[Ansil849]

Honestly, what is the appeal of this? The minimum salary requirements are absurdly high. There are nice landscapes and environments available for much cheaper requirements, likely in one's own current country. The incentive for Iceland is pretty clear, they get rich foreigners' money. But the incentive for rich foreigners to temporarily relocate here is not at all clear.

US citizens, for example, can also stay in Iceland as tourists for 90 days, so this sounds like an onerous amount of requirements to jump through to stay for 90 more.

[verve_rat]

> tourists for 90 days

Meaning not working. You can visit and live of you savings for 3 months, but not work. This new visa would allow you to work in Iceland for up to 6 months. That is a very big difference.

[Ansil849]

Under the long-term visa, you cannot work for an Icelandic employer. You can work for an international employer, just like you can when you're staying for tourism. There is no difference.

[verve_rat]

FFS how difficult is this concept to grasp? A tourist visa means you are not allowed to work in the country. You might get away with doing so, but getting away with something and that thing being legal are two different things.

[Ansil849]

No, traveling as a tourist means you are not allowed to work in the country for any employer in that country. Not you are not allowed to work at all. If it were the latter, you would not legally be able to check your work emails while in another country.

[verve_rat]

Bear in mind that (warning: assumption) most of these rules in most places probably haven't had a significant update since checking your work emails became a thing.

So yeah, technically that might be a volition of the visa (or visa waver). That is the point of the change we are discussing. Previously people visiting Iceland could not work without a work visa. Iceland is updating its set of visas acknowledge the current reality.

Again, you probably won't get kicked out of some country for checking you emails, but that doesn't mean it doesn't violate the conditions of the visa.

Edit: and no, in most places a tourist visa means you are not allowed to do work (for anyone) in that country. The point is to make employers (both foreign and domestic) hire locals in the first instance. Doing work for a foreign employer still requires a specific visa.

[Ansil849]

> Edit: and no, in most places a tourist visa means you are not allowed to do work (for anyone) in that country.

Then this would mean if you received and answered a work text message while a tourist in another country, you would be violating what, exactly? Can you cite something specific, in any country, and the corresponding penalty? And also anyone, ever, having faced repercussions for this?

[realityking]

That’s not true. Taking the US as the example, they have some very specific guidances what you can do on a B1 visa or when entering under a visa waiver.

Allowed: - Consult with business associates - Attend a scientific, educational, professional, or business convention or conference - Participating in short-term training - Settle an estate - Negotiate a contrast

Not allowed:

- Paid performances, or any professional performance before a paying audience - Arrival as a crewmember on a ship or aircraft - Work as foreign press, in radio, film, print journalism, or other information media

To take an extreme example, Microsoft can’t just have someone from Mexico come into the US for 3 months to work on a project in their Seattle office even though their salary may be paid by Microsoft Mexico.