I'm signing off now. I see that there are a number of unanswered questions. I will get to them tomorrow and over the weekend. Thank you everyone. Great questions and comments. I learned a lot.
Hello. I don't have any questions but just wanted to share that I found Peter through one of these threads 9 years ago and his work and advice has been incredibly helpful in ensuring my continued ability to live and work in America through a variety of situations. I highly recommend using his services and listening to his sage advice.
Me and my cofounder are non-US residents and live in Germany. If we get into YC, what would a typical / recommended way to proceed be?
We haven’t established a company in Germany yet, we want to be strategic and make what’s best to succeed.
From what I know we can do the batch with our current tourist visa, so I’d like to know more about the post batch options. Being US based or Germany based is an option for us.
That's right, a lot of international founders participate in the batch as business visitors, whether under ESTA or a B-1 visa. The most common post-batch work authorization options are the country-specific visas (for those from Australia, Canada, Chile, Mexico, and Singapore), the O-1, and the E-2. If based abroad and only coming to the U.S. for investor meetings and the like, then you could continue as a business visitor but practically this can become a problem if traveling to the U.S. regularly; at some point CBP will push back.
Also, attend a few free AMCHAM webinars to get the details on foreign ownership rules.
Depending on how large your project becomes, some people may just use a brokerage service to localize the Merchant on Record (MoR) like withreach.com for online retailers. However, only US domestic corporations can mitigate liability on sold goods/services etc. Keep aware of the IRS grace thresholds on sales, as even if you owe $0 in federal and state taxes... it can still become a $8k fine for forgetting to file a return in the US.
Are you aware of the US Green Card lottery? There are very few people who apply from Germany, so you can also try that route. You have a surprisingly good chance to win it. Also, you are not forced to accept it if you win the lottery -- you can decide.
True, however many countries have no option to apply at all (e.g. Canada).
And while the odds are low, I believe you can apply year after year. And the biggest benefit is that you basically get a green card, and skip the usual process of H1-B, to labor cert, to I-140/485, which can be a 3-5 year process.
Although we have a lot of AI clients, I've been slow to take advantage of AI but it's starting to transform our practice, helping with the drafting of letters of recommendation and our overall argument. So we're able to prepare applications much faster.
I run a coffee meetup in Buffalo, NY. Around graduation season we get a lot of international students who come and are looking for jobs but are worried about visa issues. What are the resources about what their actual situation is, and how I can help connect them to smaller companies who might not know how to sponsor students?
I'd recommend inviting a local immigration attorney to speak to the group and/or be available to answer questions because there's no one great resource.
This is my (not Peter's) advice for Canadians/Mexicans for TN, Australians for E-3, and seems to apply for Singaporeans/Chileans for H-1B1: If it is an automated system, just put no. That may be an automatic filter. There will be time to talk to a human and say "all we need is X/Y/Z" where X/Y/Z is something the hiring manager can do without involving a lawyer. If a human is asking you, then just say "Yes. I need a visa but I can walk you through the process. No lawyer needed."
Hi, I'm Australian and have applied a few times for us based tech roles and ticked 'require sponsorship'. I never really got far with my research - are you saying that the e3 is an automated process and I can get away with ticking 'do not need sponsorship'?
I’m Australian and have been living in the US for the last 7 years, working for the same employer the whole time. I was originally on an E3 which was renewed twice, before transferring to a H1b and finally a greencard.
The E3 is not “automated” in the sense that some interactions with CBP are. You have to attend an interview at a consulate outside the US (my first was in Sydney, renewals were all in London) and while it’s not really stressful or has a high rejection rate it’s not something I’d personally risk without a lawyer having prepared the paperwork.
As for how I communicated this when applying for jobs, I always selected that I needed sponsorship and then the first sentence in my cover letter explained that I’m eligible for an E3. I interviewed with probably 100 companies back then and only one of them that I got to a first phone screen with cared about the visa thing and it was because they wanted to fill the headcount asap. Once companies get to a certain size they are either ok with sponsorship for all roles or not ok for any, and it’s just something that gets handed off to legal after a hiring decision is made. I wouldn’t worry about the companies that automatically cull your application based on needing sponsorship.
most impt thing to note is that while you do still need a visa sponsor, it is a LOT easier and cheaper for you and yes ive had a job where i paid for my own visa lawyer, and only needed simple docs from the company (which was ~10 people at the time if that helps). didnt turn out to be a GREAT job ofc but thats separate.
dont ask me how to get a job in the us from singapore tho. if ur applying thru the "front door" as u seem to be doing, yes its harder. lots more back door options but you'll have to network well to do it (i recommend https://swyx.io/LIP)
Not Peter Roberts nor a lawyer, but: Why don't you just say "I'm Singaporean, so I'm not sure I would need to apply", and give a link to some article which describes the special visa eligibility for Singaporeans? Also note that H-1B1 is just one kind of visa, and there are many others - for which you likely would need to apply.
It's not fine to say No because even though you might qualify for the H-1B1 visa, this requires employer sponsorship; the H-1B1 visa is to work for a specific employer.
What options are available for an EU national who wants to start a U.S.-based company and relocate there but doesn’t have the capital required for an E-2 visa?
Let’s assume they start a U.S. company while staying in the EU, and the company is generating significant revenue. From what I understand, the E-2 visa requires the investment to come from the entrepreneur’s personal funds. While they could pay out dividends and reinvest them to meet this requirement, this feels like an odd hack (it might also take much longer depending on when the financial year ends). Is there a more straightforward way for EU citizens to move to the U.S., given they have a successful U.S.-based startup? How is this done in practice?
The E-2 requires that the money be from a company or individual of the same nationality as the E-2 applicant; it also can come from the E-2 applicant himself or herself. Revenue generated by the U.S. company doesn't count unless the revenue then were given in the form of profits or dividends to the E-2 applicant and reinvested into the U.S. company. The other option is the E-1 treaty trader visa, which doesn't require any minimum investment but instead requires the existence of substantial trade between the U.S. and the E-2 applicant's country of nationality so this is usually an option for more mature companies. So, the O-1 is probably the better option because it's possible to get an O-1 as a founder (of your own company) and there's no minimum investment or business activity requirement.
Historically, startups have hired foreign "employees" as contractors to simplify paperwork.
How are "false freelancer" laws, e.g. in Spain, affecting the market? Do you generally advise American early-stage startups startups to hire foreigners as contractors, or to immediately use a PEO?
We don't get involved in that. We get involved when a company has identified a foreign national whom it would like to employ in the U.S., whether the foreign national is inside the U.S. or outside, and try to develop an immigration solution. But if the foreign national is outside, we let U.S. employers know that the foreign national can be employed by the U.S. company without a U.S. work visa whether as an employee or contractor if the foreign national works while outside the U.S. By necessity, this is what many employers do because there's no U.S. work visa option available.
One idea to replace the H1-B lottery that I've seen on HN is to sort the applications by salary and let in the top XX highest paid.
Do you have any thoughts on that? Is this one of those "why don't they just..." type of ideas that people with first hand knowledge know is majorly flawed?
I just don't see how the value - from a benefit to the U.S. economy perspective - is tied to salary so that doesn't make sense to me as a line to draw. If the H-1B program were to be limited in any way (which is not something I necessarily agree with), one option is to list occupations that are in short supply each year and to prioritize those. Many countries do this.
To my eye, there is zero rationality in the process.
As far as I can see, the and the only effect of the visa programme is that there is a limited number of visas, and so this acts to prevent businesses from hiring the people they want to hire, and that's not freedom; and in the process of doing so, causing untold disruption to lives and businesses and direct and indirect costs to businesses, individuals and economy as a whole.
Perfectly said. It's so insane that most people don't understand how poorly designed the system is and how much unintended negative consequences it engenders.
But ironically it's also the only thing that prevents the number of international students from truly exploding. It's already a travesty that many big name public universities have more people from Shanghai or Mumbai than the next town over. Universities are behaving like corporations in trying to maximize revenue
Because universities have a duty first and foremost to their community. That is the citizens of their country and increasing duty to those local to them in their country.
The United States is not an economic zone that belongs to the world in short.
I suspect that the real problem with prioritizing by pay is that it shows that a lot of employers are using H1-B workers to put downward pressure on wages.
Wasn't Trump's proposal few years ago "95th percentile salary for their profession"? So you still have room for farmers and scientists provided that they are exceptional (or at least exceptionally well paid) farmers and scientists.
Who defines “profession” though? Is “farmer” all encompassing, or is “chicken farmer” different from “cattle farmer”? Is “battery chicken farmer” different to “free range chicken farmer”? Do I need to be top 5% US-wide or just the city/state I would be hired in?
I don't disagree there's a lot of complications in the actual implementation, but this approach is a better-than-status-quo way to achieve some fairness IMO. Currently the US Dept of Labor has a system of determining the fair wage that should be paid to a certain job description at a certain geographic location. In the green card process this is called "prevailing wage determination". Why not use it for H1b too?
This is not ideal, because within the same occupation, not every industry can afford paying the same salaries. Such policy would disproportionally favor high margin companies: adtech, tobacco, oil, finance, ... Arguably not the ones you should help get access to top engineering talent.
If Indian IT consultancies abuse the system, maybe the US should try to understand why there's such amount of unmet demand for cheap IT labor that cannot be offshored.
Doesn't salary at least set a floor on what a company thinks that employee is going to add in value? They wouldn't spend dollars on salary to get dimes of extra revenue.
I would also argue that prioritizing the highest paid jobs makes displacement of US workers less likely. It would raise the bar for everyone.
US residency and citizenship is in extremely high demand, so whatever immigration system is put in place will ultimately be gamed. Creating a visa category that is solely based on salary would be attractive to some cohort of people who want to live in the US regardless of the costs.
We saw similar things with previous "investor visas" where there was no intention to start a business and the USCIS had to stop issuing them for many years because of the pervasive fraud on both sides of the equation. I can guarantee that some creative lawyer out there was already thinking about how to game the US "startup visa" when that was proposed a few years back.
A salary-based requirement is a lot less easy to game. After all salaries are reported to the IRS on W-2s. Any fraud in the amount of salary can be easily detected without sophisticated investigation.
The only difficulty I see is that salary isn't necessarily proportional to a person's usefulness to the economy or the country. A person can start a company and pay himself a million dollars a year while the person and the company does nothing at all. Sure the IRS gets to collect a bunch, but at that point we might as well create a class of visas that are sold in an auction.
Salary based requirements are the easiest to game. Create shell company, inject enough cash to cover salaries, hire people who want to live in the US and charge them a margin on the cash they gave you. Lots of people will happily pay the IRS taxes on a phony salary for the option to live in the US. Far easier than gaming an H1B or even an E3 which requires an LCA.
If you sorted H1B applications by salary and only let in the top XX highest paid, then the allocation would simply skew heavily towards tech in Silicon Valley, TX, WA, MA and finance in NYC, and almost none would be allocated to Kansas, Alabama, Mississippi, etc., and not much in lower-paid sectors. And if you only compared to median wages by state (not county, or metro area), then lower cost-of-living areas like Folsom CA would get hugely penalized for being stuck in the same bucket as SF/SV. (Also by the way now employers would have to compete against each other on raw salary, not stock grants, so you're removing the incentive component for early-stage startups, and raising their effective tax rate, which breaks how they're set up.) Arguably instead H1B should enforce some reasonable minimum salary, based on metro area. (don't confuse that with minimum wage).
So if you want to reform things you need to construct something less simplistic which can't easily be gamed. (What you're describing is like Canada's Provincial Nominee Program, which is ~35% of their economic admissions, but it grants permanent residence, not just a work visa.)
Anyway a less-discussed backstop solution to prevent abuse in H1B is to shorten (legislate) the maximum time to acquire (employment-based) Green Card - it originally used to be <6mths, now it can easily be 10+ years (from the date the employee first arrived on F1/H1B/L1, not the date the GC petition was finally raised, which can itself be 5+ years after that if the employer drags things out, which happens).
I was in the USA on H1-B for 3.5 years and moved to India in 2019. My employer recently applied for my H1B, but it got rejected stating that I'm subject to the fiscal year cap (“lottery”). The company lawyers have turned the case around and re-filed it because I've had H1b in the past and didn't use my full quota of 6 years and should be cap-exempt now. Have you seen this happen before? Does USCIS typically correct itself when it makes a mistake in a reasonable time? (fwiw, my case is filed as premium)
What are considered best practices for a German/EU citizen to start a startup in the US? What would be the process to found a company and to move to the US to work for your own company be like? Or would it be better to found it Germany and move it to the US at a later point (after PMF for example)?
There are multiple options to working for your own company in the U.S. The most common paths are the O-1, the L-1, and the E-2 and E-1 visa. Creating a company in Germany first might open up a path to an L-1 visa but that's the only relative advantage to opening a company in Germany first. The E-1 and the E-2 require that the U.S. company be at last 50% German owned and that there be a substantial investment of German money into the U.S. company or substantial trade between the U.S. and Germany via the U.S. company. The O-1 is based your own personal achievements. If you can have German invested into the U.S. company (whether from you or others or both), which generally means at last $100k, then the E-2 is a very good and easy option and relative to the O-1, allows spouses to work.
There are other requirements, such as evidence of not only the investment but the expenditure of the funds by the U.S. company on business expenses and a good business plan, but these are not onerous requirements. The challenge sometimes is the expenditure of the funds because a substantial amount needs to have been spent before applying for the E-2 visa and sometimes it can be hard to spend that money.
Hi I wonder how valuable patents are for EB/O visas? I have worked 10+ in a global tech company, through which I am named on about 20 US patents. I don't have external visibility except for through those patents.
How are patents judged when it comes to these visas? Are they enough to prove what needs to be proven?
Patents are just the starting point of the analysis because patents in and of themselves don't say anything about impact or significance so the next step is to try to understand the impact/significance of the patents through usage and citations, for example.
I'm a non-American Software Engineer, living outside the US. Me and my girlfriend (who's an American citizen) are seriously considering marrying and moving together next year.
Any advice or anything you recommend reading? Also, how long it typically would take until I was able to legally have a job in the US, once I move?
I have a tourist visa and traveled to the States countless times. If I go there with the intent of getting married, do I need a special visa or not, considering I can already enter legally?
This is complicated so it's important to speak with an immigration attorney before you take any steps. The better option is to apply from within the U.S. but doing this while in the U.S. as a tourist is problematic. The other path, through a U.S. Consulate abroad, raises no legal concerns but can take a very long time (compared to a U.S. based application).
A work around would be to get some type of work visa (a challenge itself) and then once in the U.S. on this visa, apply for a green card based on marriage.
Yes, for example I married my partner who was on an F1 visa, which is a non-immigrant visa, and we were able to easily adjust his status to the GC (this is faster than the K1 process)
That’s useful to know. One difference for my situation is I’d like the H1B1 holder to be able to continue working during the application, but I have heard mixed information on how feasible that is. The H1B1 needs to be renewed quite frequently but may not be renewable while you have an adjustment pending.
There are potential issues with being in H-1B1 status and applying for a green card but they revolve more around timing - so, for example, if you entered the U.S. on an H-1B1 visa (as opposed to H-1B), which is not a dual-intent visa, then you would need to wait some unspecified period of time before applying for a green card to avoid being "charged" with immigration fraud at the time of your entry in H-1B1 status. Also, after filing your green card application, while you could continue working on your H-1B1 visa, you wouldn't be able to travel internationally on it and you wouldn't be able to travel in general for an extended period of time unless you had a family emergency abroad.
We went through the Fiance Visa program and it wasn't a big deal, but the foreign one of us was Canadian, which is on the we like that country list, which probably helped a lot.
You have to follow special rules for the fiance visa program, and most all the paperwork happens before you get married.
The big thing I remember(it's been decades now), there was a fee we had to pay at one of the consulates somewhere, and they gave us 2 receipts, a big fancy full page one and the tiny cash register receipt. Way afterwards they made us prove we paid the fee. They wanted the tiny cash register receipt, not the fancy full page one. Make sure you keep literally everything , you have no idea what might be important later on.
I'm not saying the fiance visa is right for you in your situation, just mentioning it in case you are not aware.
> I go there with the intent of getting married, do I need a special visa or not, considering I can already enter legally?
Yes, you absolutely need a visa (specifically the K1). Entering the US with the intent to get married without it is immigration fraud!
I've been through this process myself and I can tell you that it's quite the lengthy process and there's financial requirements and many checks along the way.
For me it was about 18 months from start of K1 application to issuance (delayed due to COVID) and then about 6 month wait on employment authorization (and greencard about 6 months later).
These times could be much longer if you're not from a western country or mess up the paperwork along the way (easy to do, there's quite a lot of stuff both partners need to file).
Just letting you know so you can start the process early.
There's several forums online for people going through such a process with a lot of resources, I'd suggest looking there for other's experiences.
> Yes, you absolutely need a visa (specifically the K1). Entering the US with the intent to get married without it is immigration fraud!
While this is theoretically true, the reality is that thousands (tens of thousands?) of people do it every year successfully. And it's hardly surprising, especially under a pro-immigrant administration like Biden's. I doubt strictly enforcing previous non-immigrant intent in family-based green card applications is anyone's priority.
I'm not advocating people do it. I just think there's a strange dynamic in immigration conversations online where a lot of people talk as if theory and reality are exactly the same. They're not. The reality is that people are constantly engaging in various immigration violations that are overlooked/undeclared/ignored/etc.
> While this is theoretically true, the reality is that thousands (tens of thousands?) of people do it every year successfully.
You are correct, but if you do it on a tourist visa, you can expect to wait well over a year for employment authorization, which is very difficult on a relationship.
Not to mention you always risk getting rejected (particularly if you posted your intention online) and then being essentially banned from entering the US.
For two grown adults with careers, it makes no sense to risk it, just take one of many legal routes (K-1, work visa, getting married outside of the US and then applying for a greencard, etc).
I was accepted into a postdoc program and have an H1-B that was approved by the USCIS with no issues, but it was put in administrative processing by the embassy.
It's been in administrative processing for almost a year with zero follow up communication, and the council of my employer doesn't know or is unwilling how to get an update on this process. Is there anything that can be done to move it along?
This is your visa application so you don't need to wait on the school or its counsel to act. You can ask the Congressional representative in the area where you will live in the U.S. to make an inquiry with the Consulate. This is done all the time although it often doesn't make a difference, unfortunately. Where were you born, where have you traveled, and what's the focus of your post-doc?
Hi Peter, I’m an employee at big tech in an L1 VISA in the US. I’d like to know what happens if I get laid-off. Will I have a chance of finding another job. How much time will I have before leaving the country?
I’ve heard I can get a green card via significant US investment. How much does that requires? Can I stay in the US while the process is ongoing?
Back when I was working on an L1, I continually lobbied my employer to apply for an H1B for me to give me more options in the event of losing a job, or even just the ability to change employer at all really. This is one of the most significant downsides of the L1 visa IMO, the options are comparatively limited/difficult if you do lose your job. Its biggest plus over the H1 is of course no lottery though, which is why employers that can use the L1 like it etc.
As I understand it, your employer can apply for the H1B lottery every year for you while still on the L1. Some companies will do this, eventually I did get the H1B I wanted back then. My colleagues on L1 all did the same thing too.
Regarding your first question, you would get a 60-day grace period following the end of your employment (limited, however, by your I-94 expiration date). During this 60-day period, you could remain in the U.S. and apply to change your status to another visa classification before the end of the 60-day period, such as to another work visa (if one is available) or a visitor visa. Regarding your second question, you are referring to an EB5 green card. That is too convoluted to explain here. If you are interested, you should consult with someone who specializes in EB5 green cards.
My U.S. citizen father applied for a green card for me as his over-18-year-old child, and the process was moving forward. However, during the sponsorship documents submission phase, I got married and updated the marital status question accordingly. After that, the process was stopped. What happens now, and what can be done?
While you were unmarried, you were either an immediate relative if under age 21, or family preference F1 if 21 or older. Because you married, you are now in the family preference F3 category, which has a much larger backlog and a much longer wait.
You should have considered the immigration consequences before you got married. The only thing that can change your situation is if your marriage ends in death or divorce. Otherwise you must wait.
9 FAM 502.2-3(D)
> a. (U) Immediate Relative Converts to Third Preference: If the child of a U.S. citizen is the beneficiary of an IR petition, the petition automatically converts to a third preference petition if the child marries. The priority date of the third preference petition is the filing date of the immediate relative petition.
> b. (U) First Preference Converts to Third Preference: If the unmarried son or daughter of a U.S. citizen marries before the visa is issued, the beneficiary's first preference petition automatically converts to a family third preference petition. Any child(ren) of the beneficiary would then be entitled to derivative third preference status. The priority date remains the same.
> e. (U) Third Preference Converts to First Preference: (1) (U) A third preference petition approved for a married son or daughter of a U.S. citizen who has since become widowed or divorced automatically converts to accord first preference status (or IR status if the beneficiary is under the age of 21). If the petition converts to first preference, the accompanying or following-to-join child(ren) may be granted derivative first preference status. The priority date remains the same.
> You should have considered the immigration consequences before you got married.
I may be wrong, but I think immigration consequences were not something any reasonable, normal person would have had any reason to think of. We are normal people, living normal lives. As I say, I may be wrong, but this feels like blaming the victim.
Immigrating into the US is notoriously difficult. There is a ton of demand. The US does not do even a mediocre job of prioritizing this demand, but it feels like the argument “I’m a normal person so I didn’t think about this” is rooted in lala land. If I was trying to immigrate into any other country (let alone the US), I would immediately and primarily think about how marriage might impact the status of my application. It would literally be the first thing I’d think of.
Not saying it’s wrong to get married as you’re trying to immigrate into the most competitive country in the world, but you do assume responsibility that this might impact your application.
US immigration is a strange game: folks who have good attention to detail can DIY and save a good chunk of money. Folks that don't should probably get an immigration lawyer to avoid potential disaster.
