How Relocate Nomad is researched, written, and kept current
An informational site about digital nomad visas is only useful if the facts are right and visibly dated. Here is exactly how we work — what we cite, what we don’t do, and how you should treat the content when you’re making a decision that matters.
What we cover
Long-stay visa programs explicitly designed for remote workers and freelancers earning income from outside the destination country. We focus on the paperwork, the income and tax math, the real cost of living in the hub cities, and the realistic end-to-end application timeline.
We do not cover: tourist visas, work permits requiring local employment, golden visas based on investment thresholds over €500k, or citizenship-by-investment programs. Those exist and are sometimes relevant, but they are different products with different trade-offs — and different sites cover them better.
Our sources
Every factual claim on the site is checked against a primary government source. For visa rules, that is the destination country’s immigration ministry, consular portal, or dedicated visa site. For tax rules, it is the country’s tax authority. For cost-of-living figures, we use Numbeo and Nomadlist as triangulation against current real-estate listings.
Here are the primary sources we cite most often across the 12 currently-covered countries:
Portugal
Mexico
Greece
United Arab Emirates
Costa Rica
Secondhand aggregators (other nomad blogs, visa-service-company landing pages) are not used as sources. They are sometimes interesting for reader-experience anecdotes, but they are not authoritative and frequently carry outdated or marketing-skewed figures.
What the last-verified date means
Every page shows the date we last cross-checked its content against the primary sources. When a government changes a policy or adjusts a threshold, we update the relevant pages and the last-verified date.
The date does not mean we rewrote the whole page — it means we confirmed the facts still match the source. For fast-moving programs (Thailand DTV, Mexico INM, Portugal AIMA backlogs), even a page dated less than a month ago can benefit from a quick re-check against the government source before you act.
What we don’t do
- We don’t give legal advice. Immigration outcomes depend on individual circumstances that the site cannot account for. Use this content to narrow your options; talk to an immigration lawyer for decisions.
- We don’t give tax advice. Tax residency, treaty interactions, and the US citizenship-based system are where personal situations differ most. A cross-border CPA is worth the fee in any year you change tax residency.
- We don’t do lead-generation for visa agents. Some other sites are structured primarily to funnel readers into paid visa-service contracts. Our recommendations are editorial — if we suggest a service, it’s because it matches the content, not because of a referral fee.
- We don’t inflate claims. Headlines on other sites often promise outcomes (“pay zero tax”, “guaranteed approval”) that aren’t true for typical readers. We try to state the realistic outcome, even when it’s less exciting.
How we write
Each country is covered by a hub page and four deep-dive sections. The structure is the same across every country so you can compare mentally without learning a new layout each time. Comparison pages use a shared template — side-by-side table, when-to-choose sections, tax comparison, verdict.
We try to keep the voice neutral and specific. Concrete numbers are better than adjectives. Trade-offs are surfaced rather than hidden. If a country’s program has a weak spot, the weak spot is on the page.
Corrections and feedback
If you see a fact that doesn’t match the primary source, or a government program we haven’t covered, tell us. The site is better if readers who actually applied for these visas surface what we got wrong.