# tourist cards



## djekizian (Mar 29, 2015)

I've been living in Mexico for the past couple of years on a tourist card as I don't qualify for immigrant status because my income and assets aren't enough. This hasn't been a problem since I travel a couple times a year or leave to visit my family in the States. Last February I renewed my passport at the American Embassy. I keep hearing persistent rumors that Mexico will not issue 180-day tourist cards to people like me who go in and out every 6 months. I'm scheduled to leave May 20 and return June 13 and am worried that I might not be issued a re-entry tourist card. Is there any real justification for my concerns?


----------



## maesonna (Jun 10, 2008)

I think nobody really knows Everyone who knows something only has a piece of the picture. What I have heard (this is true; no mere rumour) is that some people who did their visa runs at one of the southern borders have started being denied or given shorter-than-180-day tourist cards in recent months.

What is only speculation is that the system is now in place if they wanted to start preventing people from living in Mexico continuously on 180-day tourist cards. By this I mean that previously, the records of your going out and back in were only on little pieces of paper – there was no way to keep track of who was doing it. Now that everything is computerized, they have a way to keep track.


----------



## joaquinx (Jul 3, 2010)

The option that is open if not granted a 180 day Visitante is to go to INM and pay for an extension up to the 180 day limit.


----------



## sparks (Jun 17, 2007)

I've only heard of one border crossing somewhere in Texas refusing a quick turn around (same day) ..... but that could have been just one officer at one crossing


----------



## Longford (May 25, 2012)

Mexico has, on a spotty basis, been targeting expats who are illegally in Mexico. Some day, probably not too far in the distant future ... they'll get a better grip of the problem. The most porous point of entry is indeed the land entry points, because at the airports (but now a few land crossings) the data collection/recall systems are much more efficient in weeding-out such folks. While you don't qualify for a tourist card ... there are so many government employees who fail to enforce the rules for various reasons, I doubt you'll have a problem getting back in Mexico. I have read, on some forum or another in the past 6 months, of several instances where expats living illegally in Mexico were blocked at the border and not granted an FMM. I don't recall what the final outcome was, in those cases.


----------



## grotton (Apr 20, 2012)

Longford has a history of providing useful information on this forum, but with regard to this topic he has a history of inaccurately describing those who live here on a tourist card as being here illegally. This is not the case and is personal bias. Or perhaps he is confused about the difference between law and policy. Anyways, on this topic, take his comments with caution.


----------



## TundraGreen (Jul 15, 2010)

Longford said:


> Mexico has, on a spotty basis, been targeting expats who are illegally in Mexico. Some day, probably not too far in the distant future ... they'll get a better grip of the problem. The most porous point of entry is indeed the land entry points, because at the airports (but now a few land crossings) the data collection/recall systems are much more efficient in weeding-out such folks. While you don't qualify for a tourist card *[In Longford's opinion.]* there are so many government employees who fail to enforce the rules for various reasons, I doubt you'll have a problem getting back in Mexico. I have read, on some forum or another in the past 6 months, of several instances where expats living illegally *[In Longford's opinion.]* in Mexico were blocked at the border and not granted an FMM. I don't recall what the final outcome was, in those cases.


Notes in boldface are my opinion of Longford's post.


----------



## chicois8 (Aug 8, 2009)

Since you will be out of Mexico for 24 days I doubt you would be denied entry ....
Please post a report when you re-enter Mexico in June and let others know of any problems.......


----------



## modeeper (Mar 21, 2015)

I OP'd about this a couple of weeks ago. IMO it's irreverent what you hear. Who is being turned away? Who is being hassled? Have we ever seen them? Do we know them? Could it be they are undesirable even to a foreign tourist like myself? Could it be the agent had a bad day? Was he cranky after reading a news story about some ****** law enforcement injustice to one of his piasanos at the US Border? 

I went to Reynosa to renew. Partied with the Immigration guys for 2 hours. I was the only "client" so far that day. Would they hassle the only ****** who wanted to travel in Mexico they had? Jeez, I got the grand welcome! 

I have a student, he's a lawyer, a good one, well-paid and well-known. Damn if I'm not learning a lot from him. He told me, and after 30 years living here believe him, it doesn't matter to any Mexican law enforcer if you are "cool", well dressed, speak perfect Spanish, say Usted a lot, advanced in years, man, woman or child, he's going to enforce the law by any means he sees prudent for number one for that time and place. And the same goes for his compatriotas. Put yourself in their place; they're only human, some people rub you wrong and some people don't. Again, it's a matter of probability. 

.

.


----------



## Chelloveck (Sep 21, 2013)

djekizian said:


> I keep hearing persistent rumors that Mexico will not issue 180-day tourist cards to people like me who go in and out every 6 months.


From whom are you hearing these "persistent" rumors?

Living here as a tourist is every bit as legal as living here with any other form of immigration status. That's why they print those little tourist cards and charge that little fee.

I realize that there are some expats here who feel like they have some sort of exalted status because they're now "official" immigrants and everything, but living here indefinitely on a 180-day basis, as long as you leave once every 180 days, is still 100 percent legal according to Mexican immigration law.


----------



## Longford (May 25, 2012)

TundraGreen said:


> Notes in boldface are my opinion of Longford's post.


It's not opinion. The law is clearly written. Ignore it as you wish. The forum is no place to advise people how to break the law. I think the rules of participation on this website are clear on that point. If expats don't/can't respect the laws of Mexico and the Mexican people .. they should leave the country.


----------



## Isla Verde (Oct 19, 2011)

Longford said:


> It's not opinion. The law is clearly written. ...


Please provide a quote from a Mexican government source that clearly supports your position on this issue.


----------



## Chelloveck (Sep 21, 2013)

Longford said:


> It's not opinion. The law is clearly written. Ignore it as you wish. The forum is no place to advise people how to break the law. I think the rules of participation on this website are clear on that point. If expats don't/can't respect the laws of Mexico and the Mexican people .. they should leave the country.


It is not illegal to live as a tourist in Mexico.

There are certain things that are illegal for you to do if you are only here as a tourist, such as illegally working for a Mexican company without appropriate immigration status.

But simply living here as a tourist is perfectly legal.

You can live here for 180 days, leave, rinse, and repeat.

