Faster, easier re-entry to US via foreign pre-clearance facilities like this one in Dublin, Ireland (Photo: Chris McGinnis)
In 2015, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security identified 10 overseas airports for expansion of the US Customs and Immigration Preclearance program. And now the department has named 11 more.
For travelers, this means that you’ll clear US customs and immigration at foreign airports, and your international flight back to the US will arrive like a domestic flight- you just get off and go home. These stations usually include Global Entry kiosks for faster processing. For business travelers, the primary downside is that once you pass through, it might be impossible to wait for your flight in an airport or business/first class lounge.
“Preclearance allows DHS to screen individuals prior to boarding a flight, which means we are able to identify threats long before they arrive in the United States,” said DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson. “I look forward to the opportunity to grow our Preclearance operations in the Western Hemisphere, particularly into South America where CBP does not currently operate them.”
The airports newly named as Preclearance possibilities include Bogota, Buenos Aires, Edinburgh, Iceland’s Keflavik, Mexico City, Milan Malpensa, Osaka Kansai, Rio de Janeiro, Rome Fiumicino, Sao Paulo Guarulhos and St. Maarten.
Before a new a station can be opened, the U.S. and the host country must negotiate an agreement allowing it – and that can be a slow process.
You can add this to the long list of improvements travelers have seen under the Obama administration.
One of the next airports to get Preclearance will be Stockholm’s Arlanda. (Image: Swedavia)
Of the 10 airports selected last year for possible Preclearance locations, DHS said the U.S. has just signed an agreement with Sweden for a Preclearance facility at Stockholm Arlanda, which isn’t expected to open before 2019. DHS said it “continues to engage with many of the host governments” from the other locations, and “expects to announce additional agreements in the coming months.”
Those other airports from the 2015 selection process include Brussels, Punta Cana (Dominican Republic), Tokyo Narita, Amsterdam Schiphol, Oslo, Madrid, Istanbul Ataturk, London Heathrow, and Manchester.
Most of the existing U.S. Preclearance stations are in Canada – at Calgary, Toronto, Edmonton, Halifax, Montreal, Ottawa, Vancouver and Winnipeg. Other Preclearance facilities are at airports in Dublin, Shannon, Abu Dhabi, Aruba, Freeport and Nassau (Bahamas), and Bermuda.
Have you tried using Preclearance yet? How did that go for you? Please leave your comments below.
ICYMI, see the 25 most recent TravelSkills posts right here
In the market for a new credit card? See our “Credit Card Deals” tab to shop around! It helps us help you!
Don’t miss out! Join the 150,000+ people who read TravelSkills every month! Sign up here for one email-per-day updates!
Simplest answer: you can through-check your baggage and not handle it at your point of entry airport.
Thanks for that clarification, Roan. I didn’t quite get that from John’s post (clearly), but it’s a fair point. I was in exactly that position for the better part of two decades (flying 100K+ miles annually from a secondary market in the Midwest with a lot of international travel) and I always figured that any convenience penalty should be borne by me since I chose to live there. Apparently I was wrong about that, if now the system is skewed toward those who choose to live in EBF…
I think he’s referring to people who live near an airport that doesn’t have nonstop service to many (or any) international destinations. To fly home, these people have to connect at a hub airport in the US (JFK, O’Hare, DFW, …) and go through immigration and customs there. This means long minimum connection times, wasted time if you have Global Entry, and the potential for missing your flight if you don’t (and it’s not like the next flight is in an hour, probably more like 3-6). With preclearance, you get this out of the way at the beginning of your trip and are able to make a domestic-style connection which is quicker and more reliable.
Care to elaborate on these “benefits” that are somehow apparent only to “Flyover Americans?” My life as a coastal elite has seemingly blinded me to Trump-ian logic…
Touchy people flying non-stop from overseas to their destination airport are going to hate pre-clearance… after all, the world revolves around them and their needs… and whatever benefits what many of them call “Flyover America” is as welcome to them as a Trump presidency.
