I think it is positive and smart that we are trying to attract well-educated immigrants. Of course, we have to accept people at all levels of society. But yes, we should completely let people in here who have expertise and knowledge in certain areas and are well educated. Doing that doesn’t make us un-egalitarian. It makes us sensible and shows foresight.
I am an immigrant to Iceland from the US. I am here because my husband is an Icelander and didnt want to leave Iceland.
I am no fan of this plan at all and I think it will prove detrimental to the residents who are already experiencing a housing crisis with sky high rents/housing prices.
I dont think people realize how expensive Iceland is. I think the puprose of the income requirements were meant to ensure that the holder of the long term visa would be able to sustain themselves financially.
Though in reality it will just drive up housing costs for the residents and further shift the focus of the government on keeping rich tourists happy instead of their tax paying constituents.
Well, I definitely don’t make enough money to qualify, but I am curious how good is Internet access outside of Reykjavik? Would be curious about working remote somewhere else in the country.
I think this is cleaver, basically getting tourists to Iceland that stay here longer and spend more money.
This looks like an awesome opportunity.
Makes perfect sense. Attracting skilled proffesionals and people with enough pocket money to live here and invest a whole lot in the country. Taxes from them will help pay for social programs that benefit everyone. A win-win in my books
What about Icelanders? We struggle so much with getting jobs and affording basic needs. It would he great to focus first on the people who live here
“Egalitarian reputation” aside: What gives you the right to demand we do anything differently?
What would be the point of moving here to remote work if you can’t sustain yourself? This isn’t for super wages people. 1.3mil a month isn’t rich. It is middle class in Reykjavík, lower middle class even.
People moving here for a temporary work/holiday/experience should know beforehand they can afford it.
There are plenty of people who move here for opportunity. Most immigrants move here with hardly anything. These are not immigrants though. Just long term tourists. If they come over and have a hard time making ends meet it is a problem for everyone. This is a safe limit.
I think this is as standard as citizenships for countries. When you have to pay maybe 20% of your spending on tax, countries are going to want the people that spend the most.
Honestly it’s like a lower priced version of say the investor visa the US has. I remember there was an article about that a few years ago here from a member of the US embassy. Plugging that as an ‘easy’ way to get a US visa, all you had to do was have a million or close to in USD to use to invest in American companies. This at least is doesn’t require that much wealth.
Most countries do this. Most countries don’t want the low income people. They may need them to do the shit jobs.. but they don’t want them. Only time a country wants low income people is if the low income in their own country translates to significant amounts in the welcoming country. Sorry, that’s reality.
Also if you think Iceland is egalitarian, my guess is you’ve only ever been here as a tourist. Which is fine, but you see things very differently as a tourist. So many tourists told me how impressed they were Iceland has no homeless – which simply ain’t true. As a resident, yeah, it really ain’t and I honestly can’t decide if this idea of egalitarian Iceland makes me want to cry more than laugh. Probably cry more than laugh, not being able to get assistance cuz of snobby discrimination ain’t funny anymore.
For Americans, that is only $120k/yr to be able to bring spouse/kids. That’s around top 10% of earners. Still a small group but nowhere near .5%.
This is just a policy question. The basic math is that the value of the individual coming here must not be a net burden on the society.
You have to weigh the cost of them being here, such as increased pressure on housing prices, use of shared infrastructure, use of shared services, potential cost of emergency assistance etc, against their contribution to the economy. Their contributions are mostly going to be consumption of local goods and services, and sales tax (VAT) on those. The people coming here on these visas do not pay income tax in Iceland.
Iceland is a rich country. In 2020 the 80th percentile is at 969000kr and the 90th at 1182000kr per month. This means the current calculation is accepting people who would slot into roughly the top 15-20% of earners in Iceland. We have a very high cost of living. Earning less than roughly $50k (current exchange rate) per year would put you in the bottom 20% of the Icelandic labour market. (All this data is from Hagstofan).
Now don’t forget, Iceland is a member of the European single market. We’re already open to some 450 million people to live and work here. Additionally we have several ways of moving and living here for people outside the EEA. This particular option is just one of from a larger portfolio.
Remote work visas are, for the most part, a relatively new invention. It makes sense to test-drive the product with relatively rigid requirements. I am sure that if the experience is a good one and proves beneficial to the Icelandic economy, the numbers will be adjusted. Most countries don’t even have a remote work visa, so even if you don’t agree with Iceland’s technical implementation, there’s no need to be mad about that.