OP evidently made an incorrect assumption somewhere: perhaps they thought that they would stay in IR2/F1. Or perhaps they assumed that even if they change to F3, it would be as good as IR2/F1.
Are you an American citizen or ever had a desire to immigrate to another country? Do people fall in love and get married without thinking of the practical consequences? Yes. Do people also not get married to their love because it messes with their immigration? Also yes. Both are reasonable.
As we increasingly live/love/marry across nationalities, being very conscious about immigration rules has to become something “normal people” care about and think about.
Rather than blaming the victim it’s a hard truth. Now, I would personally love for this to be different BUT as long as rules on immigration are what they are in many places of the world, we need to consider it when we move/marry/have kids.
For instance, one important piece of advice to people thinking about studies abroad (especially PhD) is to also consider what their particular opportunities for work and permanent residence is in the place they go to. Chance are after many years in a place, you may meet someone or you may want to stay. If you choose a place (say UK a few years ago) that is unlikely to let you stick around, well you may need to be prepared for disappointment.
Furthermore, unless you live in a country where you clearly have an idea of how to get PR then you always need live with the understanding that you may at any point have to pack up and move. This is a reality, and sucks to take in but is the truth. Nothing worse than building a life some place and then 10 years down the line get rejected during your semi annual “visa renewal”.
It's just an unmitigated disaster. The only non-laughable path is via the EB1 (or marriage to a U.S. citizen or permanent resident). Many Indians who are working for U.S. companies in managerial positions will agree to work abroad for their employer for at least one year and this opens up the EB1C path.
It will likely never be mitigated. There is no economical reason why USCIS has to expedite moving that queue. There is an overwhelming influx of labor and immigrants from the same country in question that even a mass exodus, even if that were to ever happen, will mean nothing.
I'm an Australian citizen running a bootstrapped startup (and would prefer to stay bootstrapped, but would raise if there was no other way of immigrating). What is the best way to immigrate to the US? I have a computer science degree from an Australian university.
E3 is absolutely the best way for Australians in my experience. It's more flexible than a H1B and the process is much simpler. The only downside is there is no simple path to a green card like H1B, but I managed to get one anyway.
You'd need a US entity to apply on your behalf. In my case they never asked about assets to pay the salary but that may be an issue.
All correct. The E-3 visa is the easiest, fastest, and cheapest U.S. visa. But it does require a sponsoring employer. The only downside relative to the H-1B is that an E-3 visa is not a dual intent visa like the H-1B so this needs to be managed if and when the E-3 visa holder is in the green card process.
There must be an employee-employee relationship. Difficult to pull off if you are completely solo but possible for most startups with more than one founder where you are not CEO.
How common is it for companies to skip over a minimally qualified US worker during the PERM labor market test process?
If a minimally qualified US worker is found, are they under a requirement to hire the worker or can they just reapply for PERM later and conduct another labor market test?
Hi Peter, thank you for doing this. I'm a YC Founder, Ex-FAANG who applied for an O1 visa but got a "kitchen sink" RFE (i.e disputing all of my claimed* O1 qualifications). Is withdrawing and re-applying my O1 petition a good idea? Are there any known downsides to doing this? Thanks again!
Disputed qualifications include:
1. YC funding is not an "internationally recognized award"
2. YC membership is not "an association that requires outstanding achievement from its members"
3. Beneficiary's role (CTO) doesn't prove their critical role to the organisation.
4. Previous high renumeration is not evidence of high salary in the field as a whole. Nor is equity in YC company.
Not a laywer. Withdrawing and reapplying after changing the app, or responding to the RFE are both valid options. The only thing that is not useful is appealing a rejection. The appeals rarely work and are a waste of money and time. There was also an executive order about O1 which was supposed to lead to rulemaking that would make O1 and EB1 easier for AI (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-action...). I don't know if anything came of this, but look into whether any rulemaking is happening and apply after a final rule is published, assuming you are doing AI. (Everyone is doing AI, btw).
Agreed. The motion/appeals process takes a long time so it's just not a realistic option for most people. Whether to withdraw and reapply or respond to the RFE will depend on your qualifications (apart from your acceptance into and participation in YC); we've taken both approaches when we've received a kitchen-sink RFE and obtained approvals doing both. The recent guidance focuses on the EB1A but an be applied to the O-1 and has expanded arguments that we can make.
What's the general schema of getting someone a work visa in the US?
My understand is big tech usually tries to see if you're eligible for an O-1, and then they take their chances for H1-B, and then there's also a pathway for bringing in workers that have already worked from you from abroad (for one year).
Wondering if there's other types of Visa that are applicable, and where they slot in in the general algorithm of a US-based employer that wants to get a Visa for one of their workers.
I also recently learned about the EB1 Visa, though that one is not tied to an employer. I'm wondering how it compares to the O1 in ease of access / modalities.
If the individual is employed by a related entity abroad, then large companies would transfer him or her to the U.S. using the blanket L visa, a super fast and easy process. If the individual is not employed by a related entity abroad, then other options must be considered. First, there are easy options if the individual is a citizen of one of five countries with its own visa; these are Australia, Canada, Chile, Mexico, and Singapore. These countries have free trade agreements with the U.S. that give rise to these visas. If the individual is not a citizen of one of these countries but is employed in H-1B status by another company (or previously was employed in H-1B status), then an H-1B change of employer application is usually the best option and an easy one. If the individual is not employed in H-1B status (and never has been), then we look at the O-1. Sometimes the E-1 or E-2 visa is an option but this has very specific and limited requirements regarding the nationality of the company and the individual and regarding the company's trade with U.S. and investment into the U.S. company. It's a great option when it works. The EB1A is a green card path and is a high standard that takes a while.
Hi Peter, I finished my masters degree and I'm from Germany and might like to work in the US. Which Visa would be beat in thia case and any tips to work with US companies to make it happen? Much appreciated
Short of getting a green card, your ability to work in the U.S. will depend on getting a work visa which is based on a job offer from a U.S. employer. For those not from a country with its own visa, the options are the H-1B visa (but this is subject to an annual lottery so not anything that can be relied on), the O-1 visa for people of extraordinary ability (a high standard and a visa that most large companies won't bet on unless the candidate clearly qualifies for an O-1), the E-2 (this would be for German owned companies or subsidiaries in the U.S.), or L-1 (which requires one year of employment outside the U.S. with a related entity - think one year of employment with IBM Berlin and then a quick and easy transfer to IBM U.S.). Of all these, the L-1 is probably the easiest if the global company is large and is willing to transfer employees to the U.S. - and you're willing to work abroad for at least one year.
This is not immigration per se, but how often do you actually see issue with contract requalification?
For context: hiring remotely you don't want to set up a corporate presence in every country, that would be mind-boggingly complex & expensive — so instead you hire people as contractors or use an employer of record (EOR) like Deel to hire people and then you contract Deel.
The one risk with hiring contractors that will basically only work for you (though for sure, the contract should not make this a condition) is that in some jurisdiction is allegedly pretty easy to take these contracts to court and requalify them as employment contracts, putting you on the hook for back taxes and possibly fines.
I'm just wondering how much that stuff happens in practice, and how much of an issue it is when it happens.
Theoretical situation: I'm Canadian, I don't have a degree at all. If I found a startup that is incorporated in the US, but I'm still in Canada and most employees are outside of the US (although not exclusively), is there a "level of success" at which I might be considered for some sort of residency visa in the US? Suppose I wanted to, for example, open a physical office in the US for the already formed startup.
i'm leaving a comment here because i think peter roberts is the OG. there's so many immigration attorney's now all around SF. but i remember peter being there from back in like 2016 when i was looking for attorney's. although i didn't go with him (peter thank you for doing this, and taking a call with me back in the day)
Hello Peter,
I married an american woman and me and my wife are not leaving in the states.
We are in the process ofp registering the kids since we are preparing a plan B.
We didn't got married in my country, but in Thailand.
I was told that in order to get a spouse Visa, I need to start the process in Thailand.
Is this true? Do i need to apply for everything in Thailand just because this is where we got married?
Thank you
I think you will get a better answer if you clarify your situation.
* Are your kids US citizens?
* In what country you do currently live?
> I was told that in order to get a spouse Visa, I need to start the process in Thailand. Is this true? Do i need to apply for everything in Thailand just because this is where we got married? Thank you
This is generally incorrect. For a spouse of a US citizen living abroad, you "start" by filing I-130 and then by completing the NVC paperwork, which can be done either online or through mail. The final stages are generally handled by the overseas consulate where the intending immigrant resides.
Correct. The location of the Consulate interview, the final step, is either country of residence or country of citizenship; it doesn't matter where the marriage occurred.
As green card holder, I crossed border in Detroit, MI over to Canadian side, just to do a 1 hour tour for fun, but coming back, the custom wasn't as quick, they asked me a bunch of questions like why I crossed the border an hour ago, who Detroit as I currently live in New Jersey, it seemed that there was some discrepancies (I could be wrong) that two officers had to look at the computer to finally let me go as the bus driver (they have special border crossing buses) was waiting for me, along with 10+ other U.S. citizens on the same bus.
I didn't want to cause any delay or trouble so I didn't inquire much. But I do wonder, what was the hold up? They did try to ask me how many times I've been to Canada and when was the last time I crossed to Canada. They seemed very interested in the dates I did all that, not sure why.
I thought why they couldn't just look at their video camera that I actually just crossed an hour ago.
Just a guess, but they were possibly trying to figure out if your were couriering something over the border due to the short turnaround and you not living nearby. If you lived in Detroit, or stayed longer in CA, I suspect it would have gone differently.
Thank you so much Peter. I'm eligible for naturalization after 5 years on a greencard. However, amidst the craziness of startup life I missed attending a court hearing for an improper left turn... for quite some time, 1.5 years now and counting. I'm just now sorting it out; the financial/license points penalties are not huge as it was a civil case. However I do at the moment have a suspended license and may even have a bench warrant. All of this will get sorted out: I am only concerned about whether this could impact my chances of a favorable naturalization decision. I have no other legal problems or history. If you could opine on this; and perhaps more generally for other's with similar concerns, I would be tremendously grateful.
It's super unlikely that this would impact your chances of getting naturalized (that is, I doubt any officer would conclude that you lack good moral character because of this). But you shouldn't apply until it's all sorted out.
My wife's I-485 was denied because of an overlooked J1 residency requirement. She has to spend 9 more months in her home country for the residency, and we're looking into waivers. We would prefer not to leave because my current employment requires me to be in the US. Her no objection waiver was denied and now we're trying an exceptional hardship waiver. What are alternatives? Is this a good route to take?
The waiver is the only alternative to satisfying the 2-year home residence requirement but hardship waivers are tough. Do you have an attorney? I could recommend attorneys who focus on such waivers.
A small word of warning: I'm speaking with brutal honesty, extreme language is used (unfortunately I have to, it's the truth). Throwaway for obvious reasons. I tweaked the parameters a bit, it's representative of my case but not my actual case.
I'm going for a CR-1 visa. I married the love of my life a month ago. We knew each other for a year when we married. I thought it'd be fine but I gave it some more thought and I'm a bit worried.
My worries:
* I had suicidal ideation and did visits to a psychiatry center once per week for a month until I was fine enough according to them. I have never physically hurted myself. I never planned it. My issue was that I felt a strong urge to plan it, and I didn't want to cave in which I didn't thanks to the psychiatry center. In retrospect, I realized I was in a really toxic relationship, once that was gone there was no suicidal ideation left.
* I do have an autism diagnosis that I got a few months ago at the age of 36.
* My employment history is checkered. My last employment was almost 2 years and then the tech layoffs hit, so outside of my control (second round of layoffs too).
Good things:
* My education is top notch with high marks, I even published a paper
* No criminal record
* 50000$ in the bank
* Coming from Sweden
* My wife has a stable job for 4 years, no criminal record, university educated, etc. (I don't think there are any issues there)
Will the suicidal ideation episode, autism diagnosis and checkered employment history be an issue for the CR-1 visa when I get my medical?
How do ycombinator signs deal with startup that were accepted but the founder is in another country ? Do they ask to visit us or there are other options.
What are some of the challenges involved with international hiring in a remote environment? I work at a fully remote startup with ~200 employees. We hire from a couple dozen countries but I know there are fairly significant barriers whenever we add a new one. What are some of those challenges? Are they getting more streamlined?
From an immigration standpoint, there are no issues with U.S. companies employing foreign nationals who are working remotely OUTSIDE the U.S.; U.S. immigration doesn't come into play unless and until the individual will be working IN the U.S. For employees working remotely in the U.S., while this needs to be noted and referenced in any immigration application, it doesn't really change the immigration options and paths.
Many Russian citizens who have moved out of Russia are currently being denied B1/B2 visas, regardless of their prior history or any proof of ties to their current country of residence. The rejection rate is around 60%, and I am among those affected under 214(b), despite having held five B1/B2 visas before, with no visa overstays or other issues.
I don't plan to move to the US, but my startup operates in the US market, and it would be beneficial if I could meet customers and investors in person.
I plan to apply again next spring (a year after the denial), and if I’m unsuccessful, I’m considering applying for an O1 visa to be able to visit the US, although I have no intention of staying long-term. Do you think this is a good idea? I’m concerned that after the O1 visa expires, my only option to return might be to apply for another work visa or O1 visa.
What you write is incorrect. Even worse, arguably, is that applications by Russian citizens sometimes just end up in a black hole and never get reviewed. Unfortunately, while applying for an O-1 visa can be a solution, this isn't always the case and O-1 visa applications also can end up in a black hole. In other words, there are no easy solutions for Russian citizens unless they are seeking to travel to the U.S. on government business or possibly seeking to travel to the U.S. to create jobs. But the background security check/security concerns can undermine just about any application unless the Executive branch/State Department is involved and is specifically supporting the visa application.
My B1/B2 visa application has been in administrative processing (221g) for over 8 months. I assume the security checks are in place. Russian citizen, multiple US visits in 15 years. Last time it took 2 months to issue visa. If I seek to travel to the U.S. to create jobs (I own a US company), what visa option should I pursue to maximize my chances of getting approved?
I don't know if it's good or bad news for you, but at least you're pretty lucky to have reached this stage—the majority just get rejected.
From what I know, some people have received their visas after 12-16 months of processing. It will most likely be valid for only one year, though. Eight months is pretty early to expect anything at this point.
Here’s a Serbian-Russian expats visa Telegram group where there’s a US section. You can ask people there about their processing times:
https://t.me/serbia_visas_chat
Similar issues because the background check is the same regardless of the visa being applied for. Again, if you re already in the U.S. and seeking to change your status to H-1B or O-1, this isn't an issue.
Do you have any recommendations on how long one should wait before starting a startup after receiving permanent residence (EB2) in the US?
I've heard rumors that quitting the job that was used to justify the permanent residence too soon can jeopardize either the green card or future naturalization applications. Is this true?
That's really not true. There was some slight truth to this (but really just slight) years ago before the AC21 legislation, which allows those in the green card process to change employers without having to restart their green card process. Again, to be clear, lawyers used to say there were issues leaving soon after getting a green card, but that really was never true and with AC21, there's really no risk. All this being said, it's still good to have a consultation about this to rest easy.
In the USA is there any concept of prior art when considering trademark applications, like there is with patents? If "YCombinator hosting" had been commonly used by businesses, and YC decided to trademark that phrase, would the prior usage be taken into account (and void the trademark application)?
From an immigration standpoint? Only that the immigration options and issues should be fully vetted and understood as early as possible. While there are some minor differences, from an immigration standpoint, there's little difference between the immigration options/path for employment with an established/large company and a startup.
Remote workers are clearly a gray area in immigration law. On the one hand if the worker lives abroad and imports products and related support services to the US, that's clearly not a migrant worker.
On the other hand, if a remote worker is a virtual receptionist for a US business, or if the worker controls machinery remotely that operates in the states, they clearly compete with local labour, and bring cybersecurity issues.
As an attorney with power to interpret and shape case law, do you think there is any grounds to require visas for some types of private remote work, given the current laws? Or would this be a matter that needs to go through congress.
Individuals working outside the U.S., even as employees of U.S. companies, are outside the reach of U.S. immigration law. Now, that doesn't mean that they are outside the reach of all laws, such as those controlling exports or combatting (cyber)terrorism. But immigration law has no say.
Interesting, but couldn't immigration laws have jurisdiction over the US company that employs the outside employees? Especially in the ways that they interact with US Soil and US citizens.
Immigration policies primarily govern residency, no? If you're not a resident of the US, any laws that apply to you would likely fall under employment or commerce, not immigration.
Hi! Thanks for doing this. How long do you think I should keep my visa-related documents? I used to have an L-1 visa with a bunch of lengthy petitions, but now I have a green card and the visa has expired.
Any obligation to retain those documents is your employer's and now that you have a green card, there's really no practical reason to keep them; if and when you apply for naturalization, you will provide about your employment and residence since becoming a green card holder.
Hello, being a founder (recently got H1B)of an early stage startup is there any consequences of not paying yourself the prevailing wage, especially since you also own the company so won't report it to anyone.
Possibly. It could impact your ability to get a green card and could be viewed as fraud if there was no real intent to get paid the wage indicated on the H-1B petition. These issues typically rear their heads during the green card application process and the visa application process.
How does EB-2 NIW essentially work? Is it tied to a specific employer or can it be used to justify H1b renewal/transfer beyond the 6 year limit at a different workplace with the different role ?
There are two types of EB2 green card paths, one (the PERM-based EBs) is tied to a specific employer and a specific job) and the other (NIW or national interest waiver) is not.
I'm a Canadian looking for remote work in America. Is there any downside risk to the employer if I work a W2 remote job from Canada? As long as I pay taxes, is there any risk to the employee?
From an immigration standpoint, no downside and no risk. We have a lot of companies that do this: employ people abroad as W-2 employees without any U.S. work authorization (which isn't required if the employee is working remotely outside the U.S.).
How are these companies able to employ remote people as W2 employees? Aren't the remote employees subject to their local employment law? For example, in Canada the GP would need to be employed as a T4 which requires the company to maintain a Canadian presence (and pay corresponding taxes in Canada).
Any potential employer would need to have a Canadian presence (usually a ULC, which is a Canadian subsidiary of an American corp) or go through an EOR (Employer of Record), which would handle taxes, insurance, benefits, etc. "Quietly" working remotely from Canada isn’t a good idea as you'll likely fall foul of Canadian tax law (amongst other things) and immigration law (if you aren't a Canadian citizen), and your employer would likely have issues as well. This is a good summary of the issues:
Hello, I'm currently in the US with an H-1B and the company is sponsoring my greencard (the PERM application was recently filed).
If I need to leave the US for one year, do I need to do anything? The PERM process should be done by then. One option would be terminate my employment and continue as a contractor. Can/should I do that?
Thank you!
Is there a possible track for H1B holders (solo/team) to be able to start one? What I have usually been briefed is that you need a US citizen as a majority stake holder. Thanks.
It's challenging but not impossible. A key is having less than 50% ownership interest in the company and an employment agreement with the company. It's close to impossible where the ownership is vested and at or above 50%. Again, not impossible but extremely challenging. The other owners also can be foreign nationals; they don't need to be U.S. citizens. So, where there are three foreign national founders, each owning a third, this should be fine.
I believe this means that once the entity is founded and funding secured, all participants will need to transfer their H1B to this new entity in order to work for it, right?
Hey there, I am Canadian/Italian and looking for remote roles in the US. I have a PhD and years of expereince in the tech sector. Is TN my best option orr W-2? Do I need a lawyer? Given that I am looking at Seed/Series A startups, what's the best way to structure conversations with hiring teams that do not have too much expereince hiring from abroad?
I am applying for PERM through my employer, and have gone through PWD process and yesterday I submitted my PERM application under EB3. I also recently married a US citizen about a month ago.
They estimate that it will take about 1 year to review my PERM application, so my question is would it be better to get a green card through marriage? I'm currently on H1B coming from Canada.
Hi Peter, thanks for all the AMAs you've done in the past.
From the perspective of a recent Green Card recipient not yet living in USA, is it possible/advisable to convert to a Commuter Green Card, work remotely (and paid as US-based employee with US contract, US mailing address, and US benefits), and commute to the US to work in person for a week or two every few months?
(Or does this stretch the definition of commuting outside of scope?)
Could a married couple each get their own individual E2 visas and then sponsor each other on the dependent visa and then both have open work authorization?
To be clear, green card paths are not helped or hurt or impacted in any way by the underlying status so your green card options are the same whether you're in O-1 status or not. That being said, because of the nature of the O-1, many of those in O-1 status go the EB1A extraordinary ability path or the EB2 national interest waiver path. An O-1, except in limited circumstances, is tied to a specific employer so if your O-1 employer went out of business, your O-1 would go away - but it's very easy to transfer an O-1 from one employer to another.
>That's not easy. Many employers aren't aware of this type of visa.
I think a lot of the response are presupposing that the commenters are in the tech industry. If a company is already setup to deal with visas it's probably not a big deal, assuming the economy is still going well and companies are hiring. In another field where companies don't or barely deal with visas at all, it's probably really difficult.
I am a dual US / Canada citizen and currently living & working in the US.
I am looking into moving to Canada, and was wondering what kind of issues I could run into if I wanted to continue working for the US company while living in Canada.
I am working for a small sized start-up, and I am pretty certain they have no experience in this kind of thing, so I wanted some more info before breaking the ice.
This is a payroll/tax issue. Many employers in these situations use an Employer of Record, such as Deel, to employ U.S. citizens living and working abroad but you also could be employed directly as a W-2 employee.
Working as a W2 employee from Canada would likely cause tax and filing headaches with the Canadian Revenue Agency (CRA), although the salary differential between US/Canada might make this worth it (you just have to be careful). You may also have cashflow issues come tax-time as you will have a large tax Canadian tax burden at the end of the year since your employer would have only withheld/remitted to the IRS, so you would need to file a US return to get back all the income tax that was withheld by your employer.
Disclaimer - not a lawyer but also went through this process, in the end my employer decided to switch me to a contractor.