I obey Mexican immigration law. The fact that you don't happen to agree with said law doesn't make it any less the law.


----------



## modeeper (Mar 21, 2015)

The tourist card is a means for them to keep track of you. Sure, you can live here as a tourist. They don't care. But I'd agree they surely have the right to know _who _you are and _where_ you are. That's why they question you. Ever heard of any foreigner crossing the border without being questioned? Many of y'all don't understand the process' evolved, how things work here. Many never seem to come to grips with the fact they're not in their country anymore. 

.


----------



## AlanMexicali (Jun 1, 2011)

modeeper said:


> The tourist card is a means for them to keep track of you. Sure, you can live here as a tourist. They don't care. But I'd agree they surely have the right to know _who _you are and _where_ you are. That's why they question you. Ever heard of any foreigner crossing the border without being questioned? Many of y'all don't understand the process' evolved, how things work here. Many never seem to come to grips with the fact they're not in their country anymore.
> 
> .


When a person from the US or Canada or any other country crosses by car or foot into Baja California they are not questioned about anything. They have lanes marked "Nothing to Declare" and they have a Green/Red light system on the vehicle lanes driving into Mexico and if I happen to get a red light then I drive up to the customs officer about 30 feet away, he or she taps my trunk. I pop the lever and they look inside and close the trunk then from behind my car wave me on. They also have lanes marked "Something to Declare".

When I crosss by foot they have a Red/Green light button in the very small room you enter almost behind the 2 large turnstiles where you have to reach back to push it in TJ and nobody does this because the turnstile will have another person coming out and you will be in their way. They have 2 customs agents, one at the turnstile and one behind a table smiling at you and one military person with a rifle. No Immigration officer, not asking for passports or anything similar to entering the US from Mexico.


----------



## modeeper (Mar 21, 2015)

That's a free zone, so is Sonora. And not all crossings have the red/green system setup. 

The point I'd like to make is that there really isn't any laws here, as in the way most of us define law. The court system isn't even based in presidents; each case is unique. 

Whether or not it's legal for you to live here as a tourist is up to the Imm official. They decide. 

The key to living and working here as a tourist without hassles is in your composure. Don't rattle the cage, get along with your neighbors, be respectful. Don't give anybody a reason to report you. And if you are reported there are ways to deal with it. Mexicans are good for giving the benefit of a doubt. 

.


----------



## coondawg (May 1, 2014)

modeeper said:


> . Mexicans are good for giving the benefit of a doubt.
> 
> .


A little "cooperation" never hurts anyone, right?


----------



## coondawg (May 1, 2014)

Mexico Immigration Guide visas, work, Temporary Resident, Permanent Resident, FM2, FM3, Mexican Citizenship

I found this, that explains the intent of the Mexican Immigration Law. Says that a Visitante is needed for stays of less than 6 months, and a Visa is needed for a stay longer than 6 months. Many people "get around/violate" the law by living full time in Mexico, and just leaving when the 180 day expiration time arrives, for an hour/day/few days, and then renewing the Visitante for another 6 months.
IMHO, that is a violation of the law, but, so far, Mexico has really done nothing about this. I believe they are indeed headed that direction. 
In my case, I live in Mexico 3 months, then the U.S. 3 months (give or take a few days/weeks). So I have been using a Visitante Permit. I might be considered in violation of the law, as I have done this for years. 
But, as we all know, in Mexico at this time, there is no "Rule of Law", so who knows when things will become consistent.


----------



## Isla Verde (Oct 19, 2011)

coondawg said:


> Mexico Immigration Guide visas, work, Temporary Resident, Permanent Resident, FM2, FM3, Mexican Citizenship
> 
> I found this, that explains the intent of the Mexican Immigration Law. Says that a Visitante is needed for stays of less than 6 months, and a Visa is needed for a stay longer than 6 months. Many people "get around/violate" the law by living full time in Mexico, and just leaving for an hour/day/few days, and then renewing the Visitante for another 6 months.
> IMHO, that is a violation of the law, but, so far, Mexico has really done nothing about this. I believe they are indeed headed that direction.
> In my case, I live in Mexico 3 months, then the U.S. 3 months (give or take a few days/weeks). So I have been using a Visitante Permit. I might be considered in violation of the law, as I have done this for years.


Since this immigration guide mentions FM2's and FM3's, it is several years out of date.


----------



## AlanMexicali (Jun 1, 2011)

coondawg said:


> Mexico Immigration Guide visas, work, Temporary Resident, Permanent Resident, FM2, FM3, Mexican Citizenship
> 
> I found this, that explains the intent of the Mexican Immigration Law. Says that a Visitante is needed for stays of less than 6 months, and a Visa is needed for a stay longer than 6 months. Many people "get around/violate" the law by living full time in Mexico, and just leaving when the 180 day expiration time arrives, for an hour/day/few days, and then renewing the Visitante for another 6 months.
> IMHO, that is a violation of the law, but, so far, Mexico has really done nothing about this. I believe they are indeed headed that direction.
> ...


Written by an Expat and not relevant to any laws or rules in Mexico. The rules and laws permit it and if that is the case using the word illegal is a logical fallacy [lie/false].

No rule of law in Mexico. LOL. Just look around and see where that thinking will get you.


----------



## coondawg (May 1, 2014)

Isla Verde said:


> Since this immigration guide mentions FM2's and FM3's, it is several years out of date.


Actually, what I read is the mention of Visitante, Residente Temporal, and Residente Permanente. This is an explanation of the new law since it was passed. I did not encounter those older terms. We must be reading 2 different articles. Would you like me to post the entire write up here?


----------



## Isla Verde (Oct 19, 2011)

coondawg said:


> Actually, what I read is the mention of Visitante, Residente Temporal, and Residente Permanente. This is an explanation of the new law since it was passed. I did not encounter those older terms. We must be reading 2 different articles. Would you like me to post the entire write up here?


Actually, what I was referring to was the title of the guide as indicated on the place where you click to get to the website.


----------



## RVGRINGO (May 16, 2007)

If one leaves every 180 days, the law is satisfied and he may return at the discretion of the INM officer he encounters upon his return. He did not ‘stay‘ over 180 days, and has complied with the letter of the law. If the intent is other than that, it would be clearly stated.


