I work for a large tech company that has recently announced internally that they will be putting all PERM filings on pause indefinitely. The reasons cited are:

— The 10-day in-house job posting is of dubious quality now because there is no one at the office to to see it (it's closed and empty because of Covid), and they believe the Department of Labor may notice this and refuse applications.

— Because of the current administration's outlook on immigration, they're worried that more filings will be audited/rejected, which could lead to more oversight on future filings for the company, making things more difficult.

They said a number of times that pausing all PERMs is a proactive measure — there have been no issues so far, but they want to make sure there never are any.

The basic premises seem to make sense, but it puts all of us running through the process in a difficult position. They wouldn't give any timeline for how long such a pause would last, but reading between the lines with office closures, it seems that it would last at least all of 2020, and probably well into 2021.

My question: Is what my company doing reasonable, or is it more of a situation where they're adopting a very conservative stance to reduce their own risk down to zero, even at the cost of putting all its employees into immigration limbo?

Thanks!

Interesting to see you think that way.

My wife recently got her PERM application denied. The reasoning was that the in-house job posting did not include the salary for the position. We think it was a clerical mistake on part of the company attorney and we are trying to move on by looking at other options.

However, last year her colleague obtained PERM with the same job posting template. It gave us the impression that indeed the PERM filings are being scrutinized and denied with greater frequency.

I asked my company if there was any electronic alternative for the NOF and they insisted there wasn't. Do you have any sources I could use to prove this to them? I tried searching something myself but I couldn't find anything concrete.

So my question really is, is there a way in which I can bring a caregiver from India to Canada? I know one option is to hire a caregiver from Vancouver itself but it's really going to be difficult, because of the language barriers and the understandings. They are an important part of my life and I cannot function without someone who I can completely trust to live-in with.

Another option would be to take the caregiver along with me on a visitor or tourist visa, but in that scenario, they are not allowed to work in Canada.

I am really looking for solutions here and I don't want to give up on this amazing opportunity of migrating to one of the most amazing countries in the world with high standard and quality of life.

Q1) What is (/are) the easiest path(s) to start a company in the US and/or seek funding there for Europeans? How costly is it?

Q2) If there's already a company registered in Germany for example, how costly (approximately) is the process to "register a subsidiary" in the US (required for YC), and how would the visas work? (Would spouses be allowed and be able to get a working permit?)

Disclaimer: I work at Stripe.

Also Nevada? That's new to me!

There can be huge tax consequences of going the other way around, though.

I've been involved in several startups which enjoyed favorable tax treatment as an LLC, and then converted to a C-Corp upon the first round of outside financing.

There are much better tax deals to be had outside the states if you're trying to elude (the legal one, not evade) your country's high taxation.

Thank you so much for doing this!

Im a German citizen living in Mexico. Since I have been to Iran I no longer qualify for ESTA and had to apply for a visa at the embassy here in Mexico City to visit the USA. My visa has been in processing for 2y now and I have not received any response other than "still in processing, we will be in touch". What do you recommend? Is there anything I can do to accelerate this? Or withdraw the application and apply from Germany?

Thanks a lot!!

It's a frustrating process because there is literally no information available when the application enters this state, although my suspicion is that this is because nothing is being done.

Anyway it might have been longer but eventually the company's legal team collected statements from all the people this had happened to and they were submitted to one of the US Senators in the state where the company is based. My visa was issued shortly afterwards.

Not sure what message you can take from this except perhaps that the whole system is crazy (arguably even corrupt?)

(To head off the first question: No I don't have any criminal record, and there is no reason anyone has come up with as to why the ESTA was revoked.)

"Under the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015, travelers in the following categories must obtain a visa prior to traveling to the United States as they are no longer eligible to travel under the Visa Waiver Program (VWP):

Nationals of VWP countries who have traveled to or been present in Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, or Yemen on or after March 1, 2011 (with limited exceptions for travel for diplomatic or military purposes in the service of a VWP country). Nationals of VWP countries who are also nationals of Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Iran, Iraq, Sudan, or Syria."

You have to travel on a B1/B2 visa if you were in Iran/Iraq/Syria after 2011. I was affected by this but in the end it's more of a admin headache than anything else. The B1/B2 visa are pretty easy and are valid for 10 years.

Didn't the current First Lady falsely immigrate, lying about work or something, so it can't be that much of an issue to lie in your paperwork or she would have gone to prison??

