(CANADA) — Foreign nationals in Canada who receive a removal order must comply with its terms and deadlines, because failure to depart or failure to cooperate with Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) enforcement can escalate restrictions on re-entry and increase the likelihood of detention and forced removal.
Canada’s 2025 enforcement figures underscore how quickly non-compliance can translate into actual removals. Canada deported 2,831 Indian nationals in 2025, a record for that group, as removals rose to a five-year high. In the first 10 months of 2025, total removals reached 18,785, and Indian nationals made up a significant share of removals and pending cases. Those numbers matter for compliance because removal orders are not just paperwork. They are enforceable directions issued under Canada’s immigration framework.
Overview: the 2025 deportation landscape in Canada
Canadian immigration enforcement tightened in 2025 across several channels, including inland enforcement and fraud investigations. The result was measurable. Canada, 2,831 Indians, removal orders became a recurring enforcement data point as Indian nationals were removed at record levels, and as pending cases increased.
For individuals and employers, the compliance theme is consistent. Status violations, criminal inadmissibility findings, and refugee-claim non-compliance may move quickly from a proceeding to a removal.
Removals by nationality and year: what the numbers show
Publicly reported 2025 figures show removals concentrated among a few nationalities. Mexicans were the largest cohort in 2025 with 3,972 removals, while Indians were second with 2,831 removals. In 2024, 1,997 Indians were removed.
The broader context is an overall increase. 18,785 total removals occurred during the first 10 months of 2025, already exceeding several recent full-year totals. For compliance purposes, higher removal volume often means shorter timelines and fewer discretionary delays once a file is enforcement-ready.
Types of removal orders in Canada, and what compliance requires
Canada generally uses three removal-order categories under the Immigration and Refugee Protection framework, each with different compliance requirements and consequences.
1) Departure Order (least severe, but deadline-driven)
A Departure Order requires the person to leave Canada within a set period. In 2025, 3,982 Departure Orders were issued.
Practical compliance steps typically include:
- Confirm the exact date the order became enforceable.
- Depart within the deadline.
- Verify exit documentation and keep proof of departure.
Deadline Watch: A Departure Order typically requires departure within 30 days. If the person does not leave on time, it can convert into a more severe order, with harsher re-entry consequences.
2) Exclusion Order (time-barred re-entry)
An Exclusion Order bars return for a defined period. In 2025, 5,821 Exclusion Orders were issued. Re-entry is often barred for one year, and it may be longer when misrepresentation is involved.
Practical compliance steps typically include:
- Do not attempt re-entry until the bar expires.
- Keep records showing the date of departure.
- If planning to return early, confirm whether advance authorization is required.
Warning: If an Exclusion Order is tied to misrepresentation, the re-entry bar may be longer. Any future application can be scrutinized for consistency across past forms, interviews, and supporting documents.
3) Deportation Order (most severe)
A Deportation Order is the most severe removal order. In 2025, 8,982 Deportation Orders were issued.
A Deportation Order generally creates a long-term barrier to returning. Many individuals must obtain formal permission before they can lawfully re-enter.
Practical compliance steps typically include:
- Coordinate departure with CBSA when instructed.
- Keep all removal paperwork and travel records.
- Before any future travel plans, confirm whether a formal authorization process applies.
Warning: A Deportation Order can trigger forced removal and long-term re-entry barriers. Attempting to re-enter without required authorization may lead to refusal at the border and additional enforcement action.
Pending proceedings: why 2026 may bring more enforcement
As of late 2025, 29,542 individuals reportedly faced pending deportation proceedings. Indians accounted for 6,515 pending cases, the largest national cohort. That pipeline often signals continued removal activity in the following year, even without any new policy changes.
For individuals in proceedings, compliance is not limited to “leave or stay.” It often includes meeting reporting conditions, attending hearings, updating addresses, and cooperating with document requests.
Enforcement priorities and policy context: inland focus
CBSA reportedly targeted a 20,000 annual deportation goal, with an emphasis on inland enforcement such as workplace inspections. When inland enforcement rises, compliance risks increase for:
- Workers without valid authorization.
- Employers with documentation gaps.
- Individuals who overstay, breach conditions, or miss required appointments.
Fraud crackdowns and regulatory changes affecting compliance
2025 enforcement also emphasized fraud and representative misconduct:
- IRCC draft regulations published in January 2025 contemplated fines up to $1.5 million for misrepresentation by representatives.
- Ontario’s OINP imposed administrative penalties, including fines up to $150,000 and notable enforcement actions against representatives.
For applicants, the compliance lesson is direct. You are typically responsible for what is filed in your name, even if a representative prepared it. Keep copies of everything submitted and insist on reviewing forms before signing.
Border security investments and arrival trends
Canada invested $1.3 billion in surveillance and border tools, including drones. New arrivals reportedly dropped 61% after 2024 student caps. Increased monitoring can tighten the link between detection and enforcement, especially where entry, work, or study conditions are breached.
Legislative framework: Strong Borders Act (Bill C-2)
Reportedly, the Strong Borders Act (Bill C-2) expanded CBSA powers for raids and employer prosecutions. If implemented and used aggressively, that can increase compliance exposure for worksites and for third parties who facilitate unauthorized employment or misrepresentation.
Leadership signals and practical compliance steps for 2026
Prime Minister Mark Carney publicly indicated plans to accelerate deportations, improve resources, and reform tracking, while maintaining some legal pathways. For individuals, “tracking” reforms often translate into faster identification of non-compliance.
Practical ways to maintain compliance in Canada:
- Track permit expiry dates and file extensions early, when eligible.
- Follow study and work permit conditions exactly.
- Attend every immigration appointment and hearing.
- Update addresses promptly with the correct agency.
- Use licensed counsel, and keep a full copy of your file.
U.S. touchpoints: why INA and CFR still matter for some readers
Some individuals affected by Canadian proceedings also have U.S. travel or U.S. immigration histories. Misrepresentation and prior removals can also trigger U.S. inadmissibility grounds, depending on facts and timing. For example, U.S. law addresses fraud or willful misrepresentation under INA § 212(a)(6)(C)(i), and adjudicators analyze “material” misstatements in decisions such as Matter of D-R-, 27 I&N Dec. 105 (BIA 2017). Procedures and consequences differ by country, and U.S. rules can vary by federal circuit.
Official resources (Canada and U.S.)
- U.S. EOIR (Immigration Court information): justice.gov/eoir
- U.S. USCIS: uscis.gov
⚖️ Legal Disclaimer: This article provides general information about immigration law and is not legal advice. Immigration cases are highly fact-specific, and laws vary by jurisdiction. Consult a qualified immigration attorney for advice about your specific situation.
Resources:
