How the UK and Schengen countries make millions from refused visas – Firstpost

Countries around the world are making a lot of money by refusing visas.

The UK and Schengen countries collect hundreds of millions in fees.

Lago Collective data showed that refused visa application fees, known as “reverse funds transfers”, earned EU countries and the UK almost $200 million a year last.

A Schengen visa is a type of visa that allows its holder to travel freely within the Schengen Area, which is an area comprising 27 European countries that have abolished passports and other types of mutual border controls.

The Schengen visa is generally issued for short stays of up to 90 days within a 180-day period for tourism, business or family purposes. This is a uniform visa that makes it easier to travel between these countries without the need for multiple visas.

Let’s take a closer look at how these countries make money:

According to Euro observerthe EU gained $139 million from Schengen visa refusals in 2023.

Schengen visa refusals brought in $113 million in 2022, according to data compiled by Marta Foresti and Otho Mantegazza of the Lago Collective.

Meanwhile, the UK earned $56 million in denied fees last year.

Fees are not refundable.

This amount is likely to increase in 2024 as the visa application fee for traveling to the EU increases from €80 to €90 for adults on June 11.

For children aged 6 to 12, the price will be 45 euros, an increase of 5 euros. There is no charge for children under six years old.

The above figures do not take into account expenses related to the inability to travel for business or leisure, nor bills for legal advice and private agencies involved in processing visa applications.

Ninety percent of rejected Schengen visa fees come from African and Asian countries.

Low- and middle-income countries have the highest short-term visa refusal rates in Europe and the UK.

African countries are the most affected, with Ghana, Senegal and Nigeria having rejection rates as high as 40 to 50 percent.

Most EU visa applications are submitted by nationals of Morocco and Algeria, according to Euro Observer.

Pakistanis alone spent $5.7 million on British applications that were rejected, according to Dawn.

About 40 percent of Pakistan’s applications were rejected last year.

Around half of Pakistan’s Schengen visas have also been refused.

Pakistanis spent $3.5 million on Schengen visa applications.

What do the experts say?

“Visa inequality has very tangible consequences and the world’s poorest are paying the price,” said Marta Foresti, founder of Lago Collective. EU Observer.

“The costs of rejected visas can be thought of as ‘reverse remittances’, money flowing from poor countries to rich countries. We never hear about these costs when we talk about aid or migration, it’s time to change that,” she added.

“The rejection rate for short-term visa applications from Pakistan is very high, around 40% for Schengen countries and the UK, resulting in very significant costs for everyone involved. This is surprising given the multiple links between Pakistan, Europe and the UK.

“Yet the difficulties faced by Pakistani nationals in reaching Europe by legal means became tragically evident a year ago when hundreds of people died when the Greek boat capsized. People have no choice but to resort to dangerous travel,” Foresti added.

Foresti noted on his blog last year: “Visa regimes are neither equal nor reciprocal. An Italian national can obtain a Sierra Leone visa on arrival for £30. A Sierra Leonean wishing to travel to Italy for a business meeting must undertake two separate trips to the Italian consulate in Abidjan, Ivory Coast, over several weeks, at exorbitant costs.

Dawn cited Lago Collective in a statement: “These costs are just the tip of the iceberg: in most cases, applicants pay more than the base application fee, with private agencies involved in processing applications visa and brokers providing additional services along the way. The costs of not being able to travel for business or leisure also result in significant losses for everyone involved.”

With the contribution of agencies