But if you are one of the unlucky few whom they decide to prosecute, you will have a bad time. Read the articles about Sirous Asgari. I don't have any good articles which tells the whole saga, but use this as the starting point and search more on the internet: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/28/iran-scientist...

Recap of the saga:

An Iranian university professor (who had previously studied in the US and has ties to the US) requested a US visa. It was granted. Hew was arrested as soon as he entered the US. He was charged with wire fraud, visa fraud, and stealing trade secrets. After a lengthy trial, 2 years later, he was cleared of any charges and acquitted. But then ICE took him into custody because they had revoked his visa and he was in the US without a valid visa (please note that he had no choice in this, as he was forbidden from leaving the US while the trial was proceeding and he was taken into custody again immediately after the trial concluded. Real catch-22). Then he spent a couple of months in ICE custody and his frequent requests to be sent back to Iran was denied. He got infected with COVID-19 during this time. And finally in June, he was deported to Iran.

And this is the case of someone who was innocent. Imagine what would have happened if he were actually guilty. They gave him a visa so they could arrest him and charge him with visa fraud (among other things). Even when he was acquitted, he spent more time in jail because they retroactively revoked his visa. And most important of all, none of this even made front page. This is not one of those WTF cases that are so rare you might as well ignore them. Following the news on this over the years, the tone was always "yeah, nothing special about this case."

Thanks for doing this, Peter!

Thanks again!

https://mobile.twitter.com/TravelGov/status/1285331446232743...

Can they lose the green card if they spend too much time abroad? How long can they safely stay abroad before losing the GC?

For people that want to get citizenship through green card. How long before their clock resets? How likely is the gov to understand quarantine as a good reason to stay abroad?

If you left without the intent to stay longer than a year and had to extend for unforeseen circumstances (say a global pandemic heavily reduced air travel options) than you are out of luck.

For me it would be more convenient to spend 6 months abroad and then a couple months in the US then go back and spend another 6 months abroad.

If I do that technically I'm complying with all the rules and my green card should be safe while also not reseting my clock for citizenship. But the USCIS seems to be a bit vague on what would happen if I did that.

That's because the CBP officer who evaluates your request for entry on a permanent resident visa has the discretion to say that you are "likely" residing elsewhere and "remind"/"advise" you of the requirement to be permanently resident inside the United States in order to keep PR status.

The six month rule is less of a rule and more of a presumption but if a CBP officer sees a series of entry stamps all hovering around that six month mark, the officer can make that note and the next officer might declare that you've abandoned PR status and you'd then have to go through the process overcome that.

I'm not trying to game the system, but these are weird times. I wish USCIS was a bit more flexible during these times to avoid unnecessary travel and let people quarantine with family while maintaining status.

I think it answers a lot of your questions :)

Can you comment on your take? Is it possible to do this, what are the risks, and would you recommend it vs. trying for the H1B lottery?

The answer is yes. Same for E3 (for Australian).

The risk is once your company files I-140 petition (petition for immigrant workers), you might be denied entry if you leave the US. It's hard to prove your non-immigrant intent... So if you have less than a year on your i-94 it's risky (i-140 takes a while these days to process - mine took 1 year). It would take a few more months to get the EAD and advance parole document before you can travel internationally. So consider these factors as you will have to miss visiting Canada in the meantime.

My friend who was on E3 went through this and his i-94 was running out so he was told he might not be able to work while the application is still pending (the company did offer to continue paying him though, which was nice).

H1B lottery is safer, but the chances are low. If you have a committed employer + stable job then I'd go with the adjustment of status route.

It's also interesting that your friend managed to stay in the country despite his i-94 running out. I didn't think that could be done.

This gives me a lot to think about, thanks!

His adjustment of status was pending so there's a grace period (check with your lawyer). He was basically waiting for his EAD/Advance Parole card at that point!

Most people also file an I-765 and I-131 alongside the I-140, I-485 and I-693 forms, and once approved, you'll be issued an EAD/AP combo card which entitles you to work in the US and return to the US on the basis of the pending I-485. This travel and employment eligibility is separate from any previous E-3 or TN status.

Once you file, you no longer have to maintain your previous nonimmigrant visa status, but if you don't, a rejected I-485 would subject you to immediate removal. If you do, you can return to your old status.

[1] https://citizenpath.com/faq/maintaining-status-after-filing-...