----------



## coondawg (May 1, 2014)

Isla Verde said:


> Actually, what I was referring to was the title of the guide as indicated on the place where you click to get to the website.


So, after you read the article, you will understand the intent of the New Law on Visitante, Residente Permanente, and Residente Temporal.


----------



## Isla Verde (Oct 19, 2011)

coondawg said:


> So, after you read the article, you will understand the intent of the New Law on Visitante, Residente Permanente, and Residente Temporal.


Now that I have my Residente Permanente care, I have little personal interest in the New Law, though it was good of you to post it here for newcomers to Mexico.


----------



## AlanMexicali (Jun 1, 2011)

RVGRINGO said:


> If one leaves every 180 days, the law is satisfied and he may return at the discretion of the INM officer he encounters upon his return. He did not ‘stay‘ over 180 days, and has complied with the letter of the law. If the intent is other than that, it would be clearly stated.


That is it in brief and so far nothing has been changed in either the Ley de Migración or the SEGOB INM rules to otherwise contradict what you stated. If the other 2 posters don´t believe us, so be it. No big deal to me ... to you?


----------



## coondawg (May 1, 2014)

RVGRINGO said:


> If one leaves every 180 days, the law is satisfied and he may return at the discretion of the INM officer he encounters upon his return. He did not ‘stay‘ over 180 days, and has complied with the letter of the law. If the intent is other than that, it would be clearly stated.


RV, yes and yes. 

Yes, the person has complied with the law when he returns his Visitante within 180 days. However, IMHO, and that of others, if he is actually living full time in Mexico (except for traveling abroad a few days/weeks a year), he is violating the INTENT of the Law, as it CLEARLY states that a Residente Temporal is the Visa required for a person living in Mexico for more than six months and up to 4 years. RP for longer.
Did this person "pack his bags" and remove all his stuff from Mexico, or did he just "play like his tourist experience" had ended? Is he continuing to live in Mexico while he is "out"? Is this being 100% honest with the Mexican Law? I think not. I think this person is taking advantage. So, I guess that is morally ok with many. And, we complain about Mexicans. (I am as guilty as anyone on that).

Can a person "break this Law" and get away with it? Sure, happens a lot. Does this violate the intent of the Immigration Law? YES ! Should people on this Board condone "breaking the intent of the Law"? My point says"no". Even if one is kidding, you can still get a "point" for violating that policy, sometimes.  Depends, I guess.

One thing many extranjeros are very good about is coming to Mexico and taking advantage. Some justify it because the Mexicans do it a lot to us.


----------



## coondawg (May 1, 2014)

Isla Verde said:


> Now that I have my Residente Permanente care, I have little personal interest in the New Law, though it was good of you to post it here for newcomers to Mexico.


I was thinking maybe you were interested to see if anyone was suggesting that people violate the intent of the New Mexican Law?


----------



## AlanMexicali (Jun 1, 2011)

coondawg said:


> RV, yes and yes.
> 
> Yes, the person has complied with the law when he returns his Visitante within 180 days. However, IMHO, and that of others, if he is actually living full time in Mexico (except for traveling abroad a few days/weeks a year), he is violating the INTENT of the Law, as it CLEARLY states that a Residente Temporal is the Visa required for a person living in Mexico for more than six months and up to 4 years. RP for longer.
> Did this person "pack his bags" and remove all his stuff from Mexico, or did he just "play like his tourist experience" had ended? Is he continuing to live in Mexico while he is "out"? Is this being 100% honest with the Mexican Law? I think not. I think this person is taking advantage. So, I guess that is morally ok with many. And, we complain about Mexicans. (I am as guilty as anyone on that).
> ...


Your logic is flawed in this way and that it boils down to being misinformed as to what the laws and rules actually state. Intent is willing to break a written enforced law or rule. Intent to break a law is what you are talking about however you are also adding the illogical "secret hidden" clause that the person has to interpret the rules and law himself and ignore what the actual laws and rules state.


----------



## TundraGreen (Jul 15, 2010)

coondawg said:


> RV, yes and yes.
> 
> Yes, the person has complied with the law when he returns his Visitante within 180 days. However, IMHO, and that of others, if he is actually living full time in Mexico (except for traveling abroad a few days/weeks a year), he is violating the INTENT of the Law, as it CLEARLY states that a Residente Temporal is the Visa required for a person living in Mexico for more than six months and up to 4 years. RP for longer.
> Did this person "pack his bags" and remove all his stuff from Mexico, or did he just "play like his tourist experience" had ended? Is he continuing to live in Mexico while he is "out"? Is this being 100% honest with the Mexican Law? I think not. I think this person is taking advantage. So, I guess that is morally ok with many. And, we complain about Mexicans. (I am as guilty as anyone on that).
> ...


"he is violating the INTENT of the Law".

If the INTENT of the law was to limit the number or frequency of visits on a tourist permit, then the authors of the law should have and would have mentioned it. But they did no such thing. Apparently, they are happy to have tourists come as often as they want to. The only requirement is that they leave regularly so that Mexico can decide if they want them back the next time. 

Also, I fail to understand what "advantage" these repeat tourists are taking of Mexico. They are not allowed to work so they are not taking jobs away from Mexicans. And since the cannot work, they must be living on money coming from outside of Mexico. Hence they are creating jobs for locals. In what sense are they taking advantage of someone or someplace? 

My understanding is that about 1/3 of the Mexican economy depends on tourists. A person coming for six months, renting and shopping in grocery stores, certainly spends money at a slower rate than a tourist at a beach front for two weeks, but they are still injecting money into the Mexican economy. Where is the harm.


----------



## Meritorious-MasoMenos (Apr 17, 2014)

TundraGreen said:


> "he is violating the INTENT of the Law".
> 
> If the INTENT of the law was to limit the number or frequency of visits on a tourist permit, then the authors of the law should have and would have mentioned it. But they did no such thing. Apparently, they are happy to have tourists come as often as they want to. The only requirement is that they leave regularly so that Mexico can decide if they want them back the next time.
> 
> ...


You are totally correct. People getting all puffed up over North Americans "taking advantage" of this every six-month requirement should think of this: For one moment, do you think poor Central Americans could get a tourist renewal every six months to come and work illegally in Mexico? Mexican officialdom knows exactly what it's doing in allowing Canadians and North Americans to leave and re-enter every six months.


