IV2007
07-30 10:37 AM
Guys,
My undertstanding is, if one is a primary applicant on EAD and he/she starts studying full time, one need to pay taxes (like saying working part time or doing business, etc...).
Once school is complete one needs to get back to same position or higher as an EAD applicant.
I am also looking for concrete answers/confirmation on this.
Tried to post a mesg to attorney on this forum but the post was closed. :(
Anyone know for sure how to handle this situation. Or anyone did this and still got GC ??
Thanks
shree
My undertstanding is, if one is a primary applicant on EAD and he/she starts studying full time, one need to pay taxes (like saying working part time or doing business, etc...).
Once school is complete one needs to get back to same position or higher as an EAD applicant.
I am also looking for concrete answers/confirmation on this.
Tried to post a mesg to attorney on this forum but the post was closed. :(
Anyone know for sure how to handle this situation. Or anyone did this and still got GC ??
Thanks
shree
wallpaper New Hot JUSTIN BIEBER 2011
fcres
08-09 10:19 AM
Here it is
Q #17 in http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
Q17: How will USCIS interpret the language of AC21 Sec 104(c) (for three-year H-1B extensions) during a period in which AOS applications could be filed?
A17. USCIS interprets AC21 �104(c) as only applicable when an alien, who is the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, is eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status but for application of the per country limitations. Any petitioner seeking an H-1B extension on behalf of a beneficiary pursuant to AC21 �104(c) must thus establish that at the time of filing for such extension, the alien is not eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status on account of the per country immigrant visa limitations.
And here is what OH says in his breaking news for July 24th after this memo
0724/2007: AC 21 Three-Year Increment H-1B Extension Petition Availability in July and August 2007
Under Section 104(c) of AC 21 Act, those who have an approved I-140 petition or pending EB-485 application with the approved I-140 petition are eligible for the H-1B extension in three-year increment, if they cannot file EB-485 or EB-485 is pending but cannot be adjudicated because of the visa number unavailability for him/her. The question remained whether visa number should be unavailable at the time of filing of H-1B extension or at the time of adjudication of filing. The USCIS FAQ indicates that it will be determined by the date of filing rather than date of adjudication.
You should ask your lawyer to get an amendment. I read here yday somebody doing that.
Q #17 in http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
Q17: How will USCIS interpret the language of AC21 Sec 104(c) (for three-year H-1B extensions) during a period in which AOS applications could be filed?
A17. USCIS interprets AC21 �104(c) as only applicable when an alien, who is the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, is eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status but for application of the per country limitations. Any petitioner seeking an H-1B extension on behalf of a beneficiary pursuant to AC21 �104(c) must thus establish that at the time of filing for such extension, the alien is not eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status on account of the per country immigrant visa limitations.
And here is what OH says in his breaking news for July 24th after this memo
0724/2007: AC 21 Three-Year Increment H-1B Extension Petition Availability in July and August 2007
Under Section 104(c) of AC 21 Act, those who have an approved I-140 petition or pending EB-485 application with the approved I-140 petition are eligible for the H-1B extension in three-year increment, if they cannot file EB-485 or EB-485 is pending but cannot be adjudicated because of the visa number unavailability for him/her. The question remained whether visa number should be unavailable at the time of filing of H-1B extension or at the time of adjudication of filing. The USCIS FAQ indicates that it will be determined by the date of filing rather than date of adjudication.
You should ask your lawyer to get an amendment. I read here yday somebody doing that.
gc_mania_03
10-01 11:14 AM
Add me in..
2011 hot justin bieber 2011 new
GCBy3000
09-15 05:03 PM
My argument is it better to take a side on immigration issue or not. Maintaining status quo is better than including some releif for legal immigrants. I bet people in US like legal immigrants to legal immigrants, but how many people is ?. Will this favor any politicians to garner some votes or will it back fire? No one knows and that is why I said at this time of election period, it is better for them to maintain status quo than favoring legal immigrants.
If they pass something for legal immigrants for sure they are going to lose some votes who are favoring illegal immigrants which is bigger number than people favoring legals. So I dont think they will take a risk at this time to favor legal immigrants in any bills if at all there is one before the election.
I am not sure if this is entirely true. Yes we can't vote but folks who are pro-immigrant can and they will decide if legal immigration is good for this country or not. Trust me, if everyone was against legal immigration in this country then none of us would be here in the first place. Everyone knows that there is a shortage of labor and migrants are needed to fill the jobs. ............