Also, once the business set up..what if it generated profit as h1bs are not allowed to get paid by other entities..

My I-140 is approved and my wife has an EAD. Are there any restrictions that would prevent her from opening an LLC and getting paid for her freelance work through it?

What is the likelihood of process simplification? What are some groups that are pushing for concrete, attainable steps to simplify the process?

I had to follow rules as i worked at a Big Tech company. However many folks who worked for smaller sweat shop IT firms which are generally scammy in nature got their green cards as they were given designations of manager or filed under separate priority designations. Big Tech company like mine followed all rules strictly so bending or interpretation was out of question.

It is just the way it is, i do not complain. I understand the need for a more merit based overhaul. So many shades to the story though. I have seen many people getting diversity lottery just by virtue of having a family member in USA. I have seen people from lower populated countries getting green cards much faster and doing simple jobs like working at Walmart without complaining.

I think clear policy is helpful, either it is merit based or it is not. Merit is very difficult to define as well.

AFAIK the diversity lottery is random and doesn't take family members into account.

You have your answer there. There are a lot of Americans who love and welcome immigrants (and I know many of them – 99% of my friends are American), but there are also many who hate immigrants, and of all places, many of these immigrant-haters have found a home at HN. (Open up any HN thread on US visas and immigration, and the level of immigrant-hatred and xenophobia is truly stunning and appalling.)

These Americans who hate immigrants vote. You can guess what party they vote. Their votes are the reason our immigration system is broken beyond measure.

There was a bill, called the "Gang of Eight" bill (or S.744 of the 113th Congress) which would have fixed many issues with our immigration system. It failed to pass in Congress because of Republican obstructionism. It passed the Senate with a super majority, but was blocked by the House despite majority support because of the GOP speaker not allowing a vote on it, in order to pander to the extreme wing of the party. (Also, as a side note, the GOP's House majority was won in 2012 through gerrymandering – the popular vote for the House in 2012 had been for Democrats.)

If you want an answer to why the immigration system is broken – this is pretty much it. There are plenty of people who hate immigrants, and you can have the displeasure of meeting them, and reading their horrifically anti-immigrant comments right here on HN. They hate immigrants and want immigrants out, so we are at the deplorable place that we find ourselves in today.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160128153454/http://www.herita...

I am not sure if that's really the case. Case in point, the Obama administration. They had 8 years to fix this, but they didn't.

Now Obama did do some small changes that were a net positive to the immigrant community (Work Permit for spouses who are waiting for GC, 1 year increase in work permit for students who graduate from US colleges, etc). But all the other bad parts of the system are unchanged.

I'm not sure if you're being facetious here, or if you simply are ignorant of how the U.S. Constitution / government works.

There are two types/levels of federal laws: (1) statutory laws - made by Congress ("U.S.C."/US Code), and (2) regulatory laws ("C.F.R.") - made by the Executive Branch.

For a statutory law to pass in the US, the House + Senate + President has to agree. When one party has control over all 3, it's called a "trifecta". Moreover, in the Senate, you need 60% votes due to the what's called the legislative filibuster.

Democrats had a trifecta only for 2 years (2009 and 2010). During the remaining 6 years that Obama was in office, Republicans blocked practically everything substantive. The Democrats actually did try to pass a small immigration bill (the DREAM Act) during their trifecta, but that bill (S. 2205) got 52-44 votes, and thus failed due to the legislative filibuster. It's extremely difficult to pass statutory laws in the US.

Obama and the Democrats spent put a huge amount of effort trying to fix the immigration system, but they were blocked by Republicans through and through.

> Obama did do some small changes

He actually made a huge number of substantial changes with regard to immigration in our regulatory laws (the CFR). More than any recent President. Obama did everything he could that was within his power (ie within the power granted to him by the Constitution and statutory law).

I do understand that. The thing though is, "trifecta" is difficult in practice and shouldn't really be a barrier to passing laws.

My observation was mainly about fixing and overhauling the immigration system (combating fraud, streamlining it, etc - and not really about increasing or decreasing immigration). I am not sure Republicans were a barrier to such efforts.

This is an illogical sentence. What are you trying to say here. That the US Constitution "shouldn't really be a barrier to passing laws"? Is this a joke? You seem to be utterly unfamiliar with how most constitutional legal systems work. It's not just a Western country. Even countries like India have a similar system. Imagine I go to India and say "the Parliament shouldn't really be a barrier to passing laws". People would laugh at you. You're making a really dumb and nonsensical statement. (And you sound facetious.)