Hi Peter, what are my options as someone who qualifies for DACA (but doesn't have it) when it comes to working in tech or getting hired by a real company? Currently I do "false freelance" work for a small company that doesn't pay well.
I'm not sure I understand the question. You can get DACA work authorization without a job offer and then one you have it, you don't need sponsorship by a company to work.
Few months ago I've applied for F2A visa for my spouse from Russia. Official sources state processing times in California at 4 years plus.
I am 2 years away from obtaining a citizenship in US by which I then can do K1.
Would you advice to convert F2A to K1 visa in the future? How do I do that?
Is there a way to speed up the process at all?
As Peter says, K1 is not a option for you because you're married. F2A will convert to immediate relative (either CR1 or IR1) once you become a US citizen.
CR1/IR1 is generally superior from the perspective of the immigrant spouse. However, CR1/IR1 does not allow derivatives, unlike F2A. If you have any children or stepchildren that don't have US citizenship or a green card, you will need to file a separate I-130 for them if you become a US citizen.
The conversion is from an F2A to an immediate relative green card application. This will be the fastest path. You would want to notify the U.S. Consulate in Russia when you become a U.S. citizen. The K-1 is for fiances of U.S. citizens, not spouses of U.S. citizens. Has the I-130 already been approved?
Hi Peter, nice to meet you. I am currently on STEM OPT with expiration being July 2026. What is the best backup path if I don't get the H-1B lottery in the next two years, O-1A or EB-2 or other? Priority date is 1.5 years for EB-2 so would it be advisable to have the company I work for to sponsor this? Thank you!
There's no downside to having your company kick off the green card process now; the process could move fast enough to allow you to stay past July 2026 (although this isn't likely). The standard options are the O-1 (which should be evaluated soon because you have time to build up your O-1 profile now if you need to) and full-time F-1 CPT through a graduate program.
Say if a worker on H1B expires all 3 attempts to obtain an H1B and is forced to return to his home country. If the company he/she is working for has a partner company in the home country, can the US company continue to apply for the H1B to bring him back? Are there better options to exercise than this?
There is no cap on number of attempts. I think the 3 attempts you are referring to is the 3 year OPT after you graduate with a degree, companies usually try to sponsor during those three years while you're employed with them.
Is it true that there has been an uptick in unreasonable and poorly written RFE's? We got one that has a ton of inconsistencies and sometimes contradicts itself and moreover completely redefines some of the requirements.
It's really impossible to say because it's all anecdotal but the options - particularly if the petition was filed with premium processing - are to point out the errors, inconsistencies, etc. in an email to a premium processing supervisor and ask that the RFE be reissued (or the petition approved) or simply to respond to the RFE and in the RFE point out the errors, inconsistencies, etc. and note how this makes it difficult/impossible to respond to the RFE and that if USCIS is inclined to deny the petition, it should issue a better, clearer second RFE first.
Hey Peter, I have two questions:
1. How bad is the H1B situation now? I've read there are companies that flood the system with duplicate requests, which decrease the probability for the others.
2. Is it possible to get a visa and work permit for a partner without being married to them?
On paper, it's a great option; the issue has been that it's been taking USCIS a very, very long period of time to respond and it requires the qualified U.S. investors to provide detailed and intrusive information and documents about their investments, which many investors don't want to provide. USCIS is aware of the first issue and is actively trying to review applications much faster but the jury is still out.
If I fill out a W-7 as a non-American to get an ITIN - Is that then enough to open a credit card with say Navy Federal prior to even getting an address in the USA?
I'd like to have all my ducks in a row prior to even arriving if possible.
Hi,
I'm European, working in Europe
My wife has a J1 visa
To apply for a J2 visa, I need be present and stay in USA for all the duration of the application? no way to come back to Europe in the meantime?
How long would the processing take?
The best solution is just to apply for a J-2 visa at a U.S. Consulate rather than applying for J-2 change of status in the U.S. and then once you reenter the U.S. on your J-2 visa you can apply for a work card and travel while your work card application is pending without impacting this application.
Good morning Peter! I don't mean to get political, but do you anticipate any changes in the H1b process based on whoever wins the upcoming election? I've heard there were significant difference between the past two admins and that could play out again.
Hi Peter, do I currently need to be employed by a company for them to sponsor my L-1 (provided I worked for them outside the US for "one continuous year within the three years immediately preceding")?
You don't currently need to be employed by the company abroad; you just need to have been employed with the company for one year out of the past three, as you note.
I’m an Australian PhD student graduating into the US job market. I’m considering an EB-2 NIW. How does that work with the E-3 visa? What’s a good resource or law firm with experience in this kind of arrangement to refer to?
You may find this passage from USCIS relevant, particularly the last sentence.
> E-3 Specialty Occupation Workers may be admitted initially for a period not to exceed the validity period
of the accompanying E-3 labor attestation (i.e., for a maximum of two years), and extensions of stay may
be granted indefinitely in increments not to exceed the validity period of the accompanying E-3 labor
attestation (i.e., for increments of up to two years each). As there is no limit on the total length of stay for
an E-3 alien in the legislation, there is no specified number of extensions a qualify ing E-3 Specialty
Occupation Worker may be granted. Under the current E regulation, 8 CFR 214.2(e)(5) , an alien
classified under section 101(a)(15)(E) as an E-3 nonimmigrant shall maintain an intention to depart the
United States upon the expiration of termination of E status. An application for initial admission, change of
status or extension of stay in E-3 classification, however, may not be denied solely on the basis of an
approved request for permanent labor certification or a filed or approved immigrant visa preference
petition.
We represent a lot of Australians and it's definitely possible to manage applying for a green card while in E-3 status and even renewing the E-3 visa during the green card process.
Not a lawyer. Visas and green card applications are orthogonal. Do your EB2-NIW however you like - either yourself or with the help of a law firm. It has no bearing on anything else. You'll get the green card when your number is up (somewhere in the next 5 years).
I'm a software developer with leading experience in a successful healthcare startup. Do you have any advice on which platforms to use, I applied for a couple of jobs but wasn't successful so far
How much of a fuss is it for a start-up fresh out of YC to hire someone on an E-3 visa (the one for Australians) ? i.e., time & cost of the process including legal advice & applying for licences if any
Super cheap, easy, and fast. The E-3 visa is the easiest visa to get (as long as the applicant is Australian of course) and it doesn't matter whether the employer is a startup or an established large company.
Is it possible, as a Canadian with an engineering degree, to work 3 days in-office from the USA and 2 days remotely from Canada? Ideally, it'd be nice to have a US salary and live mostly in Canada.
If a Russian citizen seeks to travel to the U.S. these days to create jobs / invest in his own company, what visa type should one pursue to maximize chances of getting approved?
It's really tough for Russians to get visas to the U.S. now regardless of the visa. There's no investor visa for Russians so the O-1 is probably the best option but as I noted in another thread, visa applications by Russians typically get denied or end up in a black hole.
There's really no waiting period. Startups generally can sponsor foreign nationals without issue. Certain minor and very easy company-related requirements need to be in place but that's it.
Hard? I know people around me struggling to find work. Ghost jobs are all over the place, local USA residents are struggling to find jobs. There are local residents ready to hired everywhere.
I appreciate your perspective, thanks for sharing. Mine is that great engineers are extremely hard to find, given there are many more jobs available to them than there are folks searching right now. For nearly every other role, the opposite is true, and hiring local talent is very possible.
There's a lot that a visitor can do vis-a-vis his or her startup without crossing the unauthorized employment line. The major black line is cash compensation but there are others.
This can't be done while still in school but once you graduate, you can found a company while in F-1 OPT and then while in F-1 OPT status, look to change your status to O-1 (assuming that you also don't qualify for STEM OPT or another country-specific visa).
That's a corporate law question but I'm not aware of any law prohibiting Iranian citizens from establishing a company in the U.S. and yes, once the company is established (and certain minimal/easy company-related requirements are met), the company can sponsor the founder for an O-1 visa.
Iranian citizen already in the US with a valid H1-B visa. I have seen articles mentioning that Iranian citizens are not allowed to open a corporation in the US. Is this true? And is it possible to change status of H1-B to O-1 after registering the business. Thanks.
Hey, would you mind telling me more about your experience and how was the process like for you? I would really appreciate it. You can also send me a message @ michelsedgh@gmail.com
What has been -- in your personal experience as well as in the experience of some of your lawyer colleagues -- some of the 'hardest' cases wrt employment authorization for US-based startups and YC? And why?
Also, how are you anticipating the immigration landscape to change especially if President Donald Trump returns to the White House in January 2025? I'm asking this in the context of the 2017-2021 Trump administration's massive clampdown on Specialty Occupation visas through executive orders. [0]
Those who are in YC and who previously were in YC almost always can get work authorization, whether it's an O-1, E-2, H-1B, or country-specific visa. Relatively speaking, the harder cases are those involving those who don't have at least a bachelor's degree. While lots of experience sometimes can fix this, not always, which means that an O-1 visa is usually the only option. Regarding the impact of a change in administration, I just touched on this in response to another question/comment.
Why aren’t there tech startup immigration sanctuary cities? We have local authorities not working with the feds for referring criminals to ICE. Could you have the same for software engineers?
There's a lot to worry about but to keep the worry/analysis grounded, I think it makes sense to review what his administration did last time. And most of the damage was done to those who were illegal or seeking asylum or were from certain countries and seeking to travel to the U.S. It was awful and very disruptive to the lives of many. On the legal business immigration side, the main damage was the result of changes in policy and the way regulations were interpreted and applied. This included doing away with the deference given to previously approved applications when extensions/renewals were sought. This was disastrous, resulting in the denial of applications for people who had been employed in the U.S. by the same employer for years. The Biden administration immediately undid this when it took office. The other major change was in changing/increasing the requirements for getting H-1B and O-1 visas and extraordinary ability green cards. The Biden administration undid some but not all of these changes. There is concern that a Trump administration would undermine the H-1B program as well.
They also divorced the H4 renewal process from the H1B process.
USCIS had consistently renewed H4 visas along with the primary H1B application. Since H1Bs can pay for premium processing this meant both would usually be renewed within a month.
The Trump administration added a completely unnecessary biometrics requirement to the H4 renewal application (even if you had literally got your biometrics done a week ago) which meant the H4 application was now separated from the H1B application and now took at least a year to process.
Considering one can only apply for a renewal 6 months before expiry this led to tens of thousands of H4 visa holders losing the ability to travel, and having their EADs expire forcing them to quit their jobs.
This was a completely malicious action with the only purpose being to make people’s lives worse.
Is there any reason to think that Trump will ramp things up if he gets a second term? Particularly since the Supreme Court is so thoroughly conservative now?
It would make sense to expect some ramp up because immigration is a stronger electoral issue than it was previously, and because a second Trump administration will probably be more coordinated and effective in implementing its goals than the first one was. Given how laden with unintended consequences any change in immigration policy is, though, there are probably some limits on the rate of change that would be possible and politically prudent.
For example, without undocumented immigrants, milk would be a lot more expensive (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/15/magazine/milk-industry-un...). The current election is showing us quite starkly how significant grocery staple prices are in shaping public perception of a nation's economic health.
> For example, without undocumented immigrants, milk would be a lot more expensive (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/15/magazine/milk-industry-un...). The current election is showing us quite starkly how significant grocery staple prices are in shaping public perception of a nation's economic health.
This strikes me as a bit tone deaf. These people are paid slave wages to do this work. They have unsafe housing conditions. They pay cartel fees to get across the border. Their "employers" are breaking the law. The government looks the other way. Personally, I'd be willing to pay more for milk (or any grocery product) if Americans were doing the jobs and getting paid fair wages with good benefits.
Are you saying American voters are tone deaf for prioritizing food availability over ethical sourcing of food?
I mean sure, but I don't think that judgement has any consequence unless anyone grabs a soapbox and starts chastising people for wanting cheaper food. I haven't seen any of the candidates do that yet.
I think even with a soapbox it wouldn’t be terribly effective.
We all know where our laptops and smartphones come from and the questionable-at-best labor practices associated with them, and nearly all of us continue to use them.
(To be clear, I’m no better. If a smartphone was released that was controversy-free but cost twice as much, I doubt I would buy it.)
I think food prices would be the same. People would complain about (and vote around) the prices rising, even if the higher prices were the result of more ethical labor laws.
I’m not saying that we shouldn’t fix bad labor practices, I’m just saying that people will invariably be hypocritical about it.
Smartphones/laptops/hardware is slightly different because its manufactured/assembled overseas. The dairy industry is domestically based and acting like its workers are based in the 3rd world. Threatening the population with higher prices if they can't continue to break the law is extortion and it needs to be treated as such. If you can't run a legit business with legal labor, you need to be shut down. Someone else will find a way to do it.
I don't really disagree, I'm against exploitative labor, and I agree that if you can't do things legally you probably shouldn't be in business, especially in an extremely rich country like the US. [1]
I'm arguing that most people are hypocrites on this, and the last two years have proven that they'll blame the current president if their food prices go up. I'm not claiming that this is accurate, I'm claiming that that's what people seem to think.
[1] Exploitive labor is wrong everywhere obviously, but it's much easier to justify a more "relative morality" in a place with much more limited resources.
Agreed, politics is a team sport and someone is going to get the blame on grocery costs or gas prices. Its really the medias fault because people don't have the interest/time/intellect to dig into these issues - its all on headlines/clickbait. Illegal labor practices in farming/dairy/meat processing have been going on forever but they only seem to be front and center every 4 years, or < 3 weeks out from a national election cycle.
This isn't about food availability or ethnical sourcing of food. Apparently the business model of the dairy industry has illegal labor baked into how they do things. They have the gall to threaten Americans with higher prices if their workforce is eliminated. Sounds like extortion to me. This is a problem of crony capitalism.
I think it will be much harder to get an H-1B petition approved, at least initially like last go-round, and there could be high salary requirements, which almost went into effect last time.
I have a Greencard and would become eligible to apply for citizenship this month. I wonder what the opinions are here on the pros and cons of that. Generally, regarding most practical aspects of daily life, being permanent resident seems pretty much equivalent to that of an US citizen.
Pros:
- can vote
- can get security clearance, potentially more income
- even long periods abroad do not bear the risk of loosing privilege
- can do jury duty
Cons:
- need to do jury duty
- need to declare income to IRS regardless of residency
- potentially be taxed by IRS
Any other cons I'm not aware of? I heard that getting rid of the US citizenship (e.g. for tax reasons) will make it hard to get a visa ever again.
I think your forgetting one of the most important pros: an inalienable right to re-enter the country after going abroad.
Also a pro is that while traveling you have the services of the U.S embassy to you, which could be a life saver depending on what other citizenship you hold and the circumstances.
I became a US citizen because I wanted to be able to vote and be a full participant of my community, and it's easier to be in the same line as my wife and child at the airport.
But even though I am not a criminal, it was also on my mind that if I were ever falsely convicted in some travesty of justice, I could also be deported, which would make it even worse.
Good point. That's why I listed voting and jury duty, I was summoned to serve on a jury multiple times, and I always feel weirdly excluded when I have to explain that I'm not eligible. I know it can be a burden though..
At the airport, citizens and legal residents always share a line, in my experience. We tried to maintain Global Entry for the whole family for a while, but as the entry process got streamlined for citizens and GC holders over the years, the advantages of that vanished.
I wouldn't frame the tax parts like that. Just by having a green card, you are generally subject to the same worldwide taxation as US citizens, with only subtle differences.
Perhaps a bigger difference is that it's somewhat easier to abandon the green card than to renounce US citizenship.
Furthermore if you have held* a green card for the last 8 (of 15 years) i.e. you hold permanent resident status you also become in-scope for the tax expatriation law that apply to US Citizens, and possible ongoing declaration requirements: https://www.expatriationattorneys.com/green-card-u-s-exit-ta...
I've never been US-resident; the reason I know about this is talking to someone who relinquished theirs when I asked if they could keep it.
> As a green card holder, you generally are required to file a U.S. income tax return and report worldwide income no matter where you live.[1]
You’ll probably get a tax discount if you’re still paying taxes in your original country, but you must file US returns regardless.
If you haven’t been filing returns for the past 5 years, you should hire a CPA to get a professional opinion and possibly file late returns before applying for citizenship.
What is your timeline to stay in the US? If 5 years or less, I would say avoid it, unless have a specific "pro" that you want. Also, if you have a spouse and children, they might be important factors in your decision.
I remember watching the company I worked for in California lay off Americans and replace them with Indians. For all the talk about “prevailing wage” and “shortage of talent,” I just remember seeing it with my own eyes. One guy worked there till he was in his 60’s, built the company’s entire software, yet was kicked to the curb.
I worked for Best Buy. Entire teams fired but first had to train the Indian Accenture replacements. Entirely their right to fire us but don’t you dare say there is a “talent shortage.” There is definitely a talent shortage — of talent willing to work for $20/hour. In the jobs I’m seeing now, what used to be $65/hour jobs are now $48/hour. I remember making $90/hour a few years ago — now similar levels one would be very lucky to find $50/hour for a similar role.
I know H1Bs working at $40/hour for jobs their American counterparts are making $75/hour. They can’t move to higher paying roles at other companies because of the visa.
Also the termed “highly skilled” is an absolute joke. I can teach a person off the street to be “highly skilled” in a few weeks, based on the standard of what “highly skilled” means in H1B.
H1B needs to be highly reformed. It’s the tech equivalent of hiring construction workers from the Home Depot parking lot and paying under the table wages. I am not generally a fan of tariffs, but I suggest a 100% tariff on H1B wages paid by the hiring company. And that tariff would be a sliding scale — the more H1Bs you hire, the higher the tariff. If you need that foreign engineer so badly, paying $100/hour shouldn’t be a hardship. That would incentivize hiring the American/permanent resident at $80/hour. We’d find that “shortage” going away pretty quickly. Drive up the costs of Accenture/Infosys/etc., to make them unattractive. The only reason those companies exist is to provide cheap labor to companies like Best Buy, etc. The money collected from that tariff can be used to fund tax breaks for companies that don’t hire H1Bs. H1B isn’t about highly skilled labor. It’s about “highly” skilled cheap labor.
When Accenture has a huge offshore workforce to augment the H1Bs — they are still part of the problem, visa or not. H1B is tightly related to offshoring. They might have a few H1Bs with a client company, and then 50 or 100 offshore employees who are definitely not making $40 per hour. I personally trained Accenture employees who had a team in India doing the “real” work at far less than $40/hour. Most of Bangalore exists because of this business model.
The big “consulting” body shops are doing the labor equivalent of dumping. Dumping is a WTO violation, but seemingly doesn’t apply to labor.
My post isn’t about Indians. It’s about Indian companies that exploit the H1B system to create a pipeline to offshoring. I saw it with my own eyes.
“Average Indian household income is 152k” — the average Indian in the U.S. isn’t an H1B worker. This isn’t about Indians — this is about Indian “skilled labor” that’s filing a “shortage.” Indians are highly represented in many highly paid careers in the U.S. and the vast majority of Indians in the U.S. aren’t working “$40/hour” tech jobs.
And, a tariff on H1B (and offshore team) wages shouldn’t hurt H1Bs right? If there is actually a shortage, companies would be glad to fill the position. So how would that harm H1Bs? If a tariff on H1Bs results in fewer H1Bs, then clearly the shortage was a myth.
With Best Buy, I was in those meetings. The decision to hire Accenture had zero to do with any “shortage,” but it was to boost the company’s diminishing profits due to the impact of Covid on the retail space. So this argument that we need H1Bs and offshoring because of some “shortage” is a complete lie. If you fire your workers, then that’s the opposite of a shortage. You had a surplus of workers — otherwise why are we firing people?
I can't speak to Indian replacements, but I remember reading on here that the people at Google MV were furious that the Python team got completely disbanded and reconstituted in Munich.
Obviously this was to lower wage costs, but I was reading that and was in awe of the entitlement. Like.. the jobs belong to US personnel or to no one, EU devs don't deserve them?
Any team replaced for cost savings is going to feel insulted and demeaned.
Them whinging is not them being entitled or intending to insult you, they're just defending their self worth, just like you're doing by defending the jobs having come to your area.
Imagine the team had been replaced by fresh college greenhorns using the same seats. The rhetoric would still be the same outrage and resentment.
Personally I think a big part of this is the utterly absurd cost-of-living in the US. Why should it cost SO much more to hire US devs instead of devs in Munich, Germany, which is a world-leading economy and highly technological nation? This isn't quite like moving jobs from the US to Chile or India. Perhaps it has something to do with the ridiculous housing costs in the US, plus the ridiculous healthcare costs, plus the ridiculous transportation costs (you don't need a car in Munich), plus the ridiculous cost of eating in a restaurant (no 20% tipping in Munich), I could go on and on.
I really think the US is pricing itself out of the market in many places, and I almost never see anyone actually address this in discussions about international economics.
Is there any data about H1B for large workforce "suppliers" vs. for individuals?
As far as I know, H1B doesn't allow you to be an Accenture in India, and ship people to the US (even if they'd be at Accenture in the US).
That said, for companies like Best Buy, H1B is just a tool, and if they want to pay less, they will find a way to pay less. What they will not do is pay you more. Instead of moving people around, they might opt to move the office to a different country. Writing software isn't bound to any location, so maybe making moving people harder will just end up making moving offices more attractive, the net result being even less than what you have now.
Maybe it's pure corporate greed, or short-term thinking or late-stage capitalism, but I doubt it can all be pinned on some sort of migration abuse.
I wonder why they don't have h1b's for sports teams? Those players get paid an awful lot. Could easily outsource it to someone passing a certification exam and having a fake degree.
Not really, they're professional stars too.
Writing code is easy.
Writing good code is hard.
The H1b paradigm of a herd of people writing bad code and a few stars fixing that code is breaking down everywhere. Just look at HP, Oracle, Intel, etc. etc.
To imply, as you have, that genetics doesn't influence sports skill to a great degree is preposterous.
I used that country as an example because it is the major source of workers for tech wage suppression in the states. There is no evidence of any danger that the same negative pressure on athletics will occur.
Rushing to accuse me of racism because you disagree is offensive.
To start with, it was brave of you to edit out your original post lol.
> To imply, as you have, that genetics doesn't influence sports skill to a great degree is preposterous.
1. You do realize it is possible for an outcome to have multiple possible causes which contribute to varying degrees? Show me one peer reviewed study that says genetics are the reason for India's poor Olympic performance. Just one is enough. I will even take one from a predatory journal.
2. If someone says "genetics" as the cause for something bad without evidence, then yeah, they may not be racist, but that position is by definition a racist position.
3. Indians are the at top of the economic strata in the US (highest median wage). But low-brow racists won't attribute this success to genetics but illogically attribute it to "wage suppression" lol.
They have the highest median wages in the US. How are they suppressing wages?
4. This is how jews were treated in Europe for centuries and that lead to the Holocaust. Simultaneously, they were cunning and more clever than others and yet somehow also sub human in cognition.
5. Most racists generally lack a robust education in logic and history, so unfortunately, 3 and 4 are beyond their knowledge and comprehension.
6. You cited zero sources. Let me cite one from a neutral source saying H1B has no impact on wages.
You accuse someone of the modern equivalent of blasphemy and are surprised when you observe a chilling effect? Coming out of the gate with that vitriol indicates a bad faith stance.
There's a pattern I've observed with modern tech types. They fail to generate hypotheses with observable data, or have opinions about anything, without tacit approval from an authority. I think it's because being part of the herd is more important to them than actual truth or debate.
Next time you should pick better than to reference these guys.
The argument however is not about the tech skills or economic prowess of h1b workers. It is about the chance of professional athletics being affected to a similar degree by the wage suppression effects of importing labor.
I'm not going to engage further with you because, as I mentioned at the start, you're arguing in bad faith. I will accept an apology should you so choose to humble yourself.
Employers should have to prove they were not able to find a U.S. citizen who can do the job before they're allowed to hire someone that needs a work permit. Employers purposefully seek out non-U.S. citizens as they know they're happy to work for a lot less, especially if gets them into the U.S. This whole system encourages economic migrants, puts U.S. citizens out of work. As far as In am concerned you're actively working against your fellow Americans helping foreigners abuse and exploit our immigration laws.
There actually IS exactly such a requirement to advertise positions in the US and accept applicants. The issue is that it is gamed or done only perfunctorily. What you are looking for is enforcement, which costs money, and goes against the desires of the companies lobbying for such legislation.
It would also help enormously if the immigration was not tied to a specific company, i.e., the worker could jump to a new company at will without having to convince Company-B to do the whole sponsorship process. As it is, (iirc) if they lose their job, they have only 90?180 days to find a new sponsor or go home. This would make it much less exploitative, and also lower incentives for companies to sponsor H1Bs instead of seeking US workers. Write your congress-reps & Senators.
(Source: tech co founder in some companies that did H1Bs, so not sponsoring but managing the workers brought under the process; also competed under a coach that my school took exceptional efforts to get here from Austria because of his world-class qualifications, they still had to really fine-tune the requirements)
> Employers purposefully seek out non-U.S. citizens as they know they're happy to work for a lot less, especially if gets them into the U.S.
This is commonly stated but is not true. US companies are required to pay the "Prevailing Wage" [0] to H-1Bs, so they cannot use foreigners to undercut US citizens.
However, foreigners whose presence in the US is dependent on their employment are certainly more likely to be abused by employers
The prevailing wages are comically low though for most jobs that I've seen (like half of the real reasonable salary for the job we're offering). And employers have the option of 2 data sources so that they can selectively pick the lower of the 2 depending on the jobs they typically apply for.
> US companies are required to pay the "Prevailing Wage" [0] to H-1Bs, so they cannot use foreigners to undercut US citizens.
This is laughable. I do not know how the government calculates those wages, but as someone who got to US on H-1B visa this year I'm making more than 2x the "prevailing wage" listed on my LCA application.
Just to clarify: my job is a Software Architect, in one of East Coast states, and the prevailing wage listed in my application was $84k. So it is not that my salary is especially good, it's this government-mandated one that is a joke.
I'm lucky, because I came here to work for the same company I used to work in my home country so I got offered good terms (somehow H-1B was easier to get than L-1). If some company offered me a job for the "prevailing wage" I would laugh in their face, but I'm sure for some people that would seem like a lucrative offer.
I just checked my own LCA. My listed (and actual) salary on the LCA is 1.07x the listed prevailing wage, but it doesn't include stock or bonus which are part of my total comp. Including those, my total comp is 2.06x the listed prevailing wage.
I know from talking to my American colleagues that my total comp is around the same level as theirs, so at least at my company they don't undercut US citizens.
Your listed PW does seem quite low, and I don't know how they actually measure it. I certainly agree that companies will do whatever they can to lower wages for all worker, and not including stock or bonus in the prevailing wage is ripe for abuse. Perhaps some reform for this law is in order.
That's another thing: my compensation is basically all salary, no stock options of any kind. I think the trick might be that my immigration lawyer listed the PW for "entry level" Software Architect job (is there even such thing?), while I have around 20 years of experience.
Could it be that the prevailing wage is a national average, ie not adjusted for a high col city? I feel like tech salaries especially must swing a lot between flyover states and big coastal cities.
Well, maybe. I mean, my city is really not that high col city: median house price is $450k and the rent outside city center is just $1300 for one bedroom. But salaries in IT are pretty good here, my salary is actually the average for my position that I found on Glassdoor (I used that as a reference point when negotiating relocation with my employer).
> Employers should have to prove they were not able to find a U.S. citizen who can do the job before they're allowed to hire someone that needs a work permit.
Why?
It's their money and their business.
What business do you or I have in forcing upon them what they can do? any more than they would have any business forcing themselves upon us?
AFAICT, the parent answered that with "This whole system...puts U.S. citizens out of work." (Whether that's actually true or not, I'm not entirely certain, but the argument could definitely be made, and, in all likelihood, convincingly.)
> What business do you or I have in forcing upon them what they can do? any more than they would have any business forcing themselves upon us?
Presumably, it's people's business because the US is basically a nation governed by the people who see it as their responsibility to help ensure their basic values (peace, prosperity, life, freedom, justice, pursuit of happiness, etc.). So, when there's regulation that affects the people, it actually is their business.
> "This whole system...puts U.S. citizens out of work." (Whether that's actually true or not, I'm not entirely certain, but the argument could definitely be made, and, in all likelihood, convincingly.)
If bringing people from outside the USA into the USA puts people out of work, doesn't having children also put people out of work?
I'm not a US citizen, but you might find that most US citizens would prefer their government to prioritize the interests of US citizens over foreign nationals. Just as I would expect my home country's government to prioritize the interests of its citizens over foreigners.
Depends what “can do the job” means, right? Elite tech companies try to hire the highest ability people they can. The US is not a large share of the world’s population, so even if it is massively overrepresented in top performers, the vast majority of top performers are still foreign born. Your position is that US companies should hire less impressive people because they are American. Maybe you can build a functioning search engine that way, so a 100% American-born engineering team can technically do the job, but does it end up being Google? Does it end up being competitive relative to what the immigrants who worked on it would have done in their own countries or a friendlier country?
This is some weird 'Gangs of New York' wanna be BS. I'm sorry but we have been welcoming people throughout the entirety of our existence, it is part of the American project, and it is a part of our strength, not our weakness nor downfall.
My family were the ones told 'no Irish need apply' and now you want me to tell someone else's family off and that they aren't wanted? My family fled eastern europe for their lives but you want me to tell someone else my fear of a threat to my income is more valuable than them? Nah bro, I'm good. Don't claim to be a defender of me/America/Americans. Your type didn't want my family here either back in the day but the USA thrived even with our/my existence. Being American isn't in your blood, it's in who you chose to be. Alway had been/always will be. And Americans don't choose fear over welcoming.
I'd give every new American a huge welcome hug if I could because they are us and are family. They are your parents/grandparents/great grandparents/etc. Sad that you have forgotten that or chosen to forget because you are scared too 'share'.
Everyone reading this, I'm glad you want to come be part of this great experiment. I hope you chose to stay, it's a pretty cool place with pretty cool people.
>we have been welcoming people throughout the entirety of our existence
>And Americans don't choose fear over welcoming.
>it's a pretty cool place with pretty cool people.
How do you explain the election of Trump, and the quite possible re-election of him? It seems that only about half of Americans fit your description these days.
People like Peter exist in part to help large organizations (including YC) exploit the current system. Peter seems focused on startups - but it's within the same vein.
The parent's sentiment is valid. There's no reason the US needs to import startups - there's plenty here in the US that don't get funding/support/attention they already deserve.
Instead of helping immigrate potential founders - I'd rather see YC do outreach in these other countries to empower/support founders within their home nation.
But, that might slightly diminish YC's chances of funding the next Facebook or something... so here we are.
It also means the next Facebook would benefit a foreign country's economy rather than America's. One reason the US economy is the best in the world is that we import entrepreneurs and their businesses.
I don't have a question, but wanted to let you know that your site, www.robertsimmigration.com has a self-signed certificate and therefore others cannot create a secure connection to it.
Hi Peter. I know a little about H1B1 visas and the process of getting one, having worked with many colleagues who are in the US on one, but I don’t fully understand the pros/cons of the H1B1 program from the perspective of the average American.
As one presidential candidate will likely direct his ire at the program if he wins, can you explain why such a program is compelling or vital for our tech industry? My H1B1 colleagues seem happy to be in the US (and have indicated such) but nonetheless appear exploited. My naive economic analysis is that the visa program depresses wages to the benefit of corporations, but I’m sure the situation is far more nuanced.
(I’d like something to offer my conservative friends/family who increasingly think all immigration should be verboten.)
Ask you conservative friends how they feel about Libertarians (bring up Rand Paul). If they say they like what Libertarians stand for, remind them that the official libertarian platform is for an open border and a welcoming America in keeping with America's tradition of being a nation of immigrants. Then remind them of your great grandma/aunt/nana with the funny accent and if she and her children should have been kept out because someone felt scared of the maybe/might/gut feeling threat she posed to them.
> (I’d like something to offer my conservative friends/family who increasingly think all immigration should be verboten.)
Not proberts, but observing left wing media in the States over the last 8-10 years I've seen a carpet bombing of the same concept: eliding the difference between immigration and illegal immigration. If you want to talk to your conservative friends and family I'd start by checking whether or not it's illegal immigration they're against. Even the Democrats seem to be noticing that people don't like open border policies and are scrambling to adjust campaign promises in light of this.
The context was getting on with friends and family.
I understand you might not able to think in these terms when it comes to the hated enemy, but if you think of all people as people, even Republicans, then you might notice that they don't all think the same things. Or even that they don't hate illegal immigrants, but think that laws are a good idea and criminals should be punished, not rewarded. This is just understanding both sides 101, in case you do break out of this mindset.
> if you think of all people as people, even Republicans
The OP didn't accuse Republicans of being non-people. They specifically made a -- true, incidentally -- factual claim:
> > That's why they spread lies about refugees and other legal immigrants, right
It is notable, though, that it is the Republican candidate that has very directly been using dehumanizing language. And you are here asking people to get into a both-sides argument. The situation isn't symmetric: the arguments shouldn't have to be.
> I understand you might not able to think in these terms when it comes to the hated enemy
Also notable it is that one specific candidate is using the term "enemy within" to describe US residents. It's not the Democrat.
> Or even that they don't hate illegal immigrants, but think that laws are a good idea and criminals should be punished, not rewarded.
Again, your statement has nothing to do with what you're responding to.
> Also notable it is that one specific candidate is using the term "enemy within" to describe US residents. It's not the Democrat.
It's also notable that one whole media and political morass has been calling a candidate "literally Hitler" and he's been shot by a would-be assassin. Almost... more notable.
> Again, your statement has nothing to do with what you're responding to.
What do you mean? If someone says the OP's friends and relatives hate a group of people, it's worth mentioning that they may not hate them at all.
If you say "Republicans don't just hate illegal immigrants" it's pretty isomorphic to "All Republicans don't just hate illegal immigrants". Maybe that's English 102.
No, "Teachers use chalk daily" is nowhere near true. It would've been mostly true 30 years ago, before whiteboards, and now it's definitely not the case. The hair you're splitting only works when the approximation that omits the "all" is close to 100%.
One question I have is regarding skilled immigration from India and China specifically. Currently, people have to wait decades through no fault of their own. Big Tech companies, Chamber of Commerce, and many Republicans also support this.
However, a Democratic Senator, Dick Durbin has disingenuously blocked meaningful progress and reforms over and over and over again. He blocked the Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act of 2019 which had passed House with 365 votes and was sponsored by current Vice President Kamala Harris. He added on a poison pill that would not have gotten support knowing fully well that the Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act would have passed.
Similarly, Rep. Zoe Lofgren wrote to Speaker Pelosi expressing great dismay that her legislation (different bill, 2 years ago) which would have provided reforms was pulled from the floor and that it was important to force a vote.
It is certainly known that Republicans have blocked immigration reform (Grassley on CHIPs, etc) but Democrats have had multiple opportunities to remove the per-country visa cap and repeatedly refuse to do so in varying dishonest manners.
Why is Democratic leadership so against skilled immigrants coming from India and China? The closest we have come so far was under a Republican administration. Many populist Republicans support these reforms so it is perplexing to me that a party so committed to removing barriers that enforce systemic discrimination continue to let things play out as they are.
That's outside my area but the key is to engage with corporate/IP counsel at the outset, ideally before the company has been incorporate. One non-immigration issue that comes up all the time is incorporating before the founder has left his or her employer and thus putting the IP at risk.
If it's true people are crossing our borders, claiming asylum, and being let go with work permits, why should anyone do wait to do it the legal way and wait or get denied?
If your goal is time bound (say a few years), the asylum path may work. It will eventually run out though when you get your hearing in court. Asylum applications are overwhelmingly rejected. The legal path, at least theoretically, has a higher probability* of leading to permanent residence.
If you have the ability to immigrate on a visa, it's much safer and easier than relying on "coyotes" or having to cross multiple borders illegally just to take a shot at entering the US.
There's a reason you don't see Mexicans cross the border illegally anymore.
The solution of course is to fix the asylum process so that applications get reviewed faster not to restrict asylum (that's my view at last) but until that happens, for those who get work authorization based on an asylum application, this is just a temporary fix because at some point, their application will be reviewed and if not valid denied.
Sounds like the asylum process is an alternative stream, and the entire border has become a "port of entry."
When asylum is the low-friction way to enter the country and acquire a legal status, economics suggests fewer people will use the traditional immigration process.
Actually, you need to be advocating for immigration:
* More founders so they can employ you.
* More engineers onsite so they are in the same boat/market as you, i.e. need similar or more income. Otherwise, they will "steal" your job from their bedrooms from cheaper locations, because they are able to bill less from there.
I'm signing off now. I see that there are a number of unanswered questions. I will get to them tomorrow and over the weekend. Thank you everyone. Great questions and comments. I learned a lot.
Hello. I don't have any questions but just wanted to share that I found Peter through one of these threads 9 years ago and his work and advice has been incredibly helpful in ensuring my continued ability to live and work in America through a variety of situations. I highly recommend using his services and listening to his sage advice.
That's very kind of you. Thank you.
Me and my cofounder are non-US residents and live in Germany. If we get into YC, what would a typical / recommended way to proceed be?
We haven’t established a company in Germany yet, we want to be strategic and make what’s best to succeed.
From what I know we can do the batch with our current tourist visa, so I’d like to know more about the post batch options. Being US based or Germany based is an option for us.
Thanks in advance
That's right, a lot of international founders participate in the batch as business visitors, whether under ESTA or a B-1 visa. The most common post-batch work authorization options are the country-specific visas (for those from Australia, Canada, Chile, Mexico, and Singapore), the O-1, and the E-2. If based abroad and only coming to the U.S. for investor meetings and the like, then you could continue as a business visitor but practically this can become a problem if traveling to the U.S. regularly; at some point CBP will push back.
There was a blogpost from someone from germany who got accepted. I looked it up for you: https://web.archive.org/web/20220604131034/https://richventu...
There is also a post on hackernews about it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31601638 And there is a Ask HN that could be helpful: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31620700
Could follow this group of EU business people forming a US entity this year:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shWe5dNqUrc
Also, attend a few free AMCHAM webinars to get the details on foreign ownership rules.
Depending on how large your project becomes, some people may just use a brokerage service to localize the Merchant on Record (MoR) like withreach.com for online retailers. However, only US domestic corporations can mitigate liability on sold goods/services etc. Keep aware of the IRS grace thresholds on sales, as even if you owe $0 in federal and state taxes... it can still become a $8k fine for forgetting to file a return in the US.
Best of luck, =3
Are you aware of the US Green Card lottery? There are very few people who apply from Germany, so you can also try that route. You have a surprisingly good chance to win it. Also, you are not forced to accept it if you win the lottery -- you can decide.
I think "surprisingly good chance" is overselling it. The reported odds for Germany are about 1%.
https://dvlottery.me/win-chances-green-card-lottery
True, however many countries have no option to apply at all (e.g. Canada).
And while the odds are low, I believe you can apply year after year. And the biggest benefit is that you basically get a green card, and skip the usual process of H1-B, to labor cert, to I-140/485, which can be a 3-5 year process.
Odds are extremely low.
You should still create a US C-Corp, ideally in Delaware.
Why should you do so? What’s the advantage or would you say it’s even necessary?
Thank you for your answers, it's super helpful
It's AMA, so here's something under the category of "anything" . . .
How has AI affected your work as a lawyer, if at all? Do you expect it to change your work or how you bill?
Although we have a lot of AI clients, I've been slow to take advantage of AI but it's starting to transform our practice, helping with the drafting of letters of recommendation and our overall argument. So we're able to prepare applications much faster.
I run a coffee meetup in Buffalo, NY. Around graduation season we get a lot of international students who come and are looking for jobs but are worried about visa issues. What are the resources about what their actual situation is, and how I can help connect them to smaller companies who might not know how to sponsor students?
I'd recommend inviting a local immigration attorney to speak to the group and/or be available to answer questions because there's no one great resource.
Thank you
Alum here, most of the international students I knew got a job on campus to get their paperwork done and then you can use it elsewhere.
I'm not sure if this is appropriate for this thread, but: I'm a Singaporean, and we have access to the H-1B1 visa.
If asked whether I need a visa in a US job application, would it be fine to say "no"?
How should I explain my situation, given that most people might assume that hiring non-US candidates would require participation in the H-1B lottery?
This is my (not Peter's) advice for Canadians/Mexicans for TN, Australians for E-3, and seems to apply for Singaporeans/Chileans for H-1B1: If it is an automated system, just put no. That may be an automatic filter. There will be time to talk to a human and say "all we need is X/Y/Z" where X/Y/Z is something the hiring manager can do without involving a lawyer. If a human is asking you, then just say "Yes. I need a visa but I can walk you through the process. No lawyer needed."
Hi, I'm Australian and have applied a few times for us based tech roles and ticked 'require sponsorship'. I never really got far with my research - are you saying that the e3 is an automated process and I can get away with ticking 'do not need sponsorship'?
Thank you!
You’re not breaking any laws by not ticking the box, and you avoid be automatically screened out before anyone sees your resume.
Far better to get someone interested then find out you need sponsorship, than be filtered out right after you submit.
I’m Australian and have been living in the US for the last 7 years, working for the same employer the whole time. I was originally on an E3 which was renewed twice, before transferring to a H1b and finally a greencard.
The E3 is not “automated” in the sense that some interactions with CBP are. You have to attend an interview at a consulate outside the US (my first was in Sydney, renewals were all in London) and while it’s not really stressful or has a high rejection rate it’s not something I’d personally risk without a lawyer having prepared the paperwork.
As for how I communicated this when applying for jobs, I always selected that I needed sponsorship and then the first sentence in my cover letter explained that I’m eligible for an E3. I interviewed with probably 100 companies back then and only one of them that I got to a first phone screen with cared about the visa thing and it was because they wanted to fill the headcount asap. Once companies get to a certain size they are either ok with sponsorship for all roles or not ok for any, and it’s just something that gets handed off to legal after a hiring decision is made. I wouldn’t worry about the companies that automatically cull your application based on needing sponsorship.
hey fellow singaporean - you may enjoy my h1b1 guide https://www.swyx.io/h1b1
most impt thing to note is that while you do still need a visa sponsor, it is a LOT easier and cheaper for you and yes ive had a job where i paid for my own visa lawyer, and only needed simple docs from the company (which was ~10 people at the time if that helps). didnt turn out to be a GREAT job ofc but thats separate.
dont ask me how to get a job in the us from singapore tho. if ur applying thru the "front door" as u seem to be doing, yes its harder. lots more back door options but you'll have to network well to do it (i recommend https://swyx.io/LIP)
Not Peter Roberts nor a lawyer, but: Why don't you just say "I'm Singaporean, so I'm not sure I would need to apply", and give a link to some article which describes the special visa eligibility for Singaporeans? Also note that H-1B1 is just one kind of visa, and there are many others - for which you likely would need to apply.
It's not fine to say No because even though you might qualify for the H-1B1 visa, this requires employer sponsorship; the H-1B1 visa is to work for a specific employer.
Hello,
What options are available for an EU national who wants to start a U.S.-based company and relocate there but doesn’t have the capital required for an E-2 visa?
Let’s assume they start a U.S. company while staying in the EU, and the company is generating significant revenue. From what I understand, the E-2 visa requires the investment to come from the entrepreneur’s personal funds. While they could pay out dividends and reinvest them to meet this requirement, this feels like an odd hack (it might also take much longer depending on when the financial year ends). Is there a more straightforward way for EU citizens to move to the U.S., given they have a successful U.S.-based startup? How is this done in practice?
The E-2 requires that the money be from a company or individual of the same nationality as the E-2 applicant; it also can come from the E-2 applicant himself or herself. Revenue generated by the U.S. company doesn't count unless the revenue then were given in the form of profits or dividends to the E-2 applicant and reinvested into the U.S. company. The other option is the E-1 treaty trader visa, which doesn't require any minimum investment but instead requires the existence of substantial trade between the U.S. and the E-2 applicant's country of nationality so this is usually an option for more mature companies. So, the O-1 is probably the better option because it's possible to get an O-1 as a founder (of your own company) and there's no minimum investment or business activity requirement.
Thanks so much for taking your time.
IANAL: The correct approach here would be an O-1 Visa. Assuming your 'significant revenue' has also garnered you some level of public attention.
You also likely need some form of public recognition (awards, press etc).
Historically, startups have hired foreign "employees" as contractors to simplify paperwork.
How are "false freelancer" laws, e.g. in Spain, affecting the market? Do you generally advise American early-stage startups startups to hire foreigners as contractors, or to immediately use a PEO?
We don't get involved in that. We get involved when a company has identified a foreign national whom it would like to employ in the U.S., whether the foreign national is inside the U.S. or outside, and try to develop an immigration solution. But if the foreign national is outside, we let U.S. employers know that the foreign national can be employed by the U.S. company without a U.S. work visa whether as an employee or contractor if the foreign national works while outside the U.S. By necessity, this is what many employers do because there's no U.S. work visa option available.
One idea to replace the H1-B lottery that I've seen on HN is to sort the applications by salary and let in the top XX highest paid.
Do you have any thoughts on that? Is this one of those "why don't they just..." type of ideas that people with first hand knowledge know is majorly flawed?
I just don't see how the value - from a benefit to the U.S. economy perspective - is tied to salary so that doesn't make sense to me as a line to draw. If the H-1B program were to be limited in any way (which is not something I necessarily agree with), one option is to list occupations that are in short supply each year and to prioritize those. Many countries do this.
I had two H1-Bs.
The process is completely divorced from reality.
The questions and requirements are meaningless.
To my eye, there is zero rationality in the process.
As far as I can see, the and the only effect of the visa programme is that there is a limited number of visas, and so this acts to prevent businesses from hiring the people they want to hire, and that's not freedom; and in the process of doing so, causing untold disruption to lives and businesses and direct and indirect costs to businesses, individuals and economy as a whole.
Perfectly said. It's so insane that most people don't understand how poorly designed the system is and how much unintended negative consequences it engenders.
But ironically it's also the only thing that prevents the number of international students from truly exploding. It's already a travesty that many big name public universities have more people from Shanghai or Mumbai than the next town over. Universities are behaving like corporations in trying to maximize revenue
> It's already a travesty that many big name public universities have more people from Shanghai or Mumbai than the next town over.
Why is that a travesty?
Because universities have a duty first and foremost to their community. That is the citizens of their country and increasing duty to those local to them in their country.
The United States is not an economic zone that belongs to the world in short.
> one option is to list occupations that are in short supply each year and to prioritize those
That's a lot of what prioritizing slots by pay does: pay is higher for jobs with low supply relative to demand.
I suspect that the real problem with prioritizing by pay is that it shows that a lot of employers are using H1-B workers to put downward pressure on wages.
Also there are a lot of parties involved in gaming the complex system whose services wouldn't be needed if the solution was that simple. I think Upton Sinclair's quote applies here. https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/21810-it-is-difficult-to-ge...
Not necessarily. You need farmers and scientists. Can't do a descending sort by salary.
Wasn't Trump's proposal few years ago "95th percentile salary for their profession"? So you still have room for farmers and scientists provided that they are exceptional (or at least exceptionally well paid) farmers and scientists.
Who defines “profession” though? Is “farmer” all encompassing, or is “chicken farmer” different from “cattle farmer”? Is “battery chicken farmer” different to “free range chicken farmer”? Do I need to be top 5% US-wide or just the city/state I would be hired in?
I don't disagree there's a lot of complications in the actual implementation, but this approach is a better-than-status-quo way to achieve some fairness IMO. Currently the US Dept of Labor has a system of determining the fair wage that should be paid to a certain job description at a certain geographic location. In the green card process this is called "prevailing wage determination". Why not use it for H1b too?
The executive can't do anything. It has to be passed by Congress. Congress hasn't passed anything in 30+ years.
This is not ideal, because within the same occupation, not every industry can afford paying the same salaries. Such policy would disproportionally favor high margin companies: adtech, tobacco, oil, finance, ... Arguably not the ones you should help get access to top engineering talent.
If Indian IT consultancies abuse the system, maybe the US should try to understand why there's such amount of unmet demand for cheap IT labor that cannot be offshored.
Doesn't salary at least set a floor on what a company thinks that employee is going to add in value? They wouldn't spend dollars on salary to get dimes of extra revenue.
I would also argue that prioritizing the highest paid jobs makes displacement of US workers less likely. It would raise the bar for everyone.
US residency and citizenship is in extremely high demand, so whatever immigration system is put in place will ultimately be gamed. Creating a visa category that is solely based on salary would be attractive to some cohort of people who want to live in the US regardless of the costs.
We saw similar things with previous "investor visas" where there was no intention to start a business and the USCIS had to stop issuing them for many years because of the pervasive fraud on both sides of the equation. I can guarantee that some creative lawyer out there was already thinking about how to game the US "startup visa" when that was proposed a few years back.
A salary-based requirement is a lot less easy to game. After all salaries are reported to the IRS on W-2s. Any fraud in the amount of salary can be easily detected without sophisticated investigation.
The only difficulty I see is that salary isn't necessarily proportional to a person's usefulness to the economy or the country. A person can start a company and pay himself a million dollars a year while the person and the company does nothing at all. Sure the IRS gets to collect a bunch, but at that point we might as well create a class of visas that are sold in an auction.
Salary based requirements are the easiest to game. Create shell company, inject enough cash to cover salaries, hire people who want to live in the US and charge them a margin on the cash they gave you. Lots of people will happily pay the IRS taxes on a phony salary for the option to live in the US. Far easier than gaming an H1B or even an E3 which requires an LCA.
If you sorted H1B applications by salary and only let in the top XX highest paid, then the allocation would simply skew heavily towards tech in Silicon Valley, TX, WA, MA and finance in NYC, and almost none would be allocated to Kansas, Alabama, Mississippi, etc., and not much in lower-paid sectors. And if you only compared to median wages by state (not county, or metro area), then lower cost-of-living areas like Folsom CA would get hugely penalized for being stuck in the same bucket as SF/SV. (Also by the way now employers would have to compete against each other on raw salary, not stock grants, so you're removing the incentive component for early-stage startups, and raising their effective tax rate, which breaks how they're set up.) Arguably instead H1B should enforce some reasonable minimum salary, based on metro area. (don't confuse that with minimum wage).
So if you want to reform things you need to construct something less simplistic which can't easily be gamed. (What you're describing is like Canada's Provincial Nominee Program, which is ~35% of their economic admissions, but it grants permanent residence, not just a work visa.)
Anyway a less-discussed backstop solution to prevent abuse in H1B is to shorten (legislate) the maximum time to acquire (employment-based) Green Card - it originally used to be <6mths, now it can easily be 10+ years (from the date the employee first arrived on F1/H1B/L1, not the date the GC petition was finally raised, which can itself be 5+ years after that if the employer drags things out, which happens).
I was in the USA on H1-B for 3.5 years and moved to India in 2019. My employer recently applied for my H1B, but it got rejected stating that I'm subject to the fiscal year cap (“lottery”). The company lawyers have turned the case around and re-filed it because I've had H1b in the past and didn't use my full quota of 6 years and should be cap-exempt now. Have you seen this happen before? Does USCIS typically correct itself when it makes a mistake in a reasonable time? (fwiw, my case is filed as premium)
Thanks in advance!
What are considered best practices for a German/EU citizen to start a startup in the US? What would be the process to found a company and to move to the US to work for your own company be like? Or would it be better to found it Germany and move it to the US at a later point (after PMF for example)?
There are multiple options to working for your own company in the U.S. The most common paths are the O-1, the L-1, and the E-2 and E-1 visa. Creating a company in Germany first might open up a path to an L-1 visa but that's the only relative advantage to opening a company in Germany first. The E-1 and the E-2 require that the U.S. company be at last 50% German owned and that there be a substantial investment of German money into the U.S. company or substantial trade between the U.S. and Germany via the U.S. company. The O-1 is based your own personal achievements. If you can have German invested into the U.S. company (whether from you or others or both), which generally means at last $100k, then the E-2 is a very good and easy option and relative to the O-1, allows spouses to work.
Does this mean that if a German citizen registers a company in US and owns 100% of it and also invests $100k into it, he can get an E-2?
There are other requirements, such as evidence of not only the investment but the expenditure of the funds by the U.S. company on business expenses and a good business plan, but these are not onerous requirements. The challenge sometimes is the expenditure of the funds because a substantial amount needs to have been spent before applying for the E-2 visa and sometimes it can be hard to spend that money.
Hi I wonder how valuable patents are for EB/O visas? I have worked 10+ in a global tech company, through which I am named on about 20 US patents. I don't have external visibility except for through those patents. How are patents judged when it comes to these visas? Are they enough to prove what needs to be proven?
Patents are just the starting point of the analysis because patents in and of themselves don't say anything about impact or significance so the next step is to try to understand the impact/significance of the patents through usage and citations, for example.
I'm a non-American Software Engineer, living outside the US. Me and my girlfriend (who's an American citizen) are seriously considering marrying and moving together next year.
Any advice or anything you recommend reading? Also, how long it typically would take until I was able to legally have a job in the US, once I move?
I have a tourist visa and traveled to the States countless times. If I go there with the intent of getting married, do I need a special visa or not, considering I can already enter legally?
Thank you for your time.
This is complicated so it's important to speak with an immigration attorney before you take any steps. The better option is to apply from within the U.S. but doing this while in the U.S. as a tourist is problematic. The other path, through a U.S. Consulate abroad, raises no legal concerns but can take a very long time (compared to a U.S. based application).
A work around would be to get some type of work visa (a challenge itself) and then once in the U.S. on this visa, apply for a green card based on marriage.
Is this workaround applicable even if the work visa is of non-immigrant intent, like the H1B1?
Yes, for example I married my partner who was on an F1 visa, which is a non-immigrant visa, and we were able to easily adjust his status to the GC (this is faster than the K1 process)
That’s useful to know. One difference for my situation is I’d like the H1B1 holder to be able to continue working during the application, but I have heard mixed information on how feasible that is. The H1B1 needs to be renewed quite frequently but may not be renewable while you have an adjustment pending.
There are potential issues with being in H-1B1 status and applying for a green card but they revolve more around timing - so, for example, if you entered the U.S. on an H-1B1 visa (as opposed to H-1B), which is not a dual-intent visa, then you would need to wait some unspecified period of time before applying for a green card to avoid being "charged" with immigration fraud at the time of your entry in H-1B1 status. Also, after filing your green card application, while you could continue working on your H-1B1 visa, you wouldn't be able to travel internationally on it and you wouldn't be able to travel in general for an extended period of time unless you had a family emergency abroad.
We went through the Fiance Visa program and it wasn't a big deal, but the foreign one of us was Canadian, which is on the we like that country list, which probably helped a lot.
You have to follow special rules for the fiance visa program, and most all the paperwork happens before you get married.
The big thing I remember(it's been decades now), there was a fee we had to pay at one of the consulates somewhere, and they gave us 2 receipts, a big fancy full page one and the tiny cash register receipt. Way afterwards they made us prove we paid the fee. They wanted the tiny cash register receipt, not the fancy full page one. Make sure you keep literally everything , you have no idea what might be important later on.
I'm not saying the fiance visa is right for you in your situation, just mentioning it in case you are not aware.
> I go there with the intent of getting married, do I need a special visa or not, considering I can already enter legally?
Yes, you absolutely need a visa (specifically the K1). Entering the US with the intent to get married without it is immigration fraud!
I've been through this process myself and I can tell you that it's quite the lengthy process and there's financial requirements and many checks along the way. For me it was about 18 months from start of K1 application to issuance (delayed due to COVID) and then about 6 month wait on employment authorization (and greencard about 6 months later).
These times could be much longer if you're not from a western country or mess up the paperwork along the way (easy to do, there's quite a lot of stuff both partners need to file).
Just letting you know so you can start the process early. There's several forums online for people going through such a process with a lot of resources, I'd suggest looking there for other's experiences.
> Yes, you absolutely need a visa (specifically the K1). Entering the US with the intent to get married without it is immigration fraud!
While this is theoretically true, the reality is that thousands (tens of thousands?) of people do it every year successfully. And it's hardly surprising, especially under a pro-immigrant administration like Biden's. I doubt strictly enforcing previous non-immigrant intent in family-based green card applications is anyone's priority.
I'm not advocating people do it. I just think there's a strange dynamic in immigration conversations online where a lot of people talk as if theory and reality are exactly the same. They're not. The reality is that people are constantly engaging in various immigration violations that are overlooked/undeclared/ignored/etc.
> While this is theoretically true, the reality is that thousands (tens of thousands?) of people do it every year successfully.
You are correct, but if you do it on a tourist visa, you can expect to wait well over a year for employment authorization, which is very difficult on a relationship.
Not to mention you always risk getting rejected (particularly if you posted your intention online) and then being essentially banned from entering the US.
For two grown adults with careers, it makes no sense to risk it, just take one of many legal routes (K-1, work visa, getting married outside of the US and then applying for a greencard, etc).
Hello Peter and thanks for the AMA!
I was accepted into a postdoc program and have an H1-B that was approved by the USCIS with no issues, but it was put in administrative processing by the embassy.
It's been in administrative processing for almost a year with zero follow up communication, and the council of my employer doesn't know or is unwilling how to get an update on this process. Is there anything that can be done to move it along?
P.S. : I’m an EU Citizen
This is your visa application so you don't need to wait on the school or its counsel to act. You can ask the Congressional representative in the area where you will live in the U.S. to make an inquiry with the Consulate. This is done all the time although it often doesn't make a difference, unfortunately. Where were you born, where have you traveled, and what's the focus of your post-doc?
Hi Peter, I’m an employee at big tech in an L1 VISA in the US. I’d like to know what happens if I get laid-off. Will I have a chance of finding another job. How much time will I have before leaving the country?
I’ve heard I can get a green card via significant US investment. How much does that requires? Can I stay in the US while the process is ongoing?
Back when I was working on an L1, I continually lobbied my employer to apply for an H1B for me to give me more options in the event of losing a job, or even just the ability to change employer at all really. This is one of the most significant downsides of the L1 visa IMO, the options are comparatively limited/difficult if you do lose your job. Its biggest plus over the H1 is of course no lottery though, which is why employers that can use the L1 like it etc.
As I understand it, your employer can apply for the H1B lottery every year for you while still on the L1. Some companies will do this, eventually I did get the H1B I wanted back then. My colleagues on L1 all did the same thing too.
Regarding your first question, you would get a 60-day grace period following the end of your employment (limited, however, by your I-94 expiration date). During this 60-day period, you could remain in the U.S. and apply to change your status to another visa classification before the end of the 60-day period, such as to another work visa (if one is available) or a visitor visa. Regarding your second question, you are referring to an EB5 green card. That is too convoluted to explain here. If you are interested, you should consult with someone who specializes in EB5 green cards.
My U.S. citizen father applied for a green card for me as his over-18-year-old child, and the process was moving forward. However, during the sponsorship documents submission phase, I got married and updated the marital status question accordingly. After that, the process was stopped. What happens now, and what can be done?
While you were unmarried, you were either an immediate relative if under age 21, or family preference F1 if 21 or older. Because you married, you are now in the family preference F3 category, which has a much larger backlog and a much longer wait.
You should have considered the immigration consequences before you got married. The only thing that can change your situation is if your marriage ends in death or divorce. Otherwise you must wait.
9 FAM 502.2-3(D)
> a. (U) Immediate Relative Converts to Third Preference: If the child of a U.S. citizen is the beneficiary of an IR petition, the petition automatically converts to a third preference petition if the child marries. The priority date of the third preference petition is the filing date of the immediate relative petition.
> b. (U) First Preference Converts to Third Preference: If the unmarried son or daughter of a U.S. citizen marries before the visa is issued, the beneficiary's first preference petition automatically converts to a family third preference petition. Any child(ren) of the beneficiary would then be entitled to derivative third preference status. The priority date remains the same.
> e. (U) Third Preference Converts to First Preference: (1) (U) A third preference petition approved for a married son or daughter of a U.S. citizen who has since become widowed or divorced automatically converts to accord first preference status (or IR status if the beneficiary is under the age of 21). If the petition converts to first preference, the accompanying or following-to-join child(ren) may be granted derivative first preference status. The priority date remains the same.
https://fam.state.gov/fam/09FAM/09FAM050202.html
All correct. Thanks!
> You should have considered the immigration consequences before you got married.
I may be wrong, but I think immigration consequences were not something any reasonable, normal person would have had any reason to think of. We are normal people, living normal lives. As I say, I may be wrong, but this feels like blaming the victim.
Immigrating into the US is notoriously difficult. There is a ton of demand. The US does not do even a mediocre job of prioritizing this demand, but it feels like the argument “I’m a normal person so I didn’t think about this” is rooted in lala land. If I was trying to immigrate into any other country (let alone the US), I would immediately and primarily think about how marriage might impact the status of my application. It would literally be the first thing I’d think of.
Not saying it’s wrong to get married as you’re trying to immigrate into the most competitive country in the world, but you do assume responsibility that this might impact your application.
US immigration is a strange game: folks who have good attention to detail can DIY and save a good chunk of money. Folks that don't should probably get an immigration lawyer to avoid potential disaster.
OP evidently made an incorrect assumption somewhere: perhaps they thought that they would stay in IR2/F1. Or perhaps they assumed that even if they change to F3, it would be as good as IR2/F1.
Are you an American citizen or ever had a desire to immigrate to another country? Do people fall in love and get married without thinking of the practical consequences? Yes. Do people also not get married to their love because it messes with their immigration? Also yes. Both are reasonable.
As we increasingly live/love/marry across nationalities, being very conscious about immigration rules has to become something “normal people” care about and think about.
Rather than blaming the victim it’s a hard truth. Now, I would personally love for this to be different BUT as long as rules on immigration are what they are in many places of the world, we need to consider it when we move/marry/have kids.
For instance, one important piece of advice to people thinking about studies abroad (especially PhD) is to also consider what their particular opportunities for work and permanent residence is in the place they go to. Chance are after many years in a place, you may meet someone or you may want to stay. If you choose a place (say UK a few years ago) that is unlikely to let you stick around, well you may need to be prepared for disappointment.
Furthermore, unless you live in a country where you clearly have an idea of how to get PR then you always need live with the understanding that you may at any point have to pack up and move. This is a reality, and sucks to take in but is the truth. Nothing worse than building a life some place and then 10 years down the line get rejected during your semi annual “visa renewal”.
Any hope for Indian immigrants on H1-B to get a green card? There are over 1 million immigrants affected by this.
It's just an unmitigated disaster. The only non-laughable path is via the EB1 (or marriage to a U.S. citizen or permanent resident). Many Indians who are working for U.S. companies in managerial positions will agree to work abroad for their employer for at least one year and this opens up the EB1C path.
It will likely never be mitigated. There is no economical reason why USCIS has to expedite moving that queue. There is an overwhelming influx of labor and immigrants from the same country in question that even a mass exodus, even if that were to ever happen, will mean nothing.
I'm an Australian citizen running a bootstrapped startup (and would prefer to stay bootstrapped, but would raise if there was no other way of immigrating). What is the best way to immigrate to the US? I have a computer science degree from an Australian university.
E3 is absolutely the best way for Australians in my experience. It's more flexible than a H1B and the process is much simpler. The only downside is there is no simple path to a green card like H1B, but I managed to get one anyway.
You'd need a US entity to apply on your behalf. In my case they never asked about assets to pay the salary but that may be an issue.
https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary...
All correct. The E-3 visa is the easiest, fastest, and cheapest U.S. visa. But it does require a sponsoring employer. The only downside relative to the H-1B is that an E-3 visa is not a dual intent visa like the H-1B so this needs to be managed if and when the E-3 visa holder is in the green card process.
Can I self-sponsor an E-3, if I'm the founder of the company, with no other shareholders?
There must be an employee-employee relationship. Difficult to pull off if you are completely solo but possible for most startups with more than one founder where you are not CEO.
No it's like TN in that regard.
It's possible to get an E-3 as a founder but it needs to be done carefully because self-employment is not allowed.
How common is it for companies to skip over a minimally qualified US worker during the PERM labor market test process?
If a minimally qualified US worker is found, are they under a requirement to hire the worker or can they just reapply for PERM later and conduct another labor market test?
Hi Peter, thank you for doing this. I'm a YC Founder, Ex-FAANG who applied for an O1 visa but got a "kitchen sink" RFE (i.e disputing all of my claimed* O1 qualifications). Is withdrawing and re-applying my O1 petition a good idea? Are there any known downsides to doing this? Thanks again!
Disputed qualifications include:
1. YC funding is not an "internationally recognized award"
2. YC membership is not "an association that requires outstanding achievement from its members"
3. Beneficiary's role (CTO) doesn't prove their critical role to the organisation.
4. Previous high renumeration is not evidence of high salary in the field as a whole. Nor is equity in YC company.
Not a laywer. Withdrawing and reapplying after changing the app, or responding to the RFE are both valid options. The only thing that is not useful is appealing a rejection. The appeals rarely work and are a waste of money and time. There was also an executive order about O1 which was supposed to lead to rulemaking that would make O1 and EB1 easier for AI (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-action...). I don't know if anything came of this, but look into whether any rulemaking is happening and apply after a final rule is published, assuming you are doing AI. (Everyone is doing AI, btw).