14 comments
[deleted]
I think it is positive and smart that we are trying to attract well-educated immigrants. Of course, we have to accept people at all levels of society. But yes, we should completely let people in here who have expertise and knowledge in certain areas and are well educated. Doing that doesn’t make us un-egalitarian. It makes us sensible and shows foresight.
I am an immigrant to Iceland from the US. I am here because my husband is an Icelander and didnt want to leave Iceland.
I am no fan of this plan at all and I think it will prove detrimental to the residents who are already experiencing a housing crisis with sky high rents/housing prices.
I dont think people realize how expensive Iceland is. I think the puprose of the income requirements were meant to ensure that the holder of the long term visa would be able to sustain themselves financially.
Though in reality it will just drive up housing costs for the residents and further shift the focus of the government on keeping rich tourists happy instead of their tax paying constituents.
Well, I definitely don’t make enough money to qualify, but I am curious how good is Internet access outside of Reykjavik? Would be curious about working remote somewhere else in the country.
I think this is cleaver, basically getting tourists to Iceland that stay here longer and spend more money.
This looks like an awesome opportunity.
Makes perfect sense. Attracting skilled proffesionals and people with enough pocket money to live here and invest a whole lot in the country. Taxes from them will help pay for social programs that benefit everyone. A win-win in my books
What about Icelanders? We struggle so much with getting jobs and affording basic needs. It would he great to focus first on the people who live here
“Egalitarian reputation” aside: What gives you the right to demand we do anything differently?
What would be the point of moving here to remote work if you can’t sustain yourself? This isn’t for super wages people. 1.3mil a month isn’t rich. It is middle class in Reykjavík, lower middle class even.
People moving here for a temporary work/holiday/experience should know beforehand they can afford it.
There are plenty of people who move here for opportunity. Most immigrants move here with hardly anything. These are not immigrants though. Just long term tourists. If they come over and have a hard time making ends meet it is a problem for everyone. This is a safe limit.
I think this is as standard as citizenships for countries. When you have to pay maybe 20% of your spending on tax, countries are going to want the people that spend the most.
Honestly it’s like a lower priced version of say the investor visa the US has. I remember there was an article about that a few years ago here from a member of the US embassy. Plugging that as an ‘easy’ way to get a US visa, all you had to do was have a million or close to in USD to use to invest in American companies. This at least is doesn’t require that much wealth.
Most countries do this. Most countries don’t want the low income people. They may need them to do the shit jobs.. but they don’t want them. Only time a country wants low income people is if the low income in their own country translates to significant amounts in the welcoming country. Sorry, that’s reality.
Also if you think Iceland is egalitarian, my guess is you’ve only ever been here as a tourist. Which is fine, but you see things very differently as a tourist. So many tourists told me how impressed they were Iceland has no homeless – which simply ain’t true. As a resident, yeah, it really ain’t and I honestly can’t decide if this idea of egalitarian Iceland makes me want to cry more than laugh. Probably cry more than laugh, not being able to get assistance cuz of snobby discrimination ain’t funny anymore.
For Americans, that is only $120k/yr to be able to bring spouse/kids. That’s around top 10% of earners. Still a small group but nowhere near .5%.
This is just a policy question. The basic math is that the value of the individual coming here must not be a net burden on the society.
You have to weigh the cost of them being here, such as increased pressure on housing prices, use of shared infrastructure, use of shared services, potential cost of emergency assistance etc, against their contribution to the economy. Their contributions are mostly going to be consumption of local goods and services, and sales tax (VAT) on those. The people coming here on these visas do not pay income tax in Iceland.
Iceland is a rich country. In 2020 the 80th percentile is at 969000kr and the 90th at 1182000kr per month. This means the current calculation is accepting people who would slot into roughly the top 15-20% of earners in Iceland. We have a very high cost of living. Earning less than roughly $50k (current exchange rate) per year would put you in the bottom 20% of the Icelandic labour market. (All this data is from Hagstofan).
Now don’t forget, Iceland is a member of the European single market. We’re already open to some 450 million people to live and work here. Additionally we have several ways of moving and living here for people outside the EEA. This particular option is just one of from a larger portfolio.
Remote work visas are, for the most part, a relatively new invention. It makes sense to test-drive the product with relatively rigid requirements. I am sure that if the experience is a good one and proves beneficial to the Icelandic economy, the numbers will be adjusted. Most countries don’t even have a remote work visa, so even if you don’t agree with Iceland’s technical implementation, there’s no need to be mad about that.