An Indian government officer has shared his experience of being denied a US tourist visa, despite what he described as a stable career, financial security, and no intent to settle abroad. The account was posted on r/usvisascheduling on Reddit earlier this week.
The 40-year-old Customs officer said he and his wife attended their B1/B2 visa interview at the US Embassy in September 2025. The interview, he wrote, lasted barely three minutes.
“The whole thing lasted around 3 minutes. No questions were asked about my finances, property etc. I carried all necessary documents to support my claims but nothing was asked or sought at all,” he said.
According to his post, the consular officer asked about the purpose of the trip, planned destinations, duration of stay, and both spouses’ professions and income. The officer said he explained that they had planned a two-week holiday covering New York and Las Vegas, returning from Los Angeles. He also declared his government service, his wife’s job as a kindergarten teacher, and their combined annual income of around ₹20 lakh.
Despite this, the application was refused under Section 214(B), a standard ground for denial citing insufficient ties to the home country. “If a legitimate government servant having a permanent stable job, his own house, big investments isn’t ‘strong ties back home’ then I don’t know what is,” he wrote.
The applicant added that he has more than ₹50 lakh in savings and investments, owns a house, and has no relatives in the US. He has previously travelled to Dubai and Thailand and is now planning trips to Japan and Ireland instead.
While disappointed by the rejection, he noted a practical upside: “The good — I saved around 8-10 lakh (was really going to visit US in Jan 2026). Now I will be visiting Japan for a winter trip and Ireland in summers — and still save some money left.”
At the same time, he expressed frustration over how consular interviews are conducted. “Some may say that I spoke less, that my replies were too small. But if they had issued me a visa, the same people would say my replies were enough. Interviews are quite subjective, all depends on the VO and his frame of mind,” he wrote.
He also dismissed suggestions that his itinerary raised red flags: “Some would say NY and Vegas are quite far away. I was visiting for 2 weeks! It’s a few hour’s flight from NY to Vegas. I had money, I had planned the trip, calculated my expenses, kept provision for emergencies and I would have come back.”
Comparing his case with others at the embassy, he said: “A couple ahead of me, although couldn’t speak proper English, retired from service, were granted visa — their son was already in USA.”
The officer linked such outcomes to broader visa concerns. “Lots of visa fraud has been going on for a long time — people overstaying, working there etc. That means the VOs judgement is questionable. You have, in past and currently, allowed all sorts of people in USA on random basis (who have given ‘perfect’ replies) but are denying visa to legitimate travelers/tourists who have all paperwork, have genuine strong ties back home, will be spending their money in US and have no intent to settle in the US. It’s their right to refuse visa — I understand. But it seems legitimate people are paying for others’ mistakes.”
The post drew reactions from fellow Redditors. One user quipped: “Should’ve mentioned about your black money dude.”
Another was more sympathetic, writing: “I don’t see any major red flag in your interview. Maybe that SFO fumble might make the VO think you are going SF but chose not to mention it. It’s really random and mostly depends on the day. No big deal, apply again after a few months or so.”