US Bans Immigrant Visas for 75 Countries: Why Thailand, Bhutan and Kuwait Are on the List

The United States has announced an indefinite suspension of immigrant visa processing for citizens of 75 countries, a sweeping move that marks one of the most expansive legal immigration restrictions in recent years. The decision, which comes into effect from January 21, has triggered widespread debate — not only because of the scale of the ban, but also due to the inclusion of several countries that are neither conflict-ridden nor economically fragile.

While the presence of nations such as Pakistan, Bangladesh, Iran, Sudan and Myanmar on the list was widely anticipated due to ongoing instability or high migration pressures, the inclusion of relatively prosperous or globally well-regarded countries like Thailand, Bhutan, Kuwait and Brazil has raised serious questions about the criteria used by the US administration.

According to officials cited in international media reports, the suspension is rooted in a reassessment of immigrant screening standards under the “public charge” doctrine — a long-standing US immigration rule that allows authorities to deny visas to applicants deemed likely to depend on government welfare.

The move is part of a broader immigration crackdown under Donald Trump, whose administration has consistently argued that immigration policy should prioritise financial self-sufficiency and reduce pressure on American taxpayers.

An internal State Department cable reviewed by global news agencies reportedly flagged applicants from the listed countries as statistically more likely to access public assistance programmes after entering the US. Based on this assessment, consular officers have been instructed to halt immigrant visa issuance and deny applications under existing law while the review continues. Visitor and tourist visas, however, remain unaffected.

The inclusion of Thailand has come as a particular surprise. The Southeast Asian nation is a major US tourism partner and is often portrayed in American media as economically stable and socially open. Thai authorities reportedly summoned the US chargé d’affaires in Bangkok to seek clarification, reflecting the diplomatic discomfort caused by the decision.

Bhutan’s presence on the list has also drawn attention. Analysts point out that many Bhutanese immigrants in the US are ethnic Nepalis who fled the country during expulsions in the early 1990s. Their refugee background may have influenced how welfare-risk data was interpreted by US officials, despite Bhutan’s small population and limited migration footprint.

Kuwait, one of the world’s wealthiest nations in terms of per-capita income, has emerged as another puzzling inclusion. Although fewer than 40,000 Kuwaitis live in the US — many of them students — historical data reportedly suggested higher rates of public benefit usage among certain visa categories, prompting its addition to the list. This has raised eyebrows among policy experts, given Kuwait’s strong economic indicators.

Brazil’s inclusion has similarly surprised observers. Despite having the largest economy in South America, Brazilians account for roughly 1 per cent of the US foreign-born population. While Brazil does have a sizable diaspora, it has not traditionally been associated with high welfare dependency.

Notably, India has been excluded from the list. Experts attribute this to strong documentation systems, high-skilled migration patterns, particularly in H-1B and STEM categories, and consistently low welfare dependency rates among Indian immigrants.

The State Department has said the suspension will remain in place indefinitely until the reassessment of vetting and screening standards is completed. No country-specific timelines or benchmarks have been announced, leaving thousands of prospective immigrants facing prolonged uncertainty.

As the policy draws criticism from rights groups and affected governments alike, it underscores a sharp shift in how the US defines acceptable legal immigration — increasingly linking entry not just to security concerns, but to long-term economic calculations.