.
If they pass something for legal immigrants for sure they are going to lose some votes who are favoring illegal immigrants which is bigger number than people favoring legals. So I dont think they will take a risk at this time to favor legal immigrants in any bills if at all there is one before the election.
I am not sure if this is entirely true. Yes we can't vote but folks who are pro-immigrant can and they will decide if legal immigration is good for this country or not. Trust me, if everyone was against legal immigration in this country then none of us would be here in the first place. Everyone knows that there is a shortage of labor and migrants are needed to fill the jobs. ............
.
more...
Berkeleybee
03-02 05:48 PM
For everyone who wants to get something going -- i.e. come up with an idea, a strategy to execute and then deliver, please get in touch with the relevant task team leader. Understand that all of them are PROFOUNDLY busy, so gather your thoughts and work out at least some details of your idea before you get in touch with them.
For Membership: Jay at jay@immigrationvoice.org
For Media: Sunil at sunil@immigrationvoice.org
For Content: Sandeep, sandeep@immigrationvoice.org
For Liaison: Aman aman@immigrationvoice.org and Shilpa shilpa@immigrationvoice.org
For Meet the Lawmakers - anurag@immigrationvoice.org and pratik@immigrationvoice.org
Hope I'm not missing anyone -- core, please fill this in if I've got it wrong.
Thanks,
Berkeleybee
For Membership: Jay at jay@immigrationvoice.org
For Media: Sunil at sunil@immigrationvoice.org
For Content: Sandeep, sandeep@immigrationvoice.org
For Liaison: Aman aman@immigrationvoice.org and Shilpa shilpa@immigrationvoice.org
For Meet the Lawmakers - anurag@immigrationvoice.org and pratik@immigrationvoice.org
Hope I'm not missing anyone -- core, please fill this in if I've got it wrong.
Thanks,
Berkeleybee
naushit
05-22 04:02 PM
My attorney just said...she has too many application to file...she just cant do it on 1st June, she will try to do 1st week of June....but I am sure she is gonna miss 10th June too :).... happy?
more...
leonqiu
03-14 12:06 PM
Charles Oppenheim, Chief of Immigrant Visa Control and Reporting Division at the U.S. Department of State (DOS) was a guest speaker at a February 28, 2007 Washington D.C. Chapter meeting of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA). Mr. Oppenheim was kind enough to share his office�s visa number / Visa Bulletin expectations for 2007.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF RETROGRESSION
Mr. Oppenheim discussed the historical background that has led to the current retrogression situation. Retrogression is not something new or unfamiliar in immigration law, as long-time MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers may recall. For many, however, who may have become involved in the green card process since 2001, it is new and, of course, highly problematic. Employment-based (or EB) numbers were current from 2001 through 2005 due to a legislative "fix." This legislation authorized prior, unused immigrant visa numbers from several earlier years to be recaptured and put back into the immigration system. That quota of recaptured numbers was exhausted during Fiscal Year (FY) 2005. As a result, in FYs 2005, 2006 and 2007 we have witnessed severe backlogs in the EB3 categories for all countries and, starting in FY2006, in the EB2 categories for China and India.
PREDICTIONS FOR EB IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBERS
Employment-Based First Preference / EB1
Mr. Oppenheim stated that the employment-based first preference (EB1) category is expected to remain current for all countries of chargeability, including India and China. This is likely throughout the remainder of FY2007 (ending September 30, 2007).
Mr. Oppenheim explained what he referred to as the �trickling effect� of unused visa numbers between EB categories. This trickling effect has resulted in the EB1 category's having remained current. The numbers in the employment-based fourth preference (EB4) and employment-based fifth preference (EB5) categories that are unused are transferred up to the EB1 category. Without this trickling affect, the EB1 category would not remain current for India and China.
This also has an impact on EB2, as unused EB1 numbers trickle down to EB2. There are not enough numbers for India and China, however, to allow the EB2 for these two countries to become current. But it has helped to move EB2 forward for these two countries, to some extent.
Employment-Based Second Preference / EB2
The employment-based second preference (EB2) category is expected to remain at its current cutoff dates for nationals of India and China. These dates have been stagnant at April 22, 2005 for China and January 8, 2003 for India for a few months.