----------



## modeeper (Mar 21, 2015)

> in allowing Canadians and North Americans to leave and re-enter every six months.


Canadians aren't North Americans? 

Indeed the the Central American <snip> couldn't get away with much, if they were lucky enough to cross over once. Common sense innit? Who wants the poor? The Indigenous types are to the Mexican Immigration what the Mexican is to US Immigration .. a pain in the butt.


----------



## coondawg (May 1, 2014)

TundraGreen said:


> "he is violating the INTENT of the Law".
> 
> If the INTENT of the law was to limit the number or frequency of visits on a tourist permit, then the authors of the law should have and would have mentioned it.


Interesting that what people say are turned around here to imply something else was said. I don't find anywhere that someone said an intent was to "limit number of visits". You are responding to something that was never said here (certainly not by me), Just PLEASE read my words, and respond to what I said, or not, not what you think I said, or what you interpret that I said. Just don't respond to things that I didn't say and claim I did. Thanks.


----------



## coondawg (May 1, 2014)

Visa de Residente Temporal - Temporary Resident Visa 

Mexico operates what is known as a Temporary Resident Visa, intended for people who wish to live in Mexico for more than 6 months and not longer than 4 years. The Temporary Resident Visa is a renewable long term (more than six months) permit which gives non-immigrant temporary residency status to the holder. The visa can be issued for 1, 2, 3 or 4 years (max), can give work permissions, allows unlimited entries to and exits from Mexico. This means that it gives a person the right to live in Mexico for up to 4 years under terms as set out in the visa.
Once applied for and granted, the Temporary Resident Visa may issued for up to 4 years (or yearly, with annual renewals required in Mexico) and after this four year period, it cannot be renewed: at the end of the four year period you must apply for a Permanent Resident Visa or leave the country.
I wonder if anyone can read the above and find WHO the Residente Temporal is intended for? Would that be considered the "intent" of the law for anyone wishing to reside in Mexico for longer than 6 months?


----------



## AlanMexicali (Jun 1, 2011)

coondawg said:


> Visa de Residente Temporal - Temporary Resident Visa
> 
> Mexico operates what is known as a Temporary Resident Visa, intended for people who wish to live in Mexico for more than 6 months and not longer than 4 years. The Temporary Resident Visa is a renewable long term (more than six months) permit which gives non-immigrant temporary residency status to the holder. The visa can be issued for 1, 2, 3 or 4 years (max), can give work permissions, allows unlimited entries to and exits from Mexico. This means that it gives a person the right to live in Mexico for up to 4 years under terms as set out in the visa.
> Once applied for and granted, the Temporary Resident Visa may issued for up to 4 years (or yearly, with annual renewals required in Mexico) and after this four year period, it cannot be renewed: at the end of the four year period you must apply for a Permanent Resident Visa or leave the country.
> I wonder if anyone can read the above and find WHO the Residente Temporal is intended for? Would that be considered the "intent" of the law for anyone wishing to reside in Mexico for longer than 6 months?


You are quoting an Expat forum, not an INM rule or law. 

For any foreigner to be legally in/residing/visiting the national territory of Mexico the law states they need to have a Residente Temporal visa or a Residente Permanente visa or a FMM visitante visa. 

Nothing illegal or immoral about requesting any one of these legal documents to be in Mexico. 

It is up to the INM to decide what to do with a foreigner´s request, no one elses.


----------



## AlanMexicali (Jun 1, 2011)

modeeper said:


> Canadians aren't North Americans?
> 
> Indeed the the [cut] couldn't get away with much, if they were lucky enough to cross over once. Common sense innit? Who wants the poor? The Indigenous types are to the Mexican Immigration what the Mexican is to US Immigration .. a pain in the butt.


Stupid thing to say on an Expat fórum, especially when racial slurs are not welcome.


----------



## circle110 (Jul 20, 2009)

coondawg said:


> Mexico Immigration Guide visas, work, Temporary Resident, Permanent Resident, FM2, FM3, Mexican Citizenship
> 
> I found this, that explains the intent of the Mexican Immigration Law. Says that a Visitante is needed for stays of less than 6 months, and a Visa is needed for a stay longer than 6 months. Many people "get around/violate" the law by living full time in Mexico, and just leaving when the 180 day expiration time arrives, for an hour/day/few days, and then renewing the Visitante for another 6 months.
> IMHO, that is a violation of the law, but, so far, Mexico has really done nothing about this. I believe they are indeed headed that direction.
> ...


This is an article written by expats like us. It is not valid as "law" in any way and, as Isla Verde pointed out, it is very out of date to boot.

I have read the immigration law through several times in both the original Spanish and various English translations. It does not mention any prohibition on receiving consecutive tourist cards. If they wanted to prohibit the practice, they would have put in a clause like they did in Brazil and several other countries, saying that you can only get one tourist card within any 12 month period.

The fact that they spent so much time working over this law and chose not to put in such a clause tells me that they willfully decided to permit the practice of consecutive tourist cards.


----------



## Hound Dog (Jan 18, 2009)

_


modeeper said:



Canadians aren't North Americans? 

Indeed the the Central American <snip> couldn't get away with much, if they were lucky enough to cross over once. Common sense innit? Who wants the poor? The Indigenous types are to the Mexican Immigration what the Mexican is to US Immigration .. a pain in the butt.

Click to expand...

_Central Americans are not "indigenous" to Mexico. Now, as it happens, we reside in San Cristóbal de Las Casas, Chiapas, a couple of hours or so from the border with Guatemala and most of our friends and acquaintances down there are "indigenous" folks. That, of course, is a nebulous definition of peoples´ origin since, for example, Chiapas was until the middle 19th century, a part of what was then the Guatemala Federation under Spanish rule until a plebiscite consisting of ruling landowners and excluding most "indigenous" locals voted to become a part of the newly independent nation of Mexico. Central Americans do flood into Chiapas with regularity for economic reasons but also because some Central American nations, notably Honduras, are politically unstable and seirously violent, oppressive to the poor and dangerous places to live. The border between Guatemala and Chiapas is mostly jungle and porous and the border pólice are notoriously corrupt so these Central Americans go through hell on their way north including their rides atop "The Beast" freight train from Arriaga, Chiapas to their final destinations. The guts these people exhibit to undergo this perilous journey impress the hell out of me and whether they end up in Tuxtla Guttierez or Houston - those towns benefit greatly from their having settled there. These are the gutsy and enterprising folks needed to undergird the economies in the north. Godspeed to them.