Agreed. The motion/appeals process takes a long time so it's just not a realistic option for most people. Whether to withdraw and reapply or respond to the RFE will depend on your qualifications (apart from your acceptance into and participation in YC); we've taken both approaches when we've received a kitchen-sink RFE and obtained approvals doing both. The recent guidance focuses on the EB1A but an be applied to the O-1 and has expanded arguments that we can make.
What's the general schema of getting someone a work visa in the US?
My understand is big tech usually tries to see if you're eligible for an O-1, and then they take their chances for H1-B, and then there's also a pathway for bringing in workers that have already worked from you from abroad (for one year).
Wondering if there's other types of Visa that are applicable, and where they slot in in the general algorithm of a US-based employer that wants to get a Visa for one of their workers.
I also recently learned about the EB1 Visa, though that one is not tied to an employer. I'm wondering how it compares to the O1 in ease of access / modalities.
If the individual is employed by a related entity abroad, then large companies would transfer him or her to the U.S. using the blanket L visa, a super fast and easy process. If the individual is not employed by a related entity abroad, then other options must be considered. First, there are easy options if the individual is a citizen of one of five countries with its own visa; these are Australia, Canada, Chile, Mexico, and Singapore. These countries have free trade agreements with the U.S. that give rise to these visas. If the individual is not a citizen of one of these countries but is employed in H-1B status by another company (or previously was employed in H-1B status), then an H-1B change of employer application is usually the best option and an easy one. If the individual is not employed in H-1B status (and never has been), then we look at the O-1. Sometimes the E-1 or E-2 visa is an option but this has very specific and limited requirements regarding the nationality of the company and the individual and regarding the company's trade with U.S. and investment into the U.S. company. It's a great option when it works. The EB1A is a green card path and is a high standard that takes a while.
Hi Peter, I finished my masters degree and I'm from Germany and might like to work in the US. Which Visa would be beat in thia case and any tips to work with US companies to make it happen? Much appreciated
Short of getting a green card, your ability to work in the U.S. will depend on getting a work visa which is based on a job offer from a U.S. employer. For those not from a country with its own visa, the options are the H-1B visa (but this is subject to an annual lottery so not anything that can be relied on), the O-1 visa for people of extraordinary ability (a high standard and a visa that most large companies won't bet on unless the candidate clearly qualifies for an O-1), the E-2 (this would be for German owned companies or subsidiaries in the U.S.), or L-1 (which requires one year of employment outside the U.S. with a related entity - think one year of employment with IBM Berlin and then a quick and easy transfer to IBM U.S.). Of all these, the L-1 is probably the easiest if the global company is large and is willing to transfer employees to the U.S. - and you're willing to work abroad for at least one year.
This is not immigration per se, but how often do you actually see issue with contract requalification?
For context: hiring remotely you don't want to set up a corporate presence in every country, that would be mind-boggingly complex & expensive — so instead you hire people as contractors or use an employer of record (EOR) like Deel to hire people and then you contract Deel.
The one risk with hiring contractors that will basically only work for you (though for sure, the contract should not make this a condition) is that in some jurisdiction is allegedly pretty easy to take these contracts to court and requalify them as employment contracts, putting you on the hook for back taxes and possibly fines.
I'm just wondering how much that stuff happens in practice, and how much of an issue it is when it happens.
Theoretical situation: I'm Canadian, I don't have a degree at all. If I found a startup that is incorporated in the US, but I'm still in Canada and most employees are outside of the US (although not exclusively), is there a "level of success" at which I might be considered for some sort of residency visa in the US? Suppose I wanted to, for example, open a physical office in the US for the already formed startup.
As someone in the same theoretical position, I'm curious as well.
How much of the answer is the same as for Germany? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41871953
Anything different because it's Canada?
i'm leaving a comment here because i think peter roberts is the OG. there's so many immigration attorney's now all around SF. but i remember peter being there from back in like 2016 when i was looking for attorney's. although i didn't go with him (peter thank you for doing this, and taking a call with me back in the day)
Hello Peter, I married an american woman and me and my wife are not leaving in the states. We are in the process ofp registering the kids since we are preparing a plan B. We didn't got married in my country, but in Thailand. I was told that in order to get a spouse Visa, I need to start the process in Thailand. Is this true? Do i need to apply for everything in Thailand just because this is where we got married? Thank you
I think you will get a better answer if you clarify your situation.
* Are your kids US citizens?
* In what country you do currently live?
> I was told that in order to get a spouse Visa, I need to start the process in Thailand. Is this true? Do i need to apply for everything in Thailand just because this is where we got married? Thank you
This is generally incorrect. For a spouse of a US citizen living abroad, you "start" by filing I-130 and then by completing the NVC paperwork, which can be done either online or through mail. The final stages are generally handled by the overseas consulate where the intending immigrant resides.
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/immigrat...
However, you may need documents from Thailand, such as your marriage certificate with English translation and police records for the immigrant.
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/Visa-Rec...
Correct. The location of the Consulate interview, the final step, is either country of residence or country of citizenship; it doesn't matter where the marriage occurred.
Thank you. I live in Israel. My kids are in the process of becoming US citizens.
As green card holder, I crossed border in Detroit, MI over to Canadian side, just to do a 1 hour tour for fun, but coming back, the custom wasn't as quick, they asked me a bunch of questions like why I crossed the border an hour ago, who Detroit as I currently live in New Jersey, it seemed that there was some discrepancies (I could be wrong) that two officers had to look at the computer to finally let me go as the bus driver (they have special border crossing buses) was waiting for me, along with 10+ other U.S. citizens on the same bus.
I didn't want to cause any delay or trouble so I didn't inquire much. But I do wonder, what was the hold up? They did try to ask me how many times I've been to Canada and when was the last time I crossed to Canada. They seemed very interested in the dates I did all that, not sure why.
I thought why they couldn't just look at their video camera that I actually just crossed an hour ago.
Thanks!
Just a guess, but they were possibly trying to figure out if your were couriering something over the border due to the short turnaround and you not living nearby. If you lived in Detroit, or stayed longer in CA, I suspect it would have gone differently.
Don't take it personally, those guys are hard asses with citizens too.
Did something similar in Montana, we just wanted to cross, take a picture and cross back - 5 minute trip. Got very similar treatment.
That's just a tough land-crossing, generally to be avoided if possible, and probably says nothing about your particular situation.
Thank you so much Peter. I'm eligible for naturalization after 5 years on a greencard. However, amidst the craziness of startup life I missed attending a court hearing for an improper left turn... for quite some time, 1.5 years now and counting. I'm just now sorting it out; the financial/license points penalties are not huge as it was a civil case. However I do at the moment have a suspended license and may even have a bench warrant. All of this will get sorted out: I am only concerned about whether this could impact my chances of a favorable naturalization decision. I have no other legal problems or history. If you could opine on this; and perhaps more generally for other's with similar concerns, I would be tremendously grateful.
It's super unlikely that this would impact your chances of getting naturalized (that is, I doubt any officer would conclude that you lack good moral character because of this). But you shouldn't apply until it's all sorted out.
My wife's I-485 was denied because of an overlooked J1 residency requirement. She has to spend 9 more months in her home country for the residency, and we're looking into waivers. We would prefer not to leave because my current employment requires me to be in the US. Her no objection waiver was denied and now we're trying an exceptional hardship waiver. What are alternatives? Is this a good route to take?
The waiver is the only alternative to satisfying the 2-year home residence requirement but hardship waivers are tough. Do you have an attorney? I could recommend attorneys who focus on such waivers.
The hardship waiver is likely going to be specific to the facts of your situation, so you may benefit from hiring your own immigration lawyer.
If your waiver is denied, there's of course the alternative of your spouse going back to her home country by herself.
A small word of warning: I'm speaking with brutal honesty, extreme language is used (unfortunately I have to, it's the truth). Throwaway for obvious reasons. I tweaked the parameters a bit, it's representative of my case but not my actual case.
I'm going for a CR-1 visa. I married the love of my life a month ago. We knew each other for a year when we married. I thought it'd be fine but I gave it some more thought and I'm a bit worried.
My worries:
* I had suicidal ideation and did visits to a psychiatry center once per week for a month until I was fine enough according to them. I have never physically hurted myself. I never planned it. My issue was that I felt a strong urge to plan it, and I didn't want to cave in which I didn't thanks to the psychiatry center. In retrospect, I realized I was in a really toxic relationship, once that was gone there was no suicidal ideation left.
* I do have an autism diagnosis that I got a few months ago at the age of 36.
* My employment history is checkered. My last employment was almost 2 years and then the tech layoffs hit, so outside of my control (second round of layoffs too).
Good things:
* My education is top notch with high marks, I even published a paper
* No criminal record
* 50000$ in the bank
* Coming from Sweden
* My wife has a stable job for 4 years, no criminal record, university educated, etc. (I don't think there are any issues there)
Will the suicidal ideation episode, autism diagnosis and checkered employment history be an issue for the CR-1 visa when I get my medical?
Of course you should consult with an attorney before applying but I don't see any issue with any of these impacting your ability to get a green card
Thanks for your reply :)
How do ycombinator signs deal with startup that were accepted but the founder is in another country ? Do they ask to visit us or there are other options.
That's a question directed to YC.
What are some of the challenges involved with international hiring in a remote environment? I work at a fully remote startup with ~200 employees. We hire from a couple dozen countries but I know there are fairly significant barriers whenever we add a new one. What are some of those challenges? Are they getting more streamlined?
From an immigration standpoint, there are no issues with U.S. companies employing foreign nationals who are working remotely OUTSIDE the U.S.; U.S. immigration doesn't come into play unless and until the individual will be working IN the U.S. For employees working remotely in the U.S., while this needs to be noted and referenced in any immigration application, it doesn't really change the immigration options and paths.
Many Russian citizens who have moved out of Russia are currently being denied B1/B2 visas, regardless of their prior history or any proof of ties to their current country of residence. The rejection rate is around 60%, and I am among those affected under 214(b), despite having held five B1/B2 visas before, with no visa overstays or other issues.
I don't plan to move to the US, but my startup operates in the US market, and it would be beneficial if I could meet customers and investors in person.
I plan to apply again next spring (a year after the denial), and if I’m unsuccessful, I’m considering applying for an O1 visa to be able to visit the US, although I have no intention of staying long-term. Do you think this is a good idea? I’m concerned that after the O1 visa expires, my only option to return might be to apply for another work visa or O1 visa.
What you write is incorrect. Even worse, arguably, is that applications by Russian citizens sometimes just end up in a black hole and never get reviewed. Unfortunately, while applying for an O-1 visa can be a solution, this isn't always the case and O-1 visa applications also can end up in a black hole. In other words, there are no easy solutions for Russian citizens unless they are seeking to travel to the U.S. on government business or possibly seeking to travel to the U.S. to create jobs. But the background security check/security concerns can undermine just about any application unless the Executive branch/State Department is involved and is specifically supporting the visa application.
Well, that's life. Thank you so much—at least now I know my chances.
My B1/B2 visa application has been in administrative processing (221g) for over 8 months. I assume the security checks are in place. Russian citizen, multiple US visits in 15 years. Last time it took 2 months to issue visa. If I seek to travel to the U.S. to create jobs (I own a US company), what visa option should I pursue to maximize my chances of getting approved?
I don't know if it's good or bad news for you, but at least you're pretty lucky to have reached this stage—the majority just get rejected.
From what I know, some people have received their visas after 12-16 months of processing. It will most likely be valid for only one year, though. Eight months is pretty early to expect anything at this point.
Here’s a Serbian-Russian expats visa Telegram group where there’s a US section. You can ask people there about their processing times: https://t.me/serbia_visas_chat
Again, I’d say you’ve had some luck!
Thanks for the link!
BTW here's a Russian chat about administrative processing, check it out:
https://t.me/usadminvisaprocessing
Just to chime in, what's the situation with getting an H1B visa for a Russian Citizen? Are there similar issues or is it still possible to get one?
Similar issues because the background check is the same regardless of the visa being applied for. Again, if you re already in the U.S. and seeking to change your status to H-1B or O-1, this isn't an issue.
Do you have any recommendations on how long one should wait before starting a startup after receiving permanent residence (EB2) in the US?
I've heard rumors that quitting the job that was used to justify the permanent residence too soon can jeopardize either the green card or future naturalization applications. Is this true?
That's really not true. There was some slight truth to this (but really just slight) years ago before the AC21 legislation, which allows those in the green card process to change employers without having to restart their green card process. Again, to be clear, lawyers used to say there were issues leaving soon after getting a green card, but that really was never true and with AC21, there's really no risk. All this being said, it's still good to have a consultation about this to rest easy.
In the USA is there any concept of prior art when considering trademark applications, like there is with patents? If "YCombinator hosting" had been commonly used by businesses, and YC decided to trademark that phrase, would the prior usage be taken into account (and void the trademark application)?
Do you have a list of common red flags that engineers should avoid when considering working at a startup?
From an immigration standpoint? Only that the immigration options and issues should be fully vetted and understood as early as possible. While there are some minor differences, from an immigration standpoint, there's little difference between the immigration options/path for employment with an established/large company and a startup.
If the upcoming change in administration gave you 1 or 2 chances to tweak the policy or process, what would you recommend?
Conversely, what are the main pain points now that are likely to be intractable?
(If policy is outside the scope of AMA, sorry and please ignore...)
Thanks!
Remote workers are clearly a gray area in immigration law. On the one hand if the worker lives abroad and imports products and related support services to the US, that's clearly not a migrant worker.
On the other hand, if a remote worker is a virtual receptionist for a US business, or if the worker controls machinery remotely that operates in the states, they clearly compete with local labour, and bring cybersecurity issues.
As an attorney with power to interpret and shape case law, do you think there is any grounds to require visas for some types of private remote work, given the current laws? Or would this be a matter that needs to go through congress.
Individuals working outside the U.S., even as employees of U.S. companies, are outside the reach of U.S. immigration law. Now, that doesn't mean that they are outside the reach of all laws, such as those controlling exports or combatting (cyber)terrorism. But immigration law has no say.
Interesting, but couldn't immigration laws have jurisdiction over the US company that employs the outside employees? Especially in the ways that they interact with US Soil and US citizens.
Immigration policies primarily govern residency, no? If you're not a resident of the US, any laws that apply to you would likely fall under employment or commerce, not immigration.
Correct.
Hi! Thanks for doing this. How long do you think I should keep my visa-related documents? I used to have an L-1 visa with a bunch of lengthy petitions, but now I have a green card and the visa has expired.
Any obligation to retain those documents is your employer's and now that you have a green card, there's really no practical reason to keep them; if and when you apply for naturalization, you will provide about your employment and residence since becoming a green card holder.
Hello, being a founder (recently got H1B)of an early stage startup is there any consequences of not paying yourself the prevailing wage, especially since you also own the company so won't report it to anyone.
Possibly. It could impact your ability to get a green card and could be viewed as fraud if there was no real intent to get paid the wage indicated on the H-1B petition. These issues typically rear their heads during the green card application process and the visa application process.
How does EB-2 NIW essentially work? Is it tied to a specific employer or can it be used to justify H1b renewal/transfer beyond the 6 year limit at a different workplace with the different role ?
There are two types of EB2 green card paths, one (the PERM-based EBs) is tied to a specific employer and a specific job) and the other (NIW or national interest waiver) is not.
I'm a Canadian looking for remote work in America. Is there any downside risk to the employer if I work a W2 remote job from Canada? As long as I pay taxes, is there any risk to the employee?
From an immigration standpoint, no downside and no risk. We have a lot of companies that do this: employ people abroad as W-2 employees without any U.S. work authorization (which isn't required if the employee is working remotely outside the U.S.).
How are these companies able to employ remote people as W2 employees? Aren't the remote employees subject to their local employment law? For example, in Canada the GP would need to be employed as a T4 which requires the company to maintain a Canadian presence (and pay corresponding taxes in Canada).
Any potential employer would need to have a Canadian presence (usually a ULC, which is a Canadian subsidiary of an American corp) or go through an EOR (Employer of Record), which would handle taxes, insurance, benefits, etc. "Quietly" working remotely from Canada isn’t a good idea as you'll likely fall foul of Canadian tax law (amongst other things) and immigration law (if you aren't a Canadian citizen), and your employer would likely have issues as well. This is a good summary of the issues:
https://www.swanwealthcoaching.com/blog/2024/05/07/working-u...
Hello, I'm currently in the US with an H-1B and the company is sponsoring my greencard (the PERM application was recently filed). If I need to leave the US for one year, do I need to do anything? The PERM process should be done by then. One option would be terminate my employment and continue as a contractor. Can/should I do that? Thank you!
Is there a possible track for H1B holders (solo/team) to be able to start one? What I have usually been briefed is that you need a US citizen as a majority stake holder. Thanks.
It's challenging but not impossible. A key is having less than 50% ownership interest in the company and an employment agreement with the company. It's close to impossible where the ownership is vested and at or above 50%. Again, not impossible but extremely challenging. The other owners also can be foreign nationals; they don't need to be U.S. citizens. So, where there are three foreign national founders, each owning a third, this should be fine.
Thanks - this helps.
> employment agreement with the company
I believe this means that once the entity is founded and funding secured, all participants will need to transfer their H1B to this new entity in order to work for it, right?
Hey there, I am Canadian/Italian and looking for remote roles in the US. I have a PhD and years of expereince in the tech sector. Is TN my best option orr W-2? Do I need a lawyer? Given that I am looking at Seed/Series A startups, what's the best way to structure conversations with hiring teams that do not have too much expereince hiring from abroad?
I am applying for PERM through my employer, and have gone through PWD process and yesterday I submitted my PERM application under EB3. I also recently married a US citizen about a month ago.
They estimate that it will take about 1 year to review my PERM application, so my question is would it be better to get a green card through marriage? I'm currently on H1B coming from Canada.
There's no question that it will be faster to apply for a green card (via an I-485 application with USCIS) based on marriage.
Hi Peter, thanks for all the AMAs you've done in the past.
From the perspective of a recent Green Card recipient not yet living in USA, is it possible/advisable to convert to a Commuter Green Card, work remotely (and paid as US-based employee with US contract, US mailing address, and US benefits), and commute to the US to work in person for a week or two every few months?
(Or does this stretch the definition of commuting outside of scope?)
Could a married couple each get their own individual E2 visas and then sponsor each other on the dependent visa and then both have open work authorization?
One can only hold one visa so one would need to hold the principal E-2 visa and the other could get the benefit of the E-2D visa.
I'll be stepping out for about an hour now and then returning for another few hours. Thank you so far for the great questions and comments!
Once I get the O1 visa, what paths are available to aim for a green card?
If the company with which I applied for O1 goes bankrupt what happens to my visa status?
To be clear, green card paths are not helped or hurt or impacted in any way by the underlying status so your green card options are the same whether you're in O-1 status or not. That being said, because of the nature of the O-1, many of those in O-1 status go the EB1A extraordinary ability path or the EB2 national interest waiver path. An O-1, except in limited circumstances, is tied to a specific employer so if your O-1 employer went out of business, your O-1 would go away - but it's very easy to transfer an O-1 from one employer to another.
That's not easy. Many employers aren't aware of this type of visa.
>That's not easy. Many employers aren't aware of this type of visa.
I think a lot of the response are presupposing that the commenters are in the tech industry. If a company is already setup to deal with visas it's probably not a big deal, assuming the economy is still going well and companies are hiring. In another field where companies don't or barely deal with visas at all, it's probably really difficult.
If you seek evidence like judging others' work or association membership for your O1/EB1, contact me at halloumee(at)proton(dot)me.
I also can refer you to BCS or IEEE.
That's regarding the judging of hackathons.
Good morning,
I am a dual US / Canada citizen and currently living & working in the US.
I am looking into moving to Canada, and was wondering what kind of issues I could run into if I wanted to continue working for the US company while living in Canada.
I am working for a small sized start-up, and I am pretty certain they have no experience in this kind of thing, so I wanted some more info before breaking the ice.
Thank you
This is a payroll/tax issue. Many employers in these situations use an Employer of Record, such as Deel, to employ U.S. citizens living and working abroad but you also could be employed directly as a W-2 employee.
Working as a W2 employee from Canada would likely cause tax and filing headaches with the Canadian Revenue Agency (CRA), although the salary differential between US/Canada might make this worth it (you just have to be careful). You may also have cashflow issues come tax-time as you will have a large tax Canadian tax burden at the end of the year since your employer would have only withheld/remitted to the IRS, so you would need to file a US return to get back all the income tax that was withheld by your employer.
Disclaimer - not a lawyer but also went through this process, in the end my employer decided to switch me to a contractor.
appreciate you sharing, thank you
thanks for the insights!
Hi Peter, what are my options as someone who qualifies for DACA (but doesn't have it) when it comes to working in tech or getting hired by a real company? Currently I do "false freelance" work for a small company that doesn't pay well.
I'm not sure I understand the question. You can get DACA work authorization without a job offer and then one you have it, you don't need sponsorship by a company to work.
Just meta: You dropped the "immigration lawyer" part. Does this mean the scope of questions is different?
Thanks for doing this regularly!
Good catch! Thank you. Immigration lawyer should have been included.
Hi Peter,
Few months ago I've applied for F2A visa for my spouse from Russia. Official sources state processing times in California at 4 years plus. I am 2 years away from obtaining a citizenship in US by which I then can do K1.
Would you advice to convert F2A to K1 visa in the future? How do I do that? Is there a way to speed up the process at all?
As Peter says, K1 is not a option for you because you're married. F2A will convert to immediate relative (either CR1 or IR1) once you become a US citizen.
CR1/IR1 is generally superior from the perspective of the immigrant spouse. However, CR1/IR1 does not allow derivatives, unlike F2A. If you have any children or stepchildren that don't have US citizenship or a green card, you will need to file a separate I-130 for them if you become a US citizen.
The conversion is from an F2A to an immediate relative green card application. This will be the fastest path. You would want to notify the U.S. Consulate in Russia when you become a U.S. citizen. The K-1 is for fiances of U.S. citizens, not spouses of U.S. citizens. Has the I-130 already been approved?