> My observation was mainly about ...

You "observation" was an accusatory statement that the Obama administration "had 8 years to fix this, but they didn't" -- which I pointed out and explained was completely and flat-out wrong.

As I explained in my parent comment, the Obama administration made extensive and substantive changes to the immigration system, within the scope of the Executive Branch's powers. A lot of changes to the CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) affecting immigration, many EOs, memorandas. DACA is a famous example of a positive change they brought about.

More substantive immigration law overhauls are outside the ability of the President to affect. Congress must do it. And Republicans in Congress blocked nearly every bill that was in any way pro-immigrant.

And, no, in the US, you can't say Congress "shouldn't really be a barrier to passing laws". You'll be laughed out the room.

> This is an illogical sentence.

You said Democrats had "trifecta" only two years (2009-10) during the Obama admin. I am assuming you mean they had the executive, house and senate.

I am saying, not controlling all three should not be a barrier to passing laws. You are completely misunderstanding me. I said "trifecta" should not be a barrier because you mentioned Democrats only had it for two years. Does the US constitution say the two chambers AND executive should be controlled by either Republicans or Democrats to enact laws?

> People would laugh at you. You're making a really dumb and nonsensical statement. (And you sound facetious.)

Well, I am glad the people I know would try to understand my point better than just laugh at me or call me dumb :)

> You "observation" was an accusatory statement that the Obama administration "had 8 years to fix this, but they didn't"

And I still stand by it - while supporting the said admin. I did mention they 'made extensive and substantive changes to the immigration system'. However, I still believe there are some changes they could have done (which Republicans would have supported) that would have made the system much better.

One example would be eliminating the per-country limit on employment-based immigrants, which has resulted in 100+ years of wait time for India-born EB2/EB3 aspirants. There's bipartisan support for it, and it might have passed in isolation, but it wasn't high enough of a priority for either party. (Note though: the provision eliminating the per-country limit was included in the S. 744 bill.)

For the most part though, Republicans opposed nearly every bill that Democrats brought up. The likelihood of anything meaningful / highly-impactful / substantive through Congress, in the face of adamant Republican opposition, was unfortunately fairly low.

That, uhh, that doesn't stop them from simply forgetting to tell you when you have a consular interview and leaving you waiting for months pointlessly to receive the date. By the time we heard back from our Senator's legal counsel for advice, we already had the visa in hand, but that is a route of escalation if things go crazy. Anyone who gets stuck like that is advised to talk to the consulate directly or have their lawyer do so.

Overall, for us, the worst thing was the glacial speed things move at. It's funded by the fees paid by applicants, so I don't know what can be done to speed things up, but it's incredibly frustrating to be left in limbo for a long time.

Would the visa ban prevent me from re-entering after October when I receive the H1B? Would it also prevent me from switching jobs before January when it expires?

https://twitter.com/gsiskind/status/1275913510145462272

https://www.wcax.com/2020/07/24/leahy-uscis-furloughs-postpo...

[1] https://peoworldwide.com

http://remote.com/

She's a data scientist and has had numerous interested recruiters call her only to ask if she has a green card. When she states she has an EAD and IS awaiting her Green Card they say that's not sufficient and end the conversation. Is this legal? Seems like discrimination and is extremely frustrating for the both of us.

My wife had the same experience during our green card process when she was on an EAD and a company said they couldn't proceed until she got her green card. Now, I don't think it was on purpose. The person she was talking to was young and, while most Americans know what a green card is, probably very few know what EAD is so they'll just default to the safe answer.

Your wife should probably answer with "I have legal work authorization in the US" and leave it at that. Really, this is what the recruiters should be asking as well, not whether or not she has a green card.

I know you can go down the H1-B, O-1 or Green Card route, but what do you commonly advise?

As a student you're on CPT and OPT. And after you graduate, OPT.

Is there a huge difference?

Amongst myself and a number of friends (whom work in tech), we've observed a similar difficulty with meeting and employing lawyers for either personal- or business-related issues. We all seemed to arrive at the same conclusion that we don't know any lawyers personally, they don't seem to be part of our extended circle of acquaintances, and are difficult to find locally and evaluate their ability to handle whatever the need is, without shelling out a decent sum of money upfront.