Employment-Based Third Preference / EB3
No forward movement is expected for the employment-based third preference (EB3) category. In fact, as predicted in the March Visa Bulletin and confirmed by Mr. Oppenheim, there is a strong possibility that the EB3 numbers that are not in the "worldwide" chargeability will further retrogress, or move backward. This is expected to occur in the summer of 2007. This backward movement is based upon excessive demand for the limited supply of visa numbers. This will adversely affect nationals of India and China.
Double Dipping
Another problem important to note is one of �doubling dipping� for visa numbers by some individuals. As explained by Mr. Oppenheim, if an employment-based beneficiary filed for adjustment of status in the U.S. and for consular processing overseas, that individual could acquire two visa numbers if both cases are approved. This would result in a wasted immigrant visa number. As a result of this scenario, the DOS and the USCIS are planning a system that would coordinate their visa number allocation, so that each will be aware if the other has already issued a visa number for a particular individual, to prevent waste of this kind.
CONCLUSION
We appreciate Mr. Oppenheim's continued willingness to address matters related to visa numbers and the Visa Bulletin. The lack of employment-based visa numbers is a source of great frustration for many and Mr. Oppenheim's predictions do not assuage that feeling. It is better to have an understanding of the reality of the situation, however, than to operate in ignorance or with unrealistic expectations. The shortage of visa numbers, once again, underscores the need for legislation in this area, to increase the numbers, change the counting of the numbers (from one per person to one per family), or to revamp the system entirely.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF RETROGRESSION
Mr. Oppenheim discussed the historical background that has led to the current retrogression situation. Retrogression is not something new or unfamiliar in immigration law, as long-time MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers may recall. For many, however, who may have become involved in the green card process since 2001, it is new and, of course, highly problematic. Employment-based (or EB) numbers were current from 2001 through 2005 due to a legislative "fix." This legislation authorized prior, unused immigrant visa numbers from several earlier years to be recaptured and put back into the immigration system. That quota of recaptured numbers was exhausted during Fiscal Year (FY) 2005. As a result, in FYs 2005, 2006 and 2007 we have witnessed severe backlogs in the EB3 categories for all countries and, starting in FY2006, in the EB2 categories for China and India.
PREDICTIONS FOR EB IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBERS
Employment-Based First Preference / EB1
Mr. Oppenheim stated that the employment-based first preference (EB1) category is expected to remain current for all countries of chargeability, including India and China. This is likely throughout the remainder of FY2007 (ending September 30, 2007).
Mr. Oppenheim explained what he referred to as the �trickling effect� of unused visa numbers between EB categories. This trickling effect has resulted in the EB1 category's having remained current. The numbers in the employment-based fourth preference (EB4) and employment-based fifth preference (EB5) categories that are unused are transferred up to the EB1 category. Without this trickling affect, the EB1 category would not remain current for India and China.
This also has an impact on EB2, as unused EB1 numbers trickle down to EB2. There are not enough numbers for India and China, however, to allow the EB2 for these two countries to become current. But it has helped to move EB2 forward for these two countries, to some extent.
Employment-Based Second Preference / EB2
The employment-based second preference (EB2) category is expected to remain at its current cutoff dates for nationals of India and China. These dates have been stagnant at April 22, 2005 for China and January 8, 2003 for India for a few months.
Employment-Based Third Preference / EB3
No forward movement is expected for the employment-based third preference (EB3) category. In fact, as predicted in the March Visa Bulletin and confirmed by Mr. Oppenheim, there is a strong possibility that the EB3 numbers that are not in the "worldwide" chargeability will further retrogress, or move backward. This is expected to occur in the summer of 2007. This backward movement is based upon excessive demand for the limited supply of visa numbers. This will adversely affect nationals of India and China.
Double Dipping
Another problem important to note is one of �doubling dipping� for visa numbers by some individuals. As explained by Mr. Oppenheim, if an employment-based beneficiary filed for adjustment of status in the U.S. and for consular processing overseas, that individual could acquire two visa numbers if both cases are approved. This would result in a wasted immigrant visa number. As a result of this scenario, the DOS and the USCIS are planning a system that would coordinate their visa number allocation, so that each will be aware if the other has already issued a visa number for a particular individual, to prevent waste of this kind.
CONCLUSION
We appreciate Mr. Oppenheim's continued willingness to address matters related to visa numbers and the Visa Bulletin. The lack of employment-based visa numbers is a source of great frustration for many and Mr. Oppenheim's predictions do not assuage that feeling. It is better to have an understanding of the reality of the situation, however, than to operate in ignorance or with unrealistic expectations. The shortage of visa numbers, once again, underscores the need for legislation in this area, to increase the numbers, change the counting of the numbers (from one per person to one per family), or to revamp the system entirely.