I-130 has not been approved yet. Only 3 months passed since we applied.
Hi Peter, nice to meet you. I am currently on STEM OPT with expiration being July 2026. What is the best backup path if I don't get the H-1B lottery in the next two years, O-1A or EB-2 or other? Priority date is 1.5 years for EB-2 so would it be advisable to have the company I work for to sponsor this? Thank you!
There's no downside to having your company kick off the green card process now; the process could move fast enough to allow you to stay past July 2026 (although this isn't likely). The standard options are the O-1 (which should be evaluated soon because you have time to build up your O-1 profile now if you need to) and full-time F-1 CPT through a graduate program.
Say if a worker on H1B expires all 3 attempts to obtain an H1B and is forced to return to his home country. If the company he/she is working for has a partner company in the home country, can the US company continue to apply for the H1B to bring him back? Are there better options to exercise than this?
There is no cap on number of attempts. I think the 3 attempts you are referring to is the 3 year OPT after you graduate with a degree, companies usually try to sponsor during those three years while you're employed with them.
Correct. Thanks.
Is it true that there has been an uptick in unreasonable and poorly written RFE's? We got one that has a ton of inconsistencies and sometimes contradicts itself and moreover completely redefines some of the requirements.
What would be the best strategy to counter these?
It's really impossible to say because it's all anecdotal but the options - particularly if the petition was filed with premium processing - are to point out the errors, inconsistencies, etc. in an email to a premium processing supervisor and ask that the RFE be reissued (or the petition approved) or simply to respond to the RFE and in the RFE point out the errors, inconsistencies, etc. and note how this makes it difficult/impossible to respond to the RFE and that if USCIS is inclined to deny the petition, it should issue a better, clearer second RFE first.
Hey Peter, I have two questions: 1. How bad is the H1B situation now? I've read there are companies that flood the system with duplicate requests, which decrease the probability for the others. 2. Is it possible to get a visa and work permit for a partner without being married to them?
1. The lottery system has changed and it's much harder now for companies to submit duplicate registrations. 2. I'm not sure what you mean.
I'm a founder in the EU and would like to incorporate in the US.
I've recently found out about the International Entrepreneur Rule, is that a viable option if I raise $350k from US investors?
What are the possible challenges and how much time does processing take?
On paper, it's a great option; the issue has been that it's been taking USCIS a very, very long period of time to respond and it requires the qualified U.S. investors to provide detailed and intrusive information and documents about their investments, which many investors don't want to provide. USCIS is aware of the first issue and is actively trying to review applications much faster but the jury is still out.
If I fill out a W-7 as a non-American to get an ITIN - Is that then enough to open a credit card with say Navy Federal prior to even getting an address in the USA? I'd like to have all my ducks in a row prior to even arriving if possible.
Grandfather fought in Vietnam.
I believe so but that's not really an immigration question but a banking question. I would recommend calling a couple of banks.
Peter - I am currently living in US and I am on H1b.I have plans to start a company with my partner who currently has a green card.
Assuming i hold a minority stake, and have an employment contract Can i transfer my h1b? Can the company also sponsor my green card in the future?
Likely yes but consult with an immigration attorney familiar with startups to file this because there are right and wrong ways to file such petitions.
Hi, I'm European, working in Europe My wife has a J1 visa To apply for a J2 visa, I need be present and stay in USA for all the duration of the application? no way to come back to Europe in the meantime? How long would the processing take?
The best solution is just to apply for a J-2 visa at a U.S. Consulate rather than applying for J-2 change of status in the U.S. and then once you reenter the U.S. on your J-2 visa you can apply for a work card and travel while your work card application is pending without impacting this application.
thanks!
Good morning Peter! I don't mean to get political, but do you anticipate any changes in the H1b process based on whoever wins the upcoming election? I've heard there were significant difference between the past two admins and that could play out again.
No worries. I just discussed this in response to another question.
Can you link to your previous comment in the future?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41871481
Will do!
Hi Peter, do I currently need to be employed by a company for them to sponsor my L-1 (provided I worked for them outside the US for "one continuous year within the three years immediately preceding")?
You don't currently need to be employed by the company abroad; you just need to have been employed with the company for one year out of the past three, as you note.
I’m an Australian PhD student graduating into the US job market. I’m considering an EB-2 NIW. How does that work with the E-3 visa? What’s a good resource or law firm with experience in this kind of arrangement to refer to?
You may find this passage from USCIS relevant, particularly the last sentence.
> E-3 Specialty Occupation Workers may be admitted initially for a period not to exceed the validity period of the accompanying E-3 labor attestation (i.e., for a maximum of two years), and extensions of stay may be granted indefinitely in increments not to exceed the validity period of the accompanying E-3 labor attestation (i.e., for increments of up to two years each). As there is no limit on the total length of stay for an E-3 alien in the legislation, there is no specified number of extensions a qualify ing E-3 Specialty Occupation Worker may be granted. Under the current E regulation, 8 CFR 214.2(e)(5) , an alien classified under section 101(a)(15)(E) as an E-3 nonimmigrant shall maintain an intention to depart the United States upon the expiration of termination of E status. An application for initial admission, change of status or extension of stay in E-3 classification, however, may not be denied solely on the basis of an approved request for permanent labor certification or a filed or approved immigrant visa preference petition.
https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/policy-ma...
We represent a lot of Australians and it's definitely possible to manage applying for a green card while in E-3 status and even renewing the E-3 visa during the green card process.
Not a lawyer. Visas and green card applications are orthogonal. Do your EB2-NIW however you like - either yourself or with the help of a law firm. It has no bearing on anything else. You'll get the green card when your number is up (somewhere in the next 5 years).
I'm a software developer with leading experience in a successful healthcare startup. Do you have any advice on which platforms to use, I applied for a couple of jobs but wasn't successful so far
Sorry, which platforms to use for what?
How much of a fuss is it for a start-up fresh out of YC to hire someone on an E-3 visa (the one for Australians) ? i.e., time & cost of the process including legal advice & applying for licences if any
Super cheap, easy, and fast. The E-3 visa is the easiest visa to get (as long as the applicant is Australian of course) and it doesn't matter whether the employer is a startup or an established large company.
Is it possible, as a Canadian with an engineering degree, to work 3 days in-office from the USA and 2 days remotely from Canada? Ideally, it'd be nice to have a US salary and live mostly in Canada.
100%. This would be permissible on any work visa, whether TN, O-1. H-1B, E-2, or E-1.
The other concern would be tax wise, how do you deal with the CRA regarding the US salary and what not.
Even if it's double taxed, the salary differential would make it worth it.
If a Russian citizen seeks to travel to the U.S. these days to create jobs / invest in his own company, what visa type should one pursue to maximize chances of getting approved?
It's really tough for Russians to get visas to the U.S. now regardless of the visa. There's no investor visa for Russians so the O-1 is probably the best option but as I noted in another thread, visa applications by Russians typically get denied or end up in a black hole.
If you have the option to consider both, which visa would be the more seamless (and faster) path to green card?
L1A or O1?
(Coming from South Africa, running SaaS company with holding co in DE)
No question here, but love to see this, having been the grateful recipient of your support in the past, Peter! Thanks again.
(Peter is awesome!)
That's very kind. I hope that all is well.
At what stage should US-based startups start considering hiring folks needing help with immigration?
There's really no waiting period. Startups generally can sponsor foreign nationals without issue. Certain minor and very easy company-related requirements need to be in place but that's it.
Why not hire local residents?
Because it's hard, and I'm curious at which stage does the difficulty of hiring local talent outweigh the difficulty of dealing with immigration
Hard? I know people around me struggling to find work. Ghost jobs are all over the place, local USA residents are struggling to find jobs. There are local residents ready to hired everywhere.
I appreciate your perspective, thanks for sharing. Mine is that great engineers are extremely hard to find, given there are many more jobs available to them than there are folks searching right now. For nearly every other role, the opposite is true, and hiring local talent is very possible.
I have nothing to contribute and am late. However, every time I see YC AMA I read YMCA.
That is very funny.
Peter was extremely helpful in my successful O1A petition, highly recommend working with him.
Thanks for the kind words.
How common is it that people come to SF and work illegally on their startup and then raise money?
There's a lot that a visitor can do vis-a-vis his or her startup without crossing the unauthorized employment line. The major black line is cash compensation but there are others.
With the shrink in hiring for engineering roles how do you think that will effect h1bs ?
It's possible that getting selected in the H-1B lottery will be easier.
What are the best options for a student (F1 visa) who wants to found a startup in the US?
This can't be done while still in school but once you graduate, you can found a company while in F-1 OPT and then while in F-1 OPT status, look to change your status to O-1 (assuming that you also don't qualify for STEM OPT or another country-specific visa).
Do you foresee any improvements in PERM processing times as well as the whole process?
Unfortunately, no. Historically, the only thing that has fixed PERM backlogs is a bad economy or a major change in immigration law.
What is a difference between acceptance rate among teams vs solo founders in YC?
Again, this is outside my scope. That question should be directed to YC directly.
Can an Iranian citizen register a Delaware corporation and operate in the US?
That's a corporate law question but I'm not aware of any law prohibiting Iranian citizens from establishing a company in the U.S. and yes, once the company is established (and certain minimal/easy company-related requirements are met), the company can sponsor the founder for an O-1 visa.
From abroad? From an immigration perspective, there are no issues but other export controls/commerce laws might come into play.
Iranian citizen already in the US with a valid H1-B visa. I have seen articles mentioning that Iranian citizens are not allowed to open a corporation in the US. Is this true? And is it possible to change status of H1-B to O-1 after registering the business. Thanks.
https://www.delawareinc.com/before-forming-your-company/dela...
Hey, would you mind telling me more about your experience and how was the process like for you? I would really appreciate it. You can also send me a message @ michelsedgh@gmail.com
Can you recommend any good books or journals about US immigration law?
Email me. There are but I have to give that some thought.
Are there promising AI startups that can help with immigration?
Lots! It's becoming a very competitive space and many really add value.
What has been -- in your personal experience as well as in the experience of some of your lawyer colleagues -- some of the 'hardest' cases wrt employment authorization for US-based startups and YC? And why?
Also, how are you anticipating the immigration landscape to change especially if President Donald Trump returns to the White House in January 2025? I'm asking this in the context of the 2017-2021 Trump administration's massive clampdown on Specialty Occupation visas through executive orders. [0]
[0] https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/tr...
Those who are in YC and who previously were in YC almost always can get work authorization, whether it's an O-1, E-2, H-1B, or country-specific visa. Relatively speaking, the harder cases are those involving those who don't have at least a bachelor's degree. While lots of experience sometimes can fix this, not always, which means that an O-1 visa is usually the only option. Regarding the impact of a change in administration, I just touched on this in response to another question/comment.
Why aren’t there tech startup immigration sanctuary cities? We have local authorities not working with the feds for referring criminals to ICE. Could you have the same for software engineers?
Euros should stay in Europe.
Move to SF if you want the tendies.
Why did you decide to work with this rather than with people who might need your skills more, or do you do that too?
That's a fair question. We also do a lot of pro bono work on both the family and employment side.
do you have a site that compiles your faqs
pls
How are you thinking about the potential effects of a second Trump administration on immigration and how it might affect tech companies?
There's a lot to worry about but to keep the worry/analysis grounded, I think it makes sense to review what his administration did last time. And most of the damage was done to those who were illegal or seeking asylum or were from certain countries and seeking to travel to the U.S. It was awful and very disruptive to the lives of many. On the legal business immigration side, the main damage was the result of changes in policy and the way regulations were interpreted and applied. This included doing away with the deference given to previously approved applications when extensions/renewals were sought. This was disastrous, resulting in the denial of applications for people who had been employed in the U.S. by the same employer for years. The Biden administration immediately undid this when it took office. The other major change was in changing/increasing the requirements for getting H-1B and O-1 visas and extraordinary ability green cards. The Biden administration undid some but not all of these changes. There is concern that a Trump administration would undermine the H-1B program as well.
They also divorced the H4 renewal process from the H1B process.
USCIS had consistently renewed H4 visas along with the primary H1B application. Since H1Bs can pay for premium processing this meant both would usually be renewed within a month.
The Trump administration added a completely unnecessary biometrics requirement to the H4 renewal application (even if you had literally got your biometrics done a week ago) which meant the H4 application was now separated from the H1B application and now took at least a year to process.
Considering one can only apply for a renewal 6 months before expiry this led to tens of thousands of H4 visa holders losing the ability to travel, and having their EADs expire forcing them to quit their jobs.
This was a completely malicious action with the only purpose being to make people’s lives worse.
Is there any reason to think that Trump will ramp things up if he gets a second term? Particularly since the Supreme Court is so thoroughly conservative now?
It would make sense to expect some ramp up because immigration is a stronger electoral issue than it was previously, and because a second Trump administration will probably be more coordinated and effective in implementing its goals than the first one was. Given how laden with unintended consequences any change in immigration policy is, though, there are probably some limits on the rate of change that would be possible and politically prudent.
For example, without undocumented immigrants, milk would be a lot more expensive (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/15/magazine/milk-industry-un...). The current election is showing us quite starkly how significant grocery staple prices are in shaping public perception of a nation's economic health.
> For example, without undocumented immigrants, milk would be a lot more expensive (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/15/magazine/milk-industry-un...). The current election is showing us quite starkly how significant grocery staple prices are in shaping public perception of a nation's economic health.
This strikes me as a bit tone deaf. These people are paid slave wages to do this work. They have unsafe housing conditions. They pay cartel fees to get across the border. Their "employers" are breaking the law. The government looks the other way. Personally, I'd be willing to pay more for milk (or any grocery product) if Americans were doing the jobs and getting paid fair wages with good benefits.
It gives me Kelly Osbourne on The View vibes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8INEYLFWwc
Are you saying American voters are tone deaf for prioritizing food availability over ethical sourcing of food?
I mean sure, but I don't think that judgement has any consequence unless anyone grabs a soapbox and starts chastising people for wanting cheaper food. I haven't seen any of the candidates do that yet.
I think even with a soapbox it wouldn’t be terribly effective.
We all know where our laptops and smartphones come from and the questionable-at-best labor practices associated with them, and nearly all of us continue to use them.
(To be clear, I’m no better. If a smartphone was released that was controversy-free but cost twice as much, I doubt I would buy it.)
I think food prices would be the same. People would complain about (and vote around) the prices rising, even if the higher prices were the result of more ethical labor laws.
I’m not saying that we shouldn’t fix bad labor practices, I’m just saying that people will invariably be hypocritical about it.
Smartphones/laptops/hardware is slightly different because its manufactured/assembled overseas. The dairy industry is domestically based and acting like its workers are based in the 3rd world. Threatening the population with higher prices if they can't continue to break the law is extortion and it needs to be treated as such. If you can't run a legit business with legal labor, you need to be shut down. Someone else will find a way to do it.
I don't really disagree, I'm against exploitative labor, and I agree that if you can't do things legally you probably shouldn't be in business, especially in an extremely rich country like the US. [1]
I'm arguing that most people are hypocrites on this, and the last two years have proven that they'll blame the current president if their food prices go up. I'm not claiming that this is accurate, I'm claiming that that's what people seem to think.
[1] Exploitive labor is wrong everywhere obviously, but it's much easier to justify a more "relative morality" in a place with much more limited resources.
Agreed, politics is a team sport and someone is going to get the blame on grocery costs or gas prices. Its really the medias fault because people don't have the interest/time/intellect to dig into these issues - its all on headlines/clickbait. Illegal labor practices in farming/dairy/meat processing have been going on forever but they only seem to be front and center every 4 years, or < 3 weeks out from a national election cycle.
This isn't about food availability or ethnical sourcing of food. Apparently the business model of the dairy industry has illegal labor baked into how they do things. They have the gall to threaten Americans with higher prices if their workforce is eliminated. Sounds like extortion to me. This is a problem of crony capitalism.
What are your predictions on how H1B visa holders will be impacted if Trump wins the election?
I think it will be much harder to get an H-1B petition approved, at least initially like last go-round, and there could be high salary requirements, which almost went into effect last time.
I think you missed to mention your area of expertise in AMA description
I know. That's embarrassing. I've never done that before. Thanks for pointing out!
I have a Greencard and would become eligible to apply for citizenship this month. I wonder what the opinions are here on the pros and cons of that. Generally, regarding most practical aspects of daily life, being permanent resident seems pretty much equivalent to that of an US citizen.
Pros:
- can vote
- can get security clearance, potentially more income
- even long periods abroad do not bear the risk of loosing privilege
- can do jury duty
Cons:
- need to do jury duty
- need to declare income to IRS regardless of residency
- potentially be taxed by IRS
Any other cons I'm not aware of? I heard that getting rid of the US citizenship (e.g. for tax reasons) will make it hard to get a visa ever again.
I think your forgetting one of the most important pros: an inalienable right to re-enter the country after going abroad.
Also a pro is that while traveling you have the services of the U.S embassy to you, which could be a life saver depending on what other citizenship you hold and the circumstances.
That exact thing happened to a bunch at our shop. They went back to India for family, then could never come back.
Took us two years to clean up all their coding issues, although we still find some from time to time even now, 5 years later
I became a US citizen because I wanted to be able to vote and be a full participant of my community, and it's easier to be in the same line as my wife and child at the airport.
But even though I am not a criminal, it was also on my mind that if I were ever falsely convicted in some travesty of justice, I could also be deported, which would make it even worse.
Good point. That's why I listed voting and jury duty, I was summoned to serve on a jury multiple times, and I always feel weirdly excluded when I have to explain that I'm not eligible. I know it can be a burden though..
At the airport, citizens and legal residents always share a line, in my experience. We tried to maintain Global Entry for the whole family for a while, but as the entry process got streamlined for citizens and GC holders over the years, the advantages of that vanished.
I wouldn't frame the tax parts like that. Just by having a green card, you are generally subject to the same worldwide taxation as US citizens, with only subtle differences.
Perhaps a bigger difference is that it's somewhat easier to abandon the green card than to renounce US citizenship.
As long as you keep your greencard, you still need to declare your income worldwide.
Depending on your home country, having US passport opens up a lot of other possibilities for travel too.
Furthermore if you have held* a green card for the last 8 (of 15 years) i.e. you hold permanent resident status you also become in-scope for the tax expatriation law that apply to US Citizens, and possible ongoing declaration requirements: https://www.expatriationattorneys.com/green-card-u-s-exit-ta...
I've never been US-resident; the reason I know about this is talking to someone who relinquished theirs when I asked if they could keep it.
*from the U.S. Government's point of view.
> As a green card holder, you generally are required to file a U.S. income tax return and report worldwide income no matter where you live.[1] You’ll probably get a tax discount if you’re still paying taxes in your original country, but you must file US returns regardless.
If you haven’t been filing returns for the past 5 years, you should hire a CPA to get a professional opinion and possibly file late returns before applying for citizenship.
[1] https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/freq...
Major con: infinitely easier to deport
Why is that, could you elaborate?
pros: if you leave the US you can still claim your SS on retirement (some countries have a reciprocal agreement, most dont)
What is your timeline to stay in the US? If 5 years or less, I would say avoid it, unless have a specific "pro" that you want. Also, if you have a spouse and children, they might be important factors in your decision.
Main pro: You are an American.
I remember watching the company I worked for in California lay off Americans and replace them with Indians. For all the talk about “prevailing wage” and “shortage of talent,” I just remember seeing it with my own eyes. One guy worked there till he was in his 60’s, built the company’s entire software, yet was kicked to the curb.
I worked for Best Buy. Entire teams fired but first had to train the Indian Accenture replacements. Entirely their right to fire us but don’t you dare say there is a “talent shortage.” There is definitely a talent shortage — of talent willing to work for $20/hour. In the jobs I’m seeing now, what used to be $65/hour jobs are now $48/hour. I remember making $90/hour a few years ago — now similar levels one would be very lucky to find $50/hour for a similar role.
I know H1Bs working at $40/hour for jobs their American counterparts are making $75/hour. They can’t move to higher paying roles at other companies because of the visa.
Also the termed “highly skilled” is an absolute joke. I can teach a person off the street to be “highly skilled” in a few weeks, based on the standard of what “highly skilled” means in H1B.
H1B needs to be highly reformed. It’s the tech equivalent of hiring construction workers from the Home Depot parking lot and paying under the table wages. I am not generally a fan of tariffs, but I suggest a 100% tariff on H1B wages paid by the hiring company. And that tariff would be a sliding scale — the more H1Bs you hire, the higher the tariff. If you need that foreign engineer so badly, paying $100/hour shouldn’t be a hardship. That would incentivize hiring the American/permanent resident at $80/hour. We’d find that “shortage” going away pretty quickly. Drive up the costs of Accenture/Infosys/etc., to make them unattractive. The only reason those companies exist is to provide cheap labor to companies like Best Buy, etc. The money collected from that tariff can be used to fund tax breaks for companies that don’t hire H1Bs. H1B isn’t about highly skilled labor. It’s about “highly” skilled cheap labor.
There are 600k H1B holders in total in the USA so they're not taking as many jobs as you think they are. $40 per hour is the minimum requirement by law for H1B (https://day1cpt.org/news/understanding-h-1b-minimum-salary-r...) and also the average is $80 for H1B holders (https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2023/06/05/immig...)
In FY 2021, 66% of approved H-1B beneficiaries earned a master’s degree or higher compared to the 13% of americans with masters degree
Now coming to indians in the USA doing low paid labour - average indian household in USA earns 152,341 vs 74580 of US average.
get your facts right and say thank you to indians for making america great!
When Accenture has a huge offshore workforce to augment the H1Bs — they are still part of the problem, visa or not. H1B is tightly related to offshoring. They might have a few H1Bs with a client company, and then 50 or 100 offshore employees who are definitely not making $40 per hour. I personally trained Accenture employees who had a team in India doing the “real” work at far less than $40/hour. Most of Bangalore exists because of this business model.
The big “consulting” body shops are doing the labor equivalent of dumping. Dumping is a WTO violation, but seemingly doesn’t apply to labor.