Maybe this is unique to us, or maybe others here have experienced this too (please chime in). I suppose what I'm asking is what are good ways to find local lawyers with the right specialization (most of the half-decent recommendation services I've seen online are paid services). Also, where are y'all hiding? Can I buy one of you a beer?

My advice could be to ask around if anybody can recommend any good lawyer, no matter what field he is specialized in. Ask that lawyer if he/she can help you with your questions. If he/she can’t he/she will refer to a colleague that is specialized in the field you are looking for. Lawyers know lawyers :), we network a lot.

Another way could be to try to research the topic you want to get answer to online. Most law firms/lawyers publish informative articles when they have free time for marketing purposes. Contact the lawyer/firm having written that article.

And believe me, if you connect with a lawyer, he’ll come and connect with all your friends who are looking for a lawyer too :).

Yes, you do have to /pay/ for lawyers, they do law stuff as their job, not as a favor for random acquaintances. Basic consultation to establish whether a firm is a fit for you should be fairly low-cost or free.

You are getting some good advice below. But remember that at least half of lawyers are below average. And a lot really really suck.

Often price can be a clue, but not always. We have taken over many projects from high-priced name brand firms that were piles of garbage.

Most if not all of our new clients are referred to us by other people that have worked with us.

Asking any lawyer you know to provide a referral for a different area of law can sometimes work out. But be careful if they are referring you to another attorney in their own firm because they may be financially incentivized to do so.

Also, most referral services do not consider the competency or quality of the referred attorneys. Usually, attorneys who sign up to those services simply provide a list of their practice areas/interests and maybe billing rate. Then the referral services simply round-robin their way through the specialty lists.

Another thing to keep in mind is that most good lawyers will be busy, usually very busy.

So what you are asking for is simply impossible, there is no silver bullet.

Presently doing two legal things that involve legal experts.

So anyway, from my experience:

No, you can’t buy your lawyer a beer. Your lawyer is not your friend.

No lawyer wants to give you anything resembling advice, or even commentary lest it be construed as advice, for free, out of contract, over a beer.

> without shelling out a decent sum of money upfront.

You’ve answered your own question.

We don’t ask doctors and dentists to “come round for a beer wink wink nudge nudge”, so stop asking lawyers and tech people for free advice too.

I've been on an H1B for 4 years now and have had Greencard filed a few yrs ago. I've been working for almost 5 years and want to take a longer time off, two or three months sabbatical/unpaid leave.

I would still like to stay in US (my parents live here). Is this possible? Will I lose my visa or greencard status?

I was fortunate to be born as a citizen in the US so I don't know how to navigate such issues. As I understand it, it is a minefield for a company to hire undocumented workers, even if they are highly skilled workers. Are undocumented individuals allowed to start companies? Does YC have a stance on this from an investment perspective?

That permit allows someone to live and work in the country. Anyone can hire her as long as she has it.

As far as starting a company: that's an interesting question. That's not an employment issue. My guess is that even people without work permits could found a company, as foreigners are always allowed to hold property in the US. But having done so, I guess it would be possible to prohibit the founder from working for their US company from within the borders? Would love to hear the poster chime in on this.

Not sure I have much to add. Some of my closest friends have been immigrants and refugees with an unbelievable amount of courage in the face of a red-tape system.

This friend is many years younger to me (I'm enrolled in the university as an adult working-professional student). Generally, given her ability to earn based on her skills, I am simply trying to understand what opportunities are available to people in her situation.

My understanding was that they said that the current administration did have the power to end DACA, but that the justification they gave for doing so (that DACA was illegal) was incorrect, so it could not be ended until they gave a proper justification for it.

Ruiling:

>Today Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by the court’s four more liberal justices, agreed with the challengers that the decision to terminate DACA violated the APA. Before they could reach that key issue in the case, however, they had to dispose of a threshold question: whether courts have the power to review the decision to end DACA in the first place.

>Roberts reiterated that the court was not deciding “whether DACA or its rescission are sound policies.” Instead, he stressed, the court addressed “only whether the agency complied with the procedural requirement that it provide a reasoned explanation for its action” – which, in the majority’s view, it did not.

Loosely: any president can undo any executive action by a previous president, but you can't chuck a law simply because you don't want immigrants in the country.

Really all the Trump administration needs to do is write up a reasonable plan for rolling this back and they can do it.