So where is there ANY benefit in this arrangement? The traveler is simply inconvenienced at a different point in their journey, in an arguably worse fashion (as others have pointed out) than with Customs post-clearing. CBP has to procure and secure a distant outpost away from domestic resources. For that matter, how many people are actually ensnared at Customs and permanently diverted from their travels (wherever they may wind up)? How is it easier, cheaper, or in any way more effective for US CBP to deal with them in the country of origin? Seems like a foreign assignment boondoggle to me:
“Hey, Pete! You wanna work Customs at JFK or pre-clearance in Dublin? Yeah, I figured…”
Nice to see that the two foreign airports I use the most, NRT (Tokyo/Narita) and KIX (Osaka/Kansai) will soon be joining the list.
Pre clearance is NOT there for the convenience of the flying passenger it is there purely as a tool of the govt. to screen potential undesirables before they get on a plane and as such isn’t there to make your flight experience more comfortable nor even AS comfortable as it would be without the process. Trying to tout this as an improvement for the flyer is a stretch.
I have used Pre-Clearance at most of the airports it offered. Some are better than others as far as long waiting lines and helpful staff. Overall though I find using Pre-Clearance is less stress than arriving at a USA airport after a long flight. Its such a nice feeling to land and be out within minutes just as any domestic passenger.
Looking forward to more being opened
Pre-Clearance is great when dealing with inefficient US airport designs like the long walk for ATL bound passengers arriving in the E concourse.
However, most pre-clearance areas in foreign airports offer fewer dining and shopping options after clearing US Customs than in the main or international departure terminal areas.
I agree with rdinsf.
Note particularly that the airline does not notify you that the airport you are leaving from uses pre clearance and you need to arrive an hour earlier than other wise. Secondly, the flying passenger does not benefit from pre clearance if they are traveling to their final destination.
My wife and I flew out of Dublin and the US pre clearance line took an hour, in addition to the airport security and departing immigration checks. We met two different travelers who had missed their flights the previous day and had to pay additional fees to change their tickets, as the airline was not at fault for their missing the flight.
Additionally the pre clearance environment was very unpleasant: crowded and noisy with no signs to mark where the line began, no distinction for US residents from non-residents, and no access to restroom facilities, let alone food or drink.
Please tell us what benefits DHS sees in setting up pre clearance overseas, as I see very little, and there are distinct downsides for the traveling public. Also you point out “it might be impossible to wait for your flight in an airport or business/first class lounge.”
Airlines are already required to provide a full passenger manifest (using the passenger’s passport information) to DHS before the departure of an international flight to the US, so its hard to see how pre clearance improves security that much.
Also how is the cost of manning sites that handle far fewer flights and passengers from each pre clearance location justified?
Are the staff at these sites DHS employees or locally recruited staff? If they are locally recruited, how well trained are they in comparison to US based DHS employees.
It all depends on personal preference. Even though my wife and I have Global Entry, I’d just as soon get the formalities out of the way at a foreign airport and not have to worry about them when I get to the US. On the other hand, I can see why businesspeople might not want to waste time getting to the airport early.
I used preclearance at YUL many years ago and liked it.
And how much does this service cost the US Taxpayer who never leaves the country? Seems like a luxury a country in serious debt could do without.
Preclearance is not beneficial for the traveler if you are flying non-stop to your final US destination.
Without preclearance, you arrive at the foreign airport whenever you want taking into account checkin and security times. You don’t have to guess how long US formalities will take. When you arrive in the US, you go through immigration and customs, and you do not need to budget time for this – it takes however long it takes and you are done.
With preclearance, you have to arrive at the foreign airport extra-early because you have no idea how long US customs and immigration will take. You may cautiously allocate an hour for it, but it only takes 30 minutes. You have then spent more time at the airport than you needed to, and you spent time pent up in the preclearance area where there are generally fewer amenities than the rest of the airport. It’s not just that there may be no lounge – the food offerings are frequently far more limited.
I used YUL preclearance two weeks ago and it was fast and efficient.