canada's trade prospects are very telling. They are trying to spin a false narrative (surprise surprise).

In your opinion, what is false about it? Canada's growth segment in exports was minerals and tourism services. That's Canada's situation, unfortunately.

"Non-inflation-adjusted tourist dollars spent" was an odd metric to choose.

The number of international arrivals is down YTD (-3%): https://www.trade.gov/i-94-arrivals-program

Ask any business if they care about revenue or customers. $ is the goal.

> Meanwhile, total spending in the US from int'l visitor tourism is up in the US

You are disingenuous and spreading a false narrative. Look at that graph's growth numbers. Look at it.

9,8,7,7,8,8,7, Trump takes office, 1, -5, 8, 1, 0, -1. 6mo average from 7.5 to 0.6%.

A seven percent drop to near a zero average propped up by one historic looking value. But 0.6 _is_ "up" so you can be technically correct.

Well, that's a personal decision. And personal decisions can have financial costs.

The dilemma to relocate to the US hasn't come up regardless.

The CV info you posted basically says upper management. I'm seeing increasingly that companies centralize management in an office (either city satellites or a hq) and permit developers to either work remote within the geographic region with occasional onsites. I don't know of anybody that would permit a manager (much less someone that is a sr. manager) to be remote which is why I asked.

+1

Do you really need additional clarification on why non-American citizen might choose not to travel to the US for literally any reason? If you do need examples, let me just gesture broadly to the entire US society.

Not really. I even live in one of the cities that is "under siege". It's basically another day.

People read headlines, lock themselves in a cage of their own making, and assume the world is on fire. People would do better trusting their own eyes and ears.

Literally what people said in 1933.

Yeah the comment was aimed at people who think like this. I think you should spend more time in the physical world.

Seconding what the other commenter is saying.

I’m in CA vacationing right now for a month, flew in last week. Literally the same experience getting in, and on the daily, as it’s been for the last decade of visiting annually.

I was talking to my +1 at work before I left, he’s just gotten back from living in OH for the last couple of years for his wife’s job. As much as stuff is seemingly a shit show at the highest levels (which we can all agree on, I reckon), the day to day hasn’t changed all that much. At least not for us privileged techies.

But hey, that’s just two datapoints, so what do I know really.

Can managers/directors of engineering even qualify for a TN under the recent renewed scrutiny?

Yeah. That's actually the only way to get a TN -- to oversee technical work in a managerial capacity. Technical managers of software engineers are 100% able to enter under TN.

What do you mean it's the only way? Computer engineering is a valid TN employment category, among many others.

Sorry - I mean the "only way" as a manager, not as a software/technical professional.

You can't for example, use manager of a McDonalds to qualify as a manager under a TN as far as I understand it. If you are a manager, you need to be technical in nature.