----------



## coondawg (May 1, 2014)

circle110 said:


> This is an article written by expats like us. It is not valid as "law" in any way and, as Isla Verde pointed out, it is very out of date to boot.
> 
> I have read the immigration law through several times in both the original Spanish and various English translations. It does not mention any prohibition on receiving consecutive tourist cards. If they wanted to prohibit the practice, they would have put in a clause like they did in Brazil and several other countries, saying that you can only get one tourist card within any 12 month period.
> 
> The fact that they spent so much time working over this law and chose not to put in such a clause tells me that they willfully decided to permit the practice of consecutive tourist cards.


Again, here we have an example of turning around what people say and claiming they suggested something else. 

No one said(certainly not me) that the article was the actual law and contained all the wording(the law is written in Spanish). I originally cited the source (for those who can read), and you will find that if you actually care to read it carefully(as I suggested to I.V.), that it does reflect the 2012 law, and the terminology. Again, I will offer to post it all here if you have a problem reading it. 

No one ever said (certainly not me)there was any prohibition on the number of FMMs a person might receive. As I stated, I have been receiving them approximately every six months since 1999. So, I do have a bunch of first hand knowledge on this subject(probably more than most who post here). To suggest that I said there is a prohibition is a very irresponsible act, something like "pissing into the wind".

What I did say was that the New Law has intended the RT and RP for those who want to reside in Mexico for more than 6 months. Since you have "read" the Law several times (I hope you read the Law a lot better than you read my posts ), you will realize that is what the Law says. Have a Nice day !


----------



## ojosazules11 (Nov 3, 2013)

coondawg said:


> Again, here we have an example of turning around what people say and claiming they suggested something else.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I agree that the article you link to does reflect the updated 2012 Immigration Law. However when you stated this:



coondawg said:


> So, after you read the article, you will understand the intent of the New Law on Visitante, Residente Permanente, and Residente Temporal.


it seems to this reader that you are basing your assertion about the "intent of the new law" on this article (written by an expat), rather than on the actual "Ley de Migración". Also from your other posts it seems you are of the opinion that the "intent" of the new law is to not allow people to reside long-term in Mexico on serial tourist permits. If that is not your opinion, then I guess I, too, am misinterpreting your posts.

Like circle110 I decided to read the actual "Ley de Migración" in Spanish. It was actually not as dense or legalese-y as I had anticipated. I was actually very heartened to see the emphasis on protecting the human rights of all migrants, including those who have no legal status in the country, and the provisions for those seeking political asylum or refugee status. They even state that arrangements are to be made to ensure those migrants who have been witnesses to atrocities are provided with appropriate care to help them deal with the impact of this. I was reminded that Mexico has been an important country in providing refuge to many people fleeing political violence and oppression. I've known many Central Americans who were received as refugees in Mexico when fleeing the civil wars in the 1980's, and I was a volunteer in a UNHCR sponsored refugee camp for Guatemalan refugees (Mayan) in the Lagunas de Montebello in Chiapas many years ago.

Anyway, in reading the law there is really only one paragraph describing the tourist permit (without authorization to work):
I. VISITANTE SIN PERMISO PARA REALIZAR ACTIVIDADES REMUNERADAS. Autoriza al extranjero para transitar o permanecer en territorio nacional por un tiempo ininterrumpido no mayor a ciento ochenta días, contados a partir de la fecha de entrada, sin permiso para realizar actividades sujetas a una remuneración en el país.

I. VISITOR WITHOUT PERMISSION FOR PAID ACTIVITIES. Authorizes the foreigner to travel through or remain in national territory for no more than one hundred and eighty days uninterrupted time, starting from the date of entry, without permission to carry out paid activities in the country.

That's it. There are other paragraphs about consequences of overstaying a permit or visa, and about the very limited circumstances in which a person on a tourist permit can apply to change their status without leaving the country (e.g. family ties, humanitarian reasons, victim of a crime in Mexico) but NOTHING about how frequently one can leave and re-enter or how long a person can essentially reside in Mexico on serial tourist permits, provided they do not overstay the 180 days.

In the actual "Ley de Migración" there is also no preamble to the paragraph on "Residente Temporal" indicating it is "for those wishing to live in Mexico for longer than 6 months" - that statement in the Mexperience article Coondawg references is the author's interpretation. In the actual Law it simply states what the Residente Temporal is, how long it's valid for, and the benefits it confers.

Compare this to the number of paragraphs dedicated to other themes, including much detail about undocumented migrants entering and traversing the country, how they are to be treated when apprehended (including providing them with basic essentials needed for their personal hygiene) and the sanctions to be imposed on any employee of Immigration who violates the law or mistreats foreigners. I can't fathom that there is such detail in other areas of the document, but they just didn't bother to spell out their "true intent" on this serial tourist permit issue.

Obviously, we are going to have to agree to disagree on this point, since I doubt either "side" is going to come around to the other's interpretation of Mexican Immigration Law. What I would ask is that those who believe the "intent" of the law is to not have people living here on serial tourist permits refrain from using terms like "illegal" or "in violation" in reference to those who do this, because there is nothing in the law prohibiting this. Finally, fortunately, the only interpretation that counts is that of the Immigration employees at points of entry. 

For those interested in reading the Ley de Migración, here's a link:
http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LMigra_301014.pdf


----------



## AlanMexicali (Jun 1, 2011)

His link has the updated 2012 SEGOB INM law/rules review he is quoting in a colored link near the top of the page to the right in the middle of a paragraph for those you cannot find it.


----------



## mcn (Apr 14, 2015)

I've been doing it for over 10 years. In the earlier years, I was sometimes given just 90 days and had to apply for an extension. Since around the last 7 years, they've always given me 180 days with hardly any questions asked. I thought the process had become easier, really.