> Roberts then went on to the second step in the court’s inquiry. The Duke memorandum, he observed, concluded that DACA was illegal and should be terminated because it made DACA recipients eligible for benefits such as Social Security, Medicare and the ability to work legally in the United States. Roberts declined to weigh in on whether the Trump administration was correct in concluding that DACA was illegal

I suppose we are in limbo here

Before pandemic, in July 2019, I got my F1 visa. In September 2019, I went to the airport to fly to US, but the airline officer said your visa got revoked! I resubmit my second visa application in September which is still under administrative process after about 1 year. What can I do?

My case is related to this news:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/14/iranian-stud...

As an immigration lawyer, you undoubtedly see the complexity and huge volume of paperwork needed for even talented and skilled immigrants to this country. They approach a book sized application.

Do you ever find it inequitable or frustrating, that some classes of immmigrants are by comparison, basically waved through? What things about the immigration / visa system would you recommend immediately be changed or fixed to improve our situation?

- Could I still get a J-1 for Winter 2021? - Are there any other avenues for Canadians to work for a US company (possibly remotely) without a visa (if visas are still suspended)?

edit: I really shouldn't have said "education requirement" - it's a job categorization, so education is only supporting evidence that your job meets the criteria.

However the TN is a status for restricted NAFTA (USMCA) professional categories, and typically requires proof of qualifications (in this case, education). I could be wrong, but an undergrad intern typically does not fit these categories. I'm surprised people have used it for co-op.

People have definitely used this for even undergrad co-op, but I don't know how widespread. Obviously more easily applicable for grad students.

Part of the issue is that as you note the admissibility criteria is decided by the border agent you randomly see. So you provide evidence of education and fit for a TN category, but they decide if you qualify, and it's unclear how much guidance they have in this. Appeal process is mostly only through the same agent.

NB: my experience in this area is a bit out of date, things may have changed.

Europe screws tech workers.

Would you trade better politics, as you perceive, for millions of dollars less in retirement when considering compounding investments?

In fact, Europeans can earn substantially more money by moving to the UK or Switzerland even. EU countries are some of the worst places to be for a talented software engineer.

New graduates in the US often earn more than senior-level developers in the EU.

The same job in the US would likely pay me $115k USD.

Certainly, you're not talking about working in the Bay Area because a $115K total compensation is borderline impossible to live on anywhere between SF and SJ.

Your thinking could be right, however I would say it depends heavily on where you're living now and where you plan on moving to. 70K CAD in Ottawa or Montreal is going to get you infinitely further than 115K USD in SF or SJ. You'd probably need closer to 200K in SF to match that lifestyle.

Instead of comparing your $70K CAD salary at home by converting to $52K USD at market exchange rates, you should adjust it via purchasing power parity (as you are looking to figure out how far your new pay would take you in your new home relative to what you have now -- not make a purchase in the other country with foreign money). $70K CAD, adjusted for PPP is $75K USD. If you did the same notional conversion for $115K USD in San Francisco (where real estate is 7X the national average price per square foot) you'd probably wind up at $50K.

Now if you're planning to save money and send it home, that's different.

People raise families on less than that. If this person is single, they can certainly live very comfortably in the Peninsula.

Let's break it down:

- 70K in Ontario per year is $4400CAD per month after tax.

- A two bedroom apartment in the Glebe in Ottawa (~Mission type vibe) is about $1800-2000 per month on Zumper, leaving you with $2200-2400 after tax.

On the other hand:

- 115K in California is $6400USD per month after tax.

- A two bedroom apartment in the Mission is $3800-4500 per month on Hotpads in the heart of COVID after a 10% y/y drop, leaving you with as little as $1900-2600 per month after tax.

Even before you factor in that everything is more expensive in San Francisco, you'll see quite quickly that you're better off taking a 70K/yr CAD Ottawa salary than a 115K/yr San Francisco salary. You'll have a better lifestyle and you'll probably be happier too.

The math changes when you make a lot of money, I suppose, or if you're going to send it back, but otherwise, it's by no means sufficient to use the exchange rate as a proxy for your lifestyle (50K vs. 115K).

[edit] Not to mention the definition of a low-income household in the Bay Area is $117,000 so, while close, $115,000 is actually considered low income. [1] On the other hand, the definition of a low income household in Ottawa is $56,000 CAD, so you'd actually be 25% over the threshold.