My post isn’t about Indians. It’s about Indian companies that exploit the H1B system to create a pipeline to offshoring. I saw it with my own eyes.
“Average Indian household income is 152k” — the average Indian in the U.S. isn’t an H1B worker. This isn’t about Indians — this is about Indian “skilled labor” that’s filing a “shortage.” Indians are highly represented in many highly paid careers in the U.S. and the vast majority of Indians in the U.S. aren’t working “$40/hour” tech jobs.
And, a tariff on H1B (and offshore team) wages shouldn’t hurt H1Bs right? If there is actually a shortage, companies would be glad to fill the position. So how would that harm H1Bs? If a tariff on H1Bs results in fewer H1Bs, then clearly the shortage was a myth.
With Best Buy, I was in those meetings. The decision to hire Accenture had zero to do with any “shortage,” but it was to boost the company’s diminishing profits due to the impact of Covid on the retail space. So this argument that we need H1Bs and offshoring because of some “shortage” is a complete lie. If you fire your workers, then that’s the opposite of a shortage. You had a surplus of workers — otherwise why are we firing people?
I can't speak to Indian replacements, but I remember reading on here that the people at Google MV were furious that the Python team got completely disbanded and reconstituted in Munich.
Obviously this was to lower wage costs, but I was reading that and was in awe of the entitlement. Like.. the jobs belong to US personnel or to no one, EU devs don't deserve them?
Any team replaced for cost savings is going to feel insulted and demeaned.
Them whinging is not them being entitled or intending to insult you, they're just defending their self worth, just like you're doing by defending the jobs having come to your area.
Imagine the team had been replaced by fresh college greenhorns using the same seats. The rhetoric would still be the same outrage and resentment.
Personally I think a big part of this is the utterly absurd cost-of-living in the US. Why should it cost SO much more to hire US devs instead of devs in Munich, Germany, which is a world-leading economy and highly technological nation? This isn't quite like moving jobs from the US to Chile or India. Perhaps it has something to do with the ridiculous housing costs in the US, plus the ridiculous healthcare costs, plus the ridiculous transportation costs (you don't need a car in Munich), plus the ridiculous cost of eating in a restaurant (no 20% tipping in Munich), I could go on and on.
I really think the US is pricing itself out of the market in many places, and I almost never see anyone actually address this in discussions about international economics.
Is there any data about H1B for large workforce "suppliers" vs. for individuals?
As far as I know, H1B doesn't allow you to be an Accenture in India, and ship people to the US (even if they'd be at Accenture in the US).
That said, for companies like Best Buy, H1B is just a tool, and if they want to pay less, they will find a way to pay less. What they will not do is pay you more. Instead of moving people around, they might opt to move the office to a different country. Writing software isn't bound to any location, so maybe making moving people harder will just end up making moving offices more attractive, the net result being even less than what you have now.
Maybe it's pure corporate greed, or short-term thinking or late-stage capitalism, but I doubt it can all be pinned on some sort of migration abuse.
I'm bookmarking this. Thank you.
This just happened to a company I used to work for. Now they have a bunch of people in India working remotely for cheap.
I wonder why they don't have h1b's for sports teams? Those players get paid an awful lot. Could easily outsource it to someone passing a certification exam and having a fake degree.
Thought terminating cliche below
Wow, racist and objectively wrong.
Not really, they're professional stars too. Writing code is easy. Writing good code is hard.
The H1b paradigm of a herd of people writing bad code and a few stars fixing that code is breaking down everywhere. Just look at HP, Oracle, Intel, etc. etc.
Why don’t you look at Google, Meta, etc?
1. A simple search would have shown the India is not at the bottom of the Olympics table.
2. Even if it is, what is the evidence it is due to genetics rather than culture?
Per capita they are at the bottom.
To imply, as you have, that genetics doesn't influence sports skill to a great degree is preposterous.
I used that country as an example because it is the major source of workers for tech wage suppression in the states. There is no evidence of any danger that the same negative pressure on athletics will occur.
Rushing to accuse me of racism because you disagree is offensive.
To start with, it was brave of you to edit out your original post lol.
> To imply, as you have, that genetics doesn't influence sports skill to a great degree is preposterous.
1. You do realize it is possible for an outcome to have multiple possible causes which contribute to varying degrees? Show me one peer reviewed study that says genetics are the reason for India's poor Olympic performance. Just one is enough. I will even take one from a predatory journal.
2. If someone says "genetics" as the cause for something bad without evidence, then yeah, they may not be racist, but that position is by definition a racist position.
3. Indians are the at top of the economic strata in the US (highest median wage). But low-brow racists won't attribute this success to genetics but illogically attribute it to "wage suppression" lol. They have the highest median wages in the US. How are they suppressing wages?
4. This is how jews were treated in Europe for centuries and that lead to the Holocaust. Simultaneously, they were cunning and more clever than others and yet somehow also sub human in cognition.
5. Most racists generally lack a robust education in logic and history, so unfortunately, 3 and 4 are beyond their knowledge and comprehension.
6. You cited zero sources. Let me cite one from a neutral source saying H1B has no impact on wages.
https://aier.org/research/h-1b-visas-no-impact-on-wages/
You accuse someone of the modern equivalent of blasphemy and are surprised when you observe a chilling effect? Coming out of the gate with that vitriol indicates a bad faith stance.
There's a pattern I've observed with modern tech types. They fail to generate hypotheses with observable data, or have opinions about anything, without tacit approval from an authority. I think it's because being part of the herd is more important to them than actual truth or debate.
Next time you should pick better than to reference these guys.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Institute_for_Econo...
Here, I found a source that disagrees.
https://cis.org/North/Unlikely-Sources-Confirm-Wage-Suppress...
The argument however is not about the tech skills or economic prowess of h1b workers. It is about the chance of professional athletics being affected to a similar degree by the wage suppression effects of importing labor.
I'm not going to engage further with you because, as I mentioned at the start, you're arguing in bad faith. I will accept an apology should you so choose to humble yourself.
when money is the only KPI for the management, it must end this way...
Employers should have to prove they were not able to find a U.S. citizen who can do the job before they're allowed to hire someone that needs a work permit. Employers purposefully seek out non-U.S. citizens as they know they're happy to work for a lot less, especially if gets them into the U.S. This whole system encourages economic migrants, puts U.S. citizens out of work. As far as In am concerned you're actively working against your fellow Americans helping foreigners abuse and exploit our immigration laws.
There actually IS exactly such a requirement to advertise positions in the US and accept applicants. The issue is that it is gamed or done only perfunctorily. What you are looking for is enforcement, which costs money, and goes against the desires of the companies lobbying for such legislation.
It would also help enormously if the immigration was not tied to a specific company, i.e., the worker could jump to a new company at will without having to convince Company-B to do the whole sponsorship process. As it is, (iirc) if they lose their job, they have only 90?180 days to find a new sponsor or go home. This would make it much less exploitative, and also lower incentives for companies to sponsor H1Bs instead of seeking US workers. Write your congress-reps & Senators.
(Source: tech co founder in some companies that did H1Bs, so not sponsoring but managing the workers brought under the process; also competed under a coach that my school took exceptional efforts to get here from Austria because of his world-class qualifications, they still had to really fine-tune the requirements)
> Employers purposefully seek out non-U.S. citizens as they know they're happy to work for a lot less, especially if gets them into the U.S.
This is commonly stated but is not true. US companies are required to pay the "Prevailing Wage" [0] to H-1Bs, so they cannot use foreigners to undercut US citizens.
However, foreigners whose presence in the US is dependent on their employment are certainly more likely to be abused by employers
0: https://flag.dol.gov/programs/prevailingwages
The prevailing wages are comically low though for most jobs that I've seen (like half of the real reasonable salary for the job we're offering). And employers have the option of 2 data sources so that they can selectively pick the lower of the 2 depending on the jobs they typically apply for.
> US companies are required to pay the "Prevailing Wage" [0] to H-1Bs, so they cannot use foreigners to undercut US citizens.
This is laughable. I do not know how the government calculates those wages, but as someone who got to US on H-1B visa this year I'm making more than 2x the "prevailing wage" listed on my LCA application.
Just to clarify: my job is a Software Architect, in one of East Coast states, and the prevailing wage listed in my application was $84k. So it is not that my salary is especially good, it's this government-mandated one that is a joke.
I'm lucky, because I came here to work for the same company I used to work in my home country so I got offered good terms (somehow H-1B was easier to get than L-1). If some company offered me a job for the "prevailing wage" I would laugh in their face, but I'm sure for some people that would seem like a lucrative offer.
I just checked my own LCA. My listed (and actual) salary on the LCA is 1.07x the listed prevailing wage, but it doesn't include stock or bonus which are part of my total comp. Including those, my total comp is 2.06x the listed prevailing wage.
I know from talking to my American colleagues that my total comp is around the same level as theirs, so at least at my company they don't undercut US citizens.
Your listed PW does seem quite low, and I don't know how they actually measure it. I certainly agree that companies will do whatever they can to lower wages for all worker, and not including stock or bonus in the prevailing wage is ripe for abuse. Perhaps some reform for this law is in order.
That's another thing: my compensation is basically all salary, no stock options of any kind. I think the trick might be that my immigration lawyer listed the PW for "entry level" Software Architect job (is there even such thing?), while I have around 20 years of experience.
Could it be that the prevailing wage is a national average, ie not adjusted for a high col city? I feel like tech salaries especially must swing a lot between flyover states and big coastal cities.
Well, maybe. I mean, my city is really not that high col city: median house price is $450k and the rent outside city center is just $1300 for one bedroom. But salaries in IT are pretty good here, my salary is actually the average for my position that I found on Glassdoor (I used that as a reference point when negotiating relocation with my employer).
Unless I'm missing something that does sound rather HCOL ...
> Employers should have to prove they were not able to find a U.S. citizen who can do the job before they're allowed to hire someone that needs a work permit.
Why?
It's their money and their business.
What business do you or I have in forcing upon them what they can do? any more than they would have any business forcing themselves upon us?
> Why?
AFAICT, the parent answered that with "This whole system...puts U.S. citizens out of work." (Whether that's actually true or not, I'm not entirely certain, but the argument could definitely be made, and, in all likelihood, convincingly.)
> What business do you or I have in forcing upon them what they can do? any more than they would have any business forcing themselves upon us?
Presumably, it's people's business because the US is basically a nation governed by the people who see it as their responsibility to help ensure their basic values (peace, prosperity, life, freedom, justice, pursuit of happiness, etc.). So, when there's regulation that affects the people, it actually is their business.
> "This whole system...puts U.S. citizens out of work." (Whether that's actually true or not, I'm not entirely certain, but the argument could definitely be made, and, in all likelihood, convincingly.)
If bringing people from outside the USA into the USA puts people out of work, doesn't having children also put people out of work?
> What business do you or I have in forcing upon them what they can do?
It's called regulation and we do it all the time.
I'm not a US citizen, but you might find that most US citizens would prefer their government to prioritize the interests of US citizens over foreign nationals. Just as I would expect my home country's government to prioritize the interests of its citizens over foreigners.
> interests of US citizens
The people who own businesses are US citizens.
There are a lot more US workers than there are US business owners.
Depends what “can do the job” means, right? Elite tech companies try to hire the highest ability people they can. The US is not a large share of the world’s population, so even if it is massively overrepresented in top performers, the vast majority of top performers are still foreign born. Your position is that US companies should hire less impressive people because they are American. Maybe you can build a functioning search engine that way, so a 100% American-born engineering team can technically do the job, but does it end up being Google? Does it end up being competitive relative to what the immigrants who worked on it would have done in their own countries or a friendlier country?
100% agree.
It is a race to the bottom that Americans will never win.
Americans who want a normal wage and life are never going to be able to compete on price with someone in South America or Eastern Europe.
This is the kind of things that should result in massive tariffs and extremely onerous tax and paperwork for the companies that do it.
Otherwise, all of our expertise will just move outside of the world and to the desperate abroad. And for what benefit?
This is some weird 'Gangs of New York' wanna be BS. I'm sorry but we have been welcoming people throughout the entirety of our existence, it is part of the American project, and it is a part of our strength, not our weakness nor downfall.
My family were the ones told 'no Irish need apply' and now you want me to tell someone else's family off and that they aren't wanted? My family fled eastern europe for their lives but you want me to tell someone else my fear of a threat to my income is more valuable than them? Nah bro, I'm good. Don't claim to be a defender of me/America/Americans. Your type didn't want my family here either back in the day but the USA thrived even with our/my existence. Being American isn't in your blood, it's in who you chose to be. Alway had been/always will be. And Americans don't choose fear over welcoming.
I'd give every new American a huge welcome hug if I could because they are us and are family. They are your parents/grandparents/great grandparents/etc. Sad that you have forgotten that or chosen to forget because you are scared too 'share'.
Everyone reading this, I'm glad you want to come be part of this great experiment. I hope you chose to stay, it's a pretty cool place with pretty cool people.
>we have been welcoming people throughout the entirety of our existence >And Americans don't choose fear over welcoming. >it's a pretty cool place with pretty cool people.
How do you explain the election of Trump, and the quite possible re-election of him? It seems that only about half of Americans fit your description these days.
Most major employers have offices in EU, US, India etc. so the can just allocate racks in those countries.
>As far as In am concerned you're actively working against your fellow Americans helping foreigners abuse and exploit our immigration laws.
Isnt it the employers exploiting the system?
People like Peter exist in part to help large organizations (including YC) exploit the current system. Peter seems focused on startups - but it's within the same vein.
The parent's sentiment is valid. There's no reason the US needs to import startups - there's plenty here in the US that don't get funding/support/attention they already deserve.
Instead of helping immigrate potential founders - I'd rather see YC do outreach in these other countries to empower/support founders within their home nation.
But, that might slightly diminish YC's chances of funding the next Facebook or something... so here we are.
It also means the next Facebook would benefit a foreign country's economy rather than America's. One reason the US economy is the best in the world is that we import entrepreneurs and their businesses.
> helping foreigners abuse and exploit our immigration laws.
Well, that's a woefully short-sighted and zero sum way of thinking.
"an impressive 44.8% of Fortune 500 companies in 2023, equating to 224 companies, were founded by immigrants or their children."
So, it is more accurate to say that the US is abusing and exploiting other countries by stealing their job-creators and thus, jobs.
Source:
https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/news/new-report-r....
I don't have a question, but wanted to let you know that your site, www.robertsimmigration.com has a self-signed certificate and therefore others cannot create a secure connection to it.
> openssl s_client -connect www.robertsimmigration.com:443 2>/dev/null
> ---
> SSL handshake has read 1859 bytes and written 427 bytes
> Verification error: self-signed certificate
> ---
Cheers
Thanks! I need to shut down that website. I merged my firm with another.
Sorry, there's a dropped phrase in my title. It should read "I'm Peter Roberts, immigration attorney, who does work for YC and startups. AMA." Thanks.
Fixed now!
That is going to be confusing, good luck ;)
Hi Peter. I know a little about H1B1 visas and the process of getting one, having worked with many colleagues who are in the US on one, but I don’t fully understand the pros/cons of the H1B1 program from the perspective of the average American.
As one presidential candidate will likely direct his ire at the program if he wins, can you explain why such a program is compelling or vital for our tech industry? My H1B1 colleagues seem happy to be in the US (and have indicated such) but nonetheless appear exploited. My naive economic analysis is that the visa program depresses wages to the benefit of corporations, but I’m sure the situation is far more nuanced.
(I’d like something to offer my conservative friends/family who increasingly think all immigration should be verboten.)
Ask you conservative friends how they feel about Libertarians (bring up Rand Paul). If they say they like what Libertarians stand for, remind them that the official libertarian platform is for an open border and a welcoming America in keeping with America's tradition of being a nation of immigrants. Then remind them of your great grandma/aunt/nana with the funny accent and if she and her children should have been kept out because someone felt scared of the maybe/might/gut feeling threat she posed to them.
> (I’d like something to offer my conservative friends/family who increasingly think all immigration should be verboten.)
Not proberts, but observing left wing media in the States over the last 8-10 years I've seen a carpet bombing of the same concept: eliding the difference between immigration and illegal immigration. If you want to talk to your conservative friends and family I'd start by checking whether or not it's illegal immigration they're against. Even the Democrats seem to be noticing that people don't like open border policies and are scrambling to adjust campaign promises in light of this.
Oh yes it's just illegal immigrants that Republicans hate. That's why they spread lies about refugees and other legal immigrants, right?
The context was getting on with friends and family.
I understand you might not able to think in these terms when it comes to the hated enemy, but if you think of all people as people, even Republicans, then you might notice that they don't all think the same things. Or even that they don't hate illegal immigrants, but think that laws are a good idea and criminals should be punished, not rewarded. This is just understanding both sides 101, in case you do break out of this mindset.
> if you think of all people as people, even Republicans
The OP didn't accuse Republicans of being non-people. They specifically made a -- true, incidentally -- factual claim:
> > That's why they spread lies about refugees and other legal immigrants, right
It is notable, though, that it is the Republican candidate that has very directly been using dehumanizing language. And you are here asking people to get into a both-sides argument. The situation isn't symmetric: the arguments shouldn't have to be.
> I understand you might not able to think in these terms when it comes to the hated enemy
Also notable it is that one specific candidate is using the term "enemy within" to describe US residents. It's not the Democrat.
> Or even that they don't hate illegal immigrants, but think that laws are a good idea and criminals should be punished, not rewarded.
Again, your statement has nothing to do with what you're responding to.
> Also notable it is that one specific candidate is using the term "enemy within" to describe US residents. It's not the Democrat.
It's also notable that one whole media and political morass has been calling a candidate "literally Hitler" and he's been shot by a would-be assassin. Almost... more notable.
> Again, your statement has nothing to do with what you're responding to.
What do you mean? If someone says the OP's friends and relatives hate a group of people, it's worth mentioning that they may not hate them at all.
Did I say "all Republicans"? Nope. This is understanding English 101.
If you say "Republicans don't just hate illegal immigrants" it's pretty isomorphic to "All Republicans don't just hate illegal immigrants". Maybe that's English 102.
"Teachers use chalk daily." - definitely a true statement. Some amount of teachers do.
"All teachers use chalk daily." - definitely a false statement. Certainly some teachers don't.
Again, English 101.
No, "Teachers use chalk daily" is nowhere near true. It would've been mostly true 30 years ago, before whiteboards, and now it's definitely not the case. The hair you're splitting only works when the approximation that omits the "all" is close to 100%.
Hi Peter, thanks for doing this.
One question I have is regarding skilled immigration from India and China specifically. Currently, people have to wait decades through no fault of their own. Big Tech companies, Chamber of Commerce, and many Republicans also support this.
However, a Democratic Senator, Dick Durbin has disingenuously blocked meaningful progress and reforms over and over and over again. He blocked the Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act of 2019 which had passed House with 365 votes and was sponsored by current Vice President Kamala Harris. He added on a poison pill that would not have gotten support knowing fully well that the Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act would have passed.
Similarly, Rep. Zoe Lofgren wrote to Speaker Pelosi expressing great dismay that her legislation (different bill, 2 years ago) which would have provided reforms was pulled from the floor and that it was important to force a vote.
It is certainly known that Republicans have blocked immigration reform (Grassley on CHIPs, etc) but Democrats have had multiple opportunities to remove the per-country visa cap and repeatedly refuse to do so in varying dishonest manners.
Why is Democratic leadership so against skilled immigrants coming from India and China? The closest we have come so far was under a Republican administration. Many populist Republicans support these reforms so it is perplexing to me that a party so committed to removing barriers that enforce systemic discrimination continue to let things play out as they are.
https://rollcall.com/2022/12/15/democrat-pushes-to-reverse-d...
You can't expect an attorney in private practice to have an authoritative answer to this question.
(And, it frankly appears this account is owned or operated by a state actor.)
How are YC startups addressing the myriad of legal and copyright concerns around the AI models that seem to underpin so many of their business models?
That's outside my area but the key is to engage with corporate/IP counsel at the outset, ideally before the company has been incorporate. One non-immigration issue that comes up all the time is incorporating before the founder has left his or her employer and thus putting the IP at risk.
Ah apologies, didn't realize you were talking immigration only
Serious question...
If it's true people are crossing our borders, claiming asylum, and being let go with work permits, why should anyone do wait to do it the legal way and wait or get denied?
What is the advantage to doing it the normal way?
If your goal is time bound (say a few years), the asylum path may work. It will eventually run out though when you get your hearing in court. Asylum applications are overwhelmingly rejected. The legal path, at least theoretically, has a higher probability* of leading to permanent residence.
*Except for Indians.
Crossing illegally is an option of last resort.
If you have the ability to immigrate on a visa, it's much safer and easier than relying on "coyotes" or having to cross multiple borders illegally just to take a shot at entering the US.
There's a reason you don't see Mexicans cross the border illegally anymore.
not getting ICE knocking on your door and deporting you after living here for decades (happened to a friend's brother in law).
Yeah, I guess I was thinking of a more temporary working situation.
If you can cheat without consequences, what is the advantage of not cheating.
The solution of course is to fix the asylum process so that applications get reviewed faster not to restrict asylum (that's my view at last) but until that happens, for those who get work authorization based on an asylum application, this is just a temporary fix because at some point, their application will be reviewed and if not valid denied.
Sounds like the asylum process is an alternative stream, and the entire border has become a "port of entry."
When asylum is the low-friction way to enter the country and acquire a legal status, economics suggests fewer people will use the traditional immigration process.
Hey Peter!
Stop helping people come to the US. We don't need the outside help.
We have tens of thousands of unemployed tech workers in this country who need work.
Cisco has been in a stead state of layoffs for years, recently laying off 4,000.
Amazon and Meta are laying off.
Actually, you need to be advocating for immigration:
* More founders so they can employ you.
* More engineers onsite so they are in the same boat/market as you, i.e. need similar or more income. Otherwise, they will "steal" your job from their bedrooms from cheaper locations, because they are able to bill less from there.