----------



## vantexan (Sep 4, 2011)

coondawg said:


> Mexico Immigration Guide visas, work, Temporary Resident, Permanent Resident, FM2, FM3, Mexican Citizenship
> 
> I found this, that explains the intent of the Mexican Immigration Law. Says that a Visitante is needed for stays of less than 6 months, and a Visa is needed for a stay longer than 6 months. Many people "get around/violate" the law by living full time in Mexico, and just leaving when the 180 day expiration time arrives, for an hour/day/few days, and then renewing the Visitante for another 6 months.
> IMHO, that is a violation of the law, but, so far, Mexico has really done nothing about this. I believe they are indeed headed that direction.
> ...


I think an interpretation could be you are allowed to stay up to 180 days on a tourist permit, and if you want to stay longer without having to go the border to renew you have to get a resident visa. As long as major INM officials are telling expats in meetings that it's ok to keep renewing at the border then rumors are just rumors. I tried delivering travel trailers for a living once. Some old timer truckers told me I needed to go through weigh stations just like a tractor/trailer. Weigh station people said no, not necessary. Not some jokesters but several different truckers in several places who were certain that I was required. Everyone has an opinion but what matters is what officials are saying.


----------



## vantexan (Sep 4, 2011)

coondawg said:


> I was thinking maybe you were interested to see if anyone was suggesting that people violate the intent of the New Mexican Law?


Did you take a wrong turn at Albuquerque?😄


----------



## RVGRINGO (May 16, 2007)

“I think an interpretation could be you are allowed to stay up to 180 days on a tourist permit, and if you want to stay longer without having to go the border to renew you have to get a resident visa. “

Tht is not quite the case. When the tourist permit is about to expire in 180 days, the tourist MUST leave Mexico. If he wants to stay longer the next time, he must apply for a residence visa in his home country; it cannot be done in Mexico unless married to a Mexican National or the parent of one, etc.


----------



## vantexan (Sep 4, 2011)

RVGRINGO said:


> “I think an interpretation could be you are allowed to stay up to 180 days on a tourist permit, and if you want to stay longer without having to go the border to renew you have to get a resident visa. “
> 
> Tht is not quite the case. When the tourist permit is about to expire in 180 days, the tourist MUST leave Mexico. If he wants to stay longer the next time, he must apply for a residence visa in his home country; it cannot be done in Mexico unless married to a Mexican National or the parent of one, etc.


You're right, I worded that poorly. Didn't mean at the end of 180 days you must get a resident visa while in Mexico but it sounds that way. Just saying if you don't want the hassle of going to the border every 180 days then get a resident visa. I do wonder if some would like to see those who don't qualify for a resident visa leave Mexico for good with no recourse for staying.


----------



## RVGRINGO (May 16, 2007)

I guess they would have to make the 180 day border runs, as many have done for years. I would find it a nuisance, but if unable to qualify for a visa that is what one would have to do.


----------



## GARYJ65 (Feb 9, 2013)

modeeper said:


> Canadians aren't North Americans? Indeed the the Central American <snip> couldn't get away with much, if they were lucky enough to cross over once. Common sense innit? Who wants the poor? The Indigenous types are to the Mexican Immigration what the Mexican is to US Immigration .. a pain in the butt.


I am a Mexican, and I have never ever been a pain in the butt to any government
Gringos and Canadians, if they are dead beats also are unwanted in Mexico
Mexicans are north Americans as well


----------



## AlanMexicali (Jun 1, 2011)

vantexan said:


> You're right, I worded that poorly. Didn't mean at the end of 180 days you must get a resident visa while in Mexico but it sounds that way. Just saying if you don't want the hassle of going to the border every 180 days then get a resident visa. I do wonder if some would like to see those who don't qualify for a resident visa leave Mexico for good with no recourse for staying.


There are maybe some foreigners that own homes in Mexico that would not qualify for a RT.

There are some that travel back and forth enough times a year that it wouldn´t make any difference if they got a RT as they have many opportunities to get new FMMs yearly. 

Some foreigners do travelling for business back and forth for more than 180 days a year in Mexico. Why keep them out? 

There are some Mexican Americans that don´t have proof of Mexican citizenship and travel many times a year to visit family in Mexico that need a FMM to be in the interior. Travelling even more than 20 miles from the Rio Grande border and in New Mexico.

There are lots of reasons to allow foreigners as many FMMs as they need.


----------



## coondawg (May 1, 2014)

vantexan said:


> I think an interpretation could be you are allowed to stay up to 180 days on a tourist permit, and if you want a stay longer without having to go the border (and technically leave Mexico) to renew you have to get a resident visa. .


That is my interpretation of the intent of the New Law. For those who want to remain in Mexico for over 6 months, a RT or RP are the correct Visas ! In my case, I have never wanted to remain in Mexico over 180 days, so for 16 years I have had an FMM. Should I ever decide that I wanted to stay in Mexico for 182 days, I would need a RT ( that is what it was created for). Geez, simple ! Thanks, VT.


----------



## djekizian (Mar 29, 2015)

Thank you everyone for posting responses to my question about the tourist card. I want to add that I will be flying out and into Mexico City. Does anyone know if this will create a problem for me. Thank you so much for your help. I'm really nervous about being hassled. Sincerely djekizian


----------



## coondawg (May 1, 2014)

djekizian said:


> Thank you everyone for posting responses to my question about the tourist card. I want to add that I will be flying out and into Mexico City. Does anyone know if this will create a problem for me. Thank you so much for your help. I'm really nervous about being hassled. Sincerely djekizian


To be perfectly safe, just explain to the Mexican officials that you are living in Mexico on an FMM (leaving every 180 days to renew), and they will explain if that is legal, or not, for you. Many people here seem to think it is, so there should be no problem. Then you will not have to be nervous any more. Good luck.


----------



## MJD13 (Aug 11, 2014)

I'm reticent to put in my two cents BUT, in my understanding, the FMM simply limits a single stay to 180 consecutive days. It doesn't limit the number of times that you can be a tourist in Mexico in some particular time period...like a year. Some people just love Mexico and vacation multiple times each year..either in a rental, hotel or in their own home. Frequent or long visits are just fine...you just can't stay more than 180 consecutive days. If you want to visit for longer than 180 consecutive days, a Residente Temporal or Permanente would be a good idea.