[1] https://fortune.com/2018/06/27/bay-area-six-figures-housing-...

I moved from Canada and went from $90k CAD to $180k USD. Even with the high cost of rent, I can save more here than what my take home pay was in Canada. I'll admit though that I don't have kids and I don't have health conditions. That would change the equation a lot.

Additionally, the ceiling is higher here. I felt like I was approaching the ceiling in Canada unless I wanted to move to Toronto.

What matters isn’t how much you’re making but how far it will take you in the new home you’re considering as compared to how far your current salary will take you in your current home. Of course, if you’re making $500K-600K as a staff engineer in the Bay Area there’s a different conversation to be had.

The US offers much better opportunities and compensation. And as a upper-middle class worker, healthcare isn't really any issue.

Besides, you guys are generating herdv immunity as fast as possible. Time it right and moving to the US could greatly decrease your chances of being infected.

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/from-our-experts/early-herd-immu...

Nor am I claiming that California has yet achieved any substantial degree of herd immunity. Just that projecting current rates forward I think you will before I actually end up moving there (it helps that I have a lot of flexibility).

That said, the 70% figure in your article is too high. Research [1] and experience in Sweden [2] suggests that there are substantial benefits at just 40%.

[1] https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/06/22/scie...

[2] https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=sv&tl=en&u=https%3...

However I need to get a SSN and so far from the SSA website they are issued only through a physical appointment. I have called up a few SSA offices and they all told me they are closed right now and don’t take any appointments. They will let me know when they start scheduling appointments and at that point I will have to go to their office and attend the interview physically.

My questions are:

1) assuming the border remains closed for a while and I have no means of going there while the current EO is in force, is there an alternative way of getting SSN you know of?

2) If it comes to that and there is no way of getting SSN without going there physically - the EO doesn’t impact existing L1Bs but my situation is a bit complex since there was never a stamp in my visa. They just issued I140 and an entry seal in the passport (as is done for all land entries through Canada I suppose). The EO does specifically mention having to have the visa stamp for me to be allowed to enter. How strict do you think the enforcement is going to be and do you think I will be allowed to enter if I attempt when they schedule the interview for SSN? Are the CBP officers enforcing the EO as verbatim or there is room for interpretation for someone who already has L1B but no visa stamps?

I’m a highly skilled engineer and reasonably accomplished entrepreneur (founder of a VC-backed startup that is still alive but hasn’t taken off, and I no longer work there). I’m a natural born citizen of Sweden and I live there.

I’d like to emigrate to the US, with citizenship as the goal. I can spend a bit of money on it, but I’m not wealthy. What’s my best bet? What would you say is the probability of success?

Thanks in advance,

Björn

Since my goal is US citizenship and I’m in-between projects right now I’m open both to working for my own company or for another company.

I have a master’s degree in engineering physics. I’ve had senior leadership roles in two VC-backed startups (one of which I founded and was CEO of). I’ve been covered in the press, by regional newspapers and national tech media. I’ve spoken at a number of tech/telecom conferences. I’m the inventor on a handful of patents.

Does that help narrow down other paths?

Lawyers told me that my degree does not qualify as a BSc, even after I send them the certificate that proves it does. Apparently, anything under five years is not considered a BSc. They also told me that my 15+ years of experience have little value, as they will only consider the five most recent.

What is the position of the USCIS about this?

Or Google those terms to find a provider (or email me, for the same result), and buy it yourself (price starts at $110; just expense it later). If they like your degree, you'll get like a 2-3 page wall of text that should usually be sufficient for USCIS. Take that to your lawyers, and make them include it in your application. I'm surprised they didn't get one already for your L-1B.

3 years B.Sc. can definitely be fine, but maybe it depends on the country/university/courses? (In my case it didn't matter; I also have an M.Sc. But they certify what you give them, not just the highest, and so I know my 3 year B.Sc. is ok, at least for the evaluator, don't know about USCIS.). One potential problem is if your subject of study doesn't match exactly (e.g. an EE MSc doing software dev). USCIS has been stricter in those cases in past years afaik.

Also, it's more risky, but x% of a degree + y years progressive experience can sometimes be summed up and then in total considered equivalent to the degree. (Progressive means you can show your job continuously became harder. y years of beginner level wouldn't count. Any work that doesn't directly relate doesn't count either.)

