EES: New data on EU entry refusals and extension of stay beyond 90 days
Why many Americans and Canadians are allowed to stay on for longer
A new report gives a snapshot of how the EES digital borders scheme is being used to check on comings and goings of non-EU nationals into France and the wider Schengen area.
It relates to the first quarter of 2026 – January to March – and includes, for example, data on how many people were refused entry and how many were given permission to extend their stay beyond 90 days. It shows that Americans were the major beneficiaries of this.
The EES is the EU’s new centralised database system for logging travellers to Schengen who are non-EU/non-EEA/non-Swiss citizens coming for short stays. It replaces the need for passport stamps as the process is now all digital.
A short stay under EU rules means less than three months, or no more than 90 days in any 180-day period in the Schengen area. Short-stay travellers may be from countries which are visa-exempt for short stays, or may be coming from other countries with a short-stay visa.
EES has officially been fully operational since April 10, 2026 (a phased rollout began on October 12, 2025), but issues remain to be ironed out, including in France with technical problems hampering the use of self-registration kiosks intended to help collect facial and fingerprint images to form part of people’s EES files.
It is separate from ETIAS, an online authorisation to enter the EU, which is yet to be implemented.
The new report was published by eu-LISA, the EU’s agency for large-scale IT projects, which is overseeing EES implementation. It is part of EU regulation obligations to provide ongoing information on how the system is being used.
One key use of the EES is to track people’s respect of the 90/180 days rule, however this report focuses on entry refusals, extensions of stay and revocations of stays.
Note that the EU now provides a tool to use for tracking your days allowance, but notes that it may not be fully accurate yet as the system continues to bed in.
The report relates only to foreign nationals visiting the EU and therefore subject to EES, not nationals who live in the EU with valid long-stay visas and residency cards and who are not subject to the 90/180-day rule.
Refusals of entry
The data shows 19,985 refusals of entry, with the most common reason – 7,202 cases – being that border guards were not convinced that the traveller had sufficiently justified the ‘purpose and conditions of their planned stay’.
This refers to not being able sufficiently to explain or prove reasons for visiting or availability of accommodation.
The next most common reason – 4,353 cases – was because the traveller was flagged as having already had their maximum permitted visa-free stays in the Schengen area, ie. they had reached or exceeded their 90/180 days allowance.
Other reasons in order of frequency included:
Flagged by Schengen information system (because an EU state’s authorities recorded the person as having committed previous immigration violations such that they should be banned from entering the area)
Lack of valid visa (for nationals needing a short-stay visa) or of a residency document proving exemption from EES
Unable to give evidence of sufficient means to fund the stay
No valid passport
Traveller flagged by by EU security databases as being a threat
National-level entry refusal alerts
Using a false passport
Refusing to provide biometric data (facial image or fingerprints)
Ukrainians accounted for the highest number of refusals (4,771).
The report does not explain reasons for this but many Ukrainians enter via the EU's eastern land borders rather than major holiday airports, where travel circumstances may differ from those of typical tourists.
While all guards at external Schengen borders are entitled to ask questions about means, accommodation and purpose of trip, experience shows that this is rarely enforced at major holiday destination airports for people who look like typical tourists.
Among anglophone countries, 190 Britons were refused and 158 Americans.
Travellers aged 20 to 30 were most likely to be refused and more men than women were refused.
Extensions of stay
Extensions of stay refers to scenarios where authorities in an EU country give permission for a person to stay in that country for an additional period after they have exhausted their total 90/180 days in the Schengen area.
This would include, for example, making use of rights under old pre-Schengen Agreement bilateral deals, due to force majeure (such as flight cancellations), or due to obtaining temporary leave to remain in a country for emergency reasons such as an autorisation provisoire de séjour from a French prefecture.
There were a total 11,885 extensions, including 6,565 Americans, followed by Canada (1,846) and Japan (1,001). Some 206 Britons benefited, as well as 187 New Zealanders and 87 Australians.
The large number of Americans is explainable by the existence of an old deal they can rely on (none exists for Britons). We will review further in the August edition of The Connexion (and subsequently online) how this works for them and some other nationalities.
Revocations
There were 665 revoked stays.
While the report does not define the circumstances covered by this rare category, it is likely to relate to situations where permission to remain is withdrawn, for example after authorities discover paperwork fraud, security issues or that the conditions for the stay are no longer met.
The highest numbers affected were nationals of Turkey (84), followed by China and Belarus.