I've been crossing the border (on a regular basis) by car and by plane in crazy time combinations for about 10 years now and I've never been questioned as to why I'm re-entering after being gone for only a few days, a few weeks or a few months. Their big question is how many days I want for my new FMM. In all instances, I've never exceeded the length of time granted on my FMM.

I can see that you are nervous but, really, I would just leave Mexico and come back on your schedule for another wonderful "vacation". 

Good luck...


----------



## RVGRINGO (May 16, 2007)

Coondawk has, I hope, his tongue firmly planted in his cheek. If not, he may be trying to set you up for trouble. It is best not to enter into explanatory, or excusatory conversations with low level border officials with the power to grant you a very short stay, forcing you to pay later to extend your tourist permit to the full 180 days.
Just check out, then return with a smile and a fresh 180 day permit.


----------



## coondawg (May 1, 2014)

RVGRINGO said:


> Coondawk has, I hope, his tongue firmly planted in his cheek. If not, he may be trying to set you up for trouble. It is best not to enter into explanatory, or excusatory conversations with low level border officials with the power to grant you a very short stay, forcing you to pay later to extend your tourist permit to the full 180 days.
> Just check out, then return with a smile and a fresh 180 day permit.


RV, if he is doing something legal, how can asking about it cause him trouble? I don't follow.
If it is not "illegal" to live here full time on an FMM as most here maintain, then why the "hush-hush"? Certainly he is not trying to get around the intent of the law, or take any advantage. Would it be better if he went to a Mexican Embassy and asked? From what officials(rather than expats who are not officials) can he get the definitive answer, since he seems to have doubts about the legality, and calm his worries, RV?


----------



## vantexan (Sep 4, 2011)

coondawg said:


> RV, if he is doing something legal, how can asking about it cause him trouble? I don't follow.
> If it is not "illegal" to live here full time on an FMM as most here maintain, then why the "hush-hush"? Certainly he is not trying to get around the intent of the law, or take any advantage. Would it be better if he went to a Mexican Embassy and asked? From what officials(rather than expats who are not officials) can he get the definitive answer, since he seems to have doubts about the legality, and calm his worries, RV?


If it's illegal then wouldn't the border agents tell him so when they look at his passport? If a guy has the power to limit your stay why would you try to antagonize him in any way? This has been going on for many decades so why hasn't the Mexican gov't put up signs at every border crossing saying it's illegal to stay more than 180 days in any consecutive 365? Right next to the illegal gun signs? There are many thousands who are living or have lived in Mexico on tourist cards. Think the Mexicans don't know this? You'd think it would be right on the tourist permit that it's illegal to do so. Why are the Mexicans being so secretive about it when they're so clear about guns? Is it the letter of the law or the intent? And why do gringos get to decide what their intent is? Inquiring minds want to know!


----------



## ojosazules11 (Nov 3, 2013)

coondawg said:


> To be perfectly safe, just explain to the Mexican officials that you are living in Mexico on an FMM (leaving every 180 days to renew), and they will explain if that is legal, or not, for you. Many people here seem to think it is, so there should be no problem. Then you will not have to be nervous any more. Good luck.


I actually did ask this of an Immigration official at the Mexico City airport last year, and I even went so far as to explain this issue had caused an interminable debate (polémica) on an online expat forum. 

He told me it's not illegal.


----------



## coondawg (May 1, 2014)

There you have an answer by an expat who asked directly to an INM official issuing FMMs, so no need to worry about getting another FMM ! And, if anyone says otherwise, you can use ojosazules11 as your official source. Your worries can now disappear. Good luck.


----------



## TundraGreen (Jul 15, 2010)

ojosazules11 said:


> I actually did ask this of an Immigration official at the Mexico City airport last year, and I even went so far as to explain this issue had caused an interminable debate (polémica) on an online expat forum.
> 
> He told me it's not illegal.


The same question was asked of INM at a public forum a few years ago with the same response. Somehow, I don't think these facts are going to end the debate, but it is valuable to inject some direct info from INM into it.


----------



## vantexan (Sep 4, 2011)

As long as there are expats who took all the steps necessary to get residency, there will be some who resent those who are taking the "easy" way out.


----------



## citlali (Mar 4, 2013)

I would think that the majority of expats do not care one way or the other and if you think that having to go back to the border every 6 month is the "easy" way out you have a strange idea of "easy". I would hvae to be under such a schedule so to each its own.


----------



## vantexan (Sep 4, 2011)

citlali said:


> I would think that the majority of expats do not care one way or the other and if you think that having to go back to the border every 6 month is the "easy" way out you have a strange idea of "easy". I would hvae to be under such a schedule so to each its own.


Amazing how you always twist things. I never said the majority...I said some. And I'm not saying it's easy, I put it in quotation marks afterall. But some may feel that if they deal with the red tape then everyone should. It seriously rankles some on here. And from past posts some truly feel that if one doesn't qualify doing it the "legal" way then one shouldn't be eligible to live in Mexico. If it doesn't bother them one way or the other then why do they bring it up repeatedly?


----------



## coondawg (May 1, 2014)

vantexan said:


> Amazing how you always twist things. I never said the majority...I said some. And I'm not saying it's easy, I put it in quotation marks afterall. But some may feel that if they deal with the red tape then everyone should. It seriously rankles some on here. And from past posts some truly feel that if one doesn't qualify doing it the "legal" way then one shouldn't be eligible to live in Mexico. If it doesn't bother them one way or the other then why do they bring it up repeatedly?


Van, please reread her post ! SHE did NOT say YOU said the majority, those were HER words, not rephrasing yours. She is not twisting anything. I think a large problem some have on their posts here is not reading carefully someone's post they are responding to, and then "panties get in a wad".


----------



## vantexan (Sep 4, 2011)

coondawg said:


> Van, please reread her post ! SHE did NOT say YOU said the majority, those were HER words, not rephrasing yours. She is not twisting anything. I think a large problem some have on their posts here is not reading carefully someone's post they are responding to, and then "panties get in a wad".


And if you look at the post she was responding to I said some then she came back with the majority plus said I have a strange idea of what's easy. It's not the first time by a long shot that she's responded to my posts by twisting what I said. And I stand by my assertion that living on tourist cards isn't an issue for Mexican authorities but SOME expats make it an issue repeatedly, even saying it's illegal. For people new to the forum it's fair to counter that argument because they may go away thinking that they'll never be able to live in Mexico because they don't meet residency requirements.


----------



## AlanMexicali (Jun 1, 2011)

vantexan said:


> And if you look at the post she was responding to I said some then she came back with the majority plus said I have a strange idea of what's easy. It's not the first time by a long shot that she's responded to my posts by twisting what I said. And I stand by my assertion that living on tourist cards isn't an issue for Mexican authorities but SOME expats make it an issue repeatedly, even saying it's illegal. For people new to the forum it's fair to counter that argument because they may go away thinking that they'll never be able to live in Mexico because they don't meet residency requirements.


Longford, to my recollection, is the unique poster who seems always and contiuously upset with other Expats living/staying more time than 180 days per year on FMMs no matter what the law and rules are and many times goes so far as to say they are "economic refugees" and "illegally in Mexico" and "should leave Mexico because they do not respect Mexico or Mexican law". All others seem content to know and understand the current INM rules, law and policies. Coondawg seems to have a symantics problem when reading the INM rules and laws though. I feel he eventually will get "it" but Longford never will. He doesn´t even know any Expats except on Mexico forums. IMO.


----------



## citlali (Mar 4, 2013)

Anyone with a brain will talk to the consulate about what they can or cannot do, God help the people who only get their info from one forum.


----------



## mcn (Apr 14, 2015)

djekizian said:


> Thank you everyone for posting responses to my question about the tourist card. I want to add that I will be flying out and into Mexico City. Does anyone know if this will create a problem for me. Thank you so much for your help. I'm really nervous about being hassled. Sincerely djekizian


You could get hassled, as anybody entering the country could. We're at their mercy, as we would be with any other border control. Any hassling is usually in the form of standard questions, unless there's something extraordinary about you or you've done something wrong. What are you nervous about exactly?


----------



## ValRomx (Nov 12, 2012)

ojosazules11 said:


> I actually did ask this of an Immigration official at the Mexico City airport last year, and I even went so far as to explain this issue had caused an interminable debate (polémica) on an online expat forum.
> 
> He told me it's not illegal.


If this post had been the initial response to the OP, I would have been extremely happy.


----------



## AlanMexicali (Jun 1, 2011)

Foreign Nationals who are physically present in Mexico with an irregular immigration status have until 18 December 2015, to correct that status to comply with the provisions of the Temporary Immigration Correction Program published on 12 January 2015. Foreign nationals may submit a petition to the INM requesting the correction of their status and request a Residente Temporal visa that may be granted for up to four years.


----------



## vantexan (Sep 4, 2011)

AlanMexicali said:


> Foreign Nationals who are physically present in Mexico with an irregular immigration status have until 18 December 2015, to correct that status to comply with the provisions of the Temporary Immigration Correction Program published on 12 January 2015. Foreign nationals may submit a petition to the INM requesting the correction of their status and request a Residente Temporal visa that may be granted for up to four years.


And if there on tourist cards we're still tourists, not residents?


----------



## coondawg (May 1, 2014)

vantexan said:


> And if there on tourist cards we're still tourists, not residents?


I think only you can honestly answer that question.


----------



## TundraGreen (Jul 15, 2010)

coondawg said:


> I think only you can honestly answer that question.


I disagree. If you are in Mexico on a tourist permit, you are, by definition, a tourist. You may be a frequent and repeated tourist, but you are still a tourist. 

I believe the program Alan mentioned is for people who are here illegally, having overstayed after the expiration of whatever type of immigration document they originally had.


----------



## coondawg (May 1, 2014)

You misread my post. My point was that only you know if you are telling the truth or lying to officials about being a tourist and not a resident.


----------



## Longford (May 25, 2012)

I think it's disingenuous for anyone to suggest or assume that just because an individual told an INM agent when they entered the country that they were in Mexico as a tourist when they actually have established residency in Mexico that they are, because of their untruthfulness ... a "tourist." Let's get real here and not assume that we're all ignorant. :fencing:


----------



## AlanMexicali (Jun 1, 2011)

TundraGreen said:


> I disagree. If you are in Mexico on a tourist permit, you are, by definition, a tourist. You may be a frequent and repeated tourist, but you are still a tourist.
> 
> I believe the program Alan mentioned is for people who are here illegally, having overstayed after the expiration of whatever type of immigration document they originally had.


Google US found a write up about it in English right away. I read a Spanish language newspaper article awhile ago about it. 


"Today, January, 12, 2015 the first publication about the program was made in the Daily Federal Register and is to take effect tomorrow, January 13, 2015 and last until December 18, 2015. 

The program mentions nothing about paying fines nor having to show income to qualify. 

Here is the publication in plain English 

ASSUMPTIONS 

The present program applies to foreigners who entered Mexico before November 9, 2012 and on January 13, 2015 find themselves living in the country with an irregular immigration status." 

New Regularization (Amnesty) Program for people illegally in Mexico | Chapala Law


----------



## coondawg (May 1, 2014)

Was wondering if you were going to respond to Longford here, Alan ! You always manage to "hunt him down" though.


----------



## AlanMexicali (Jun 1, 2011)

coondawg said:


> Was wondering if you were going to respond to Longford here, Alan ! You always manage to "hunt him down" though.





Longford said:


> I think it's disingenuous for anyone to suggest or assume that just because an individual told an INM agent when they entered the country that they were in Mexico as a tourist when they actually have established residency in Mexico that they are, because of their untruthfulness ... a "tourist." Let's get real here and not assume that we're all ignorant. :fencing:







AlanMexicali said:


> Longford, to my recollection, is the unique poster who seems always and contiuously upset with other Expats living/staying more time than 180 days per year on FMMs no matter what the law and rules are and many times goes so far as to say they are "economic refugees" and "illegally in Mexico" and "should leave Mexico because they do not respect Mexicians or Mexican law". All others seem content to know and understand the current INM rules, law and policies. Coondawg seems to have a symantics problem when reading the INM rules and laws though. I feel he eventually will get "it" but Longford never will. He doesn´t even know any Expats except on Mexico forums. IMO.


OK. just for you.


----------