IANAL

(You may have already done this; I couldn't tell from your post. "certificate that proves it does" could refer either to a (useless) piece of paper by your university, or an independent academic equivalence evaluation. So posting this just in case you don't have the latter one yet.)

What should I do in response to the effects?

What should I fill in if there is a form that asks about visa?

What should I say when recruiters or companies ask about visa during our call?

Thanks for doing this AMA Peter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H1b1

Which reputable links or documents do you send or show when you tell them that it is cheap and quick to get the H1B1?

What did you use to find out that the H1B1 is not subject to the latest proclamation/ban?

I hold a GC and have been working outside the US on reentry permit. The latter has already been renewed once, expiring again in Q1 2021. Two questions:

1. Do you anticipate any impact of changing policies on people holding GCs but working outside?

2. What would be the best time to apply for a third extension of the reentry permit, given the pandemic situation.

Thanks.

If you are or have been a technology startup employee, founder, or investor, can you take a few minutes to complete this survey: https://lnkd.in/gSuxfUJ ?

Your answers will help produce a report about the role of immigrants in the tech startup ecosystem.

It matters to me, because over the past 15 years, I have been under a bunch of different visas (J1, F1, H-1B). I believe that I, like many other immigrants in the technology startup world, helped create thousands of jobs in the US. I want to get data to show it and ultimately share around.

(And sorry if it's a bit off topic)

I wanted to move back to Canada until we're back at the office so I can be closer to my family as it's been incredibly lonely working here in isolation, however my employer is saying I can only visit for up to 6 weeks. I'm just wondering what grounds do they have for enforcing this? And also, what is the worst that can happen if I just stayed in Canada for a few months?

If so, what are the requirements and the chances. Note, that worker is not the citizen of a country of which there would be a ton of applications from (I think that matters)

Curious what happens when someone with an H1B (say greater than 3 years used but less than 6 post-extension) leaves the US to go back to their home country? If that person is interested in working in the US again as an H1B, do they need to be subject to the lottery again or are they exempt since they were already "approved" for an H1B?

I heard it has something to do with the time when you re-file to go back? I'm specifically curious about the case when the person decides to go back after a few years (after when the H1B would have expired).

Canadian here btw.

My question is, has the difficulty of getting O-1 visas gone up significantly in the past year or so?

1- My wife wants to be able to work shortly and my understanding is that she won't be able to on an H4 until my I-494 is approved). Is it feasible for her to do a J1 if an employer is willing? Are there other options?

2- I'm working on getting the nanny a B2-domestic, but consulates around the world are closed which puts a very long delay on the process. Is it possible to bring the nanny on a tourist/business B1/B2 and do the change within the us? Are there other options?

My understanding is that we can get the B-1 visa for domestic employee outside the united states. Some counsel has told me that entering the US with the tourist /Business B1/B2 is could be risky.

Do you work on the B1 nanny cases or have a referral of a lawyer to work with such a case? I'm interested in hiring counsel to make it happen.

The recruiter told me I will start working remotely and then after covid move to the us, what are my options? I have been working as a software engineer in Mexico for two years. I know the TN visa from nafta may be an option for me but I am not very informed, could you help me?

Specifically do you think whether there a risk of losing a green card or N-400 being denied on those grounds for a person that has been staying outside the US (in different countries) for 5-7 months per year for the past 3 years, but not exceeding 6 months at any time and maintaining ties to the US?

Thank you!

Do American companies have to do anything special immigration-wise for an employee to work from Canada (either temporarily or permanent)? Or is it just a matter of me moving back to Canada and invoicing the company as a sole proprietor (contractor)? Is that a simple solution I could pitch my company?

I thought there would be major accounting/tax headache for my company to have employees in Canada, although it wouldn't be an immigration issue for me. If it was as easy as flipping a switch, I'd make the move. I also have another US job offer that is going through the same issue (RFE), so I'm sensing a pattern here.

Planning to travel to be back in (flying, commercial), to reduce uncertainty and be ready for an eventual return to office, although no specific date has been given by the employer but I continue to work for them remotely.

This is the executive order I am talking about: ttps://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/proclamation-suspending-entry-aliens-present-risk-u-s-labor-market-following-coronavirus-outbreak/

I'd be optimistic about the baseline situation, but given the pandemic, I don't know whether the government would be (a) very slow, allowing the person lots of time to stay while govt makes their call, or (b) unusually efficient AND strict.

(Thanks for helping everyone out on this thread!)