2010 Canadian pop singer Justin
lj_rr
08-06 12:52 PM
Congrats.
Labor filing date(not approval date) is your PD.What was the filing date?
It is EB2, labor approval date is my PD - No idea, why profile does not show up.
Labor filing date(not approval date) is your PD.What was the filing date?
It is EB2, labor approval date is my PD - No idea, why profile does not show up.
more...
smuggymba
10-20 05:49 PM
you said u file ITIN for tax needs - why did u apply for job dude. ITIN doesn't get u a job. H4 can't work in USA...as simple as that. Hire a good lawyer and tax consultant.
Hello! I'm on H1B, and my spouse is on H4. We received an ITIN for my spouse for our taxpaying needs. My spouse managed to get employed using the ITIN. We filed a joint tax return this year. We received a letter from SS administration saying "We cannot put these earnings on your Social Security record until the name and SSN reported agree with our records." My lawyer says: "your spouse is now barred from GC, because when she's worked for more than X amount of days she became OOS."
When the time will come for my employer to process my GC, what consequences will my spouse's unauthorised employment have on Her ability to receive a Greencard? What are the ways to rectify the situation? Appeals? Special provisions/clauses? Cost?
Thank you,
Hello! I'm on H1B, and my spouse is on H4. We received an ITIN for my spouse for our taxpaying needs. My spouse managed to get employed using the ITIN. We filed a joint tax return this year. We received a letter from SS administration saying "We cannot put these earnings on your Social Security record until the name and SSN reported agree with our records." My lawyer says: "your spouse is now barred from GC, because when she's worked for more than X amount of days she became OOS."
When the time will come for my employer to process my GC, what consequences will my spouse's unauthorised employment have on Her ability to receive a Greencard? What are the ways to rectify the situation? Appeals? Special provisions/clauses? Cost?
Thank you,
hair hot justin bieber 2011
puskeygadha
07-08 02:47 PM
is this becuase of arranged marriage? immigrants like us have to
go back home find girl quickly and get married..its just like
similar way we get screwed in the hopes of green card..
i believe arranged marriage can be hard but we can grow together
given time and patience
go back home find girl quickly and get married..its just like
similar way we get screwed in the hopes of green card..
i believe arranged marriage can be hard but we can grow together
given time and patience
more...
TeddyKoochu
01-24 10:14 AM
TeddyKoochu, based on the 2010 report, can we estimate what the total EB quota would be for 2011?
We are back to 140K, refer to demand data. This year both EB1 and EB2 are showing much lower consumption the dates will definitely move into 2007.
We are back to 140K, refer to demand data. This year both EB1 and EB2 are showing much lower consumption the dates will definitely move into 2007.
hot hot justin bieber 2011
gc_kaavaali
11-14 04:09 PM
somebody gave red mark...what happened???
more...
house justin bieber hot wallpaper.
Asian
12-07 09:26 AM
Hi,
I am EB-3 ROW, PD in Nov.03, I-140 approved. I am planning on changing my current employer (non profit) to for-profit company.
I am in my H-1 B fifth year. I renewed once on my third year. By the time I change my job to the new employer, I will have about one year left in my current H-1B.
If I change the employer, will I be subject to H-1 B visa quota restriction?
I have stayed with my current employer (University) for five years just for the hope of green card. But I think this is time to move on. Staying in my current job is so detrimental to my career.
However, if the new company that may hire me, cannot find any H-1 B visa quota left for me, I will be in trouble if it is the case.
I would appreciate your advice very much.
Thank you always.
I am EB-3 ROW, PD in Nov.03, I-140 approved. I am planning on changing my current employer (non profit) to for-profit company.
I am in my H-1 B fifth year. I renewed once on my third year. By the time I change my job to the new employer, I will have about one year left in my current H-1B.
If I change the employer, will I be subject to H-1 B visa quota restriction?
I have stayed with my current employer (University) for five years just for the hope of green card. But I think this is time to move on. Staying in my current job is so detrimental to my career.
However, if the new company that may hire me, cannot find any H-1 B visa quota left for me, I will be in trouble if it is the case.
I would appreciate your advice very much.
Thank you always.
tattoo justin bieber hot wallpaper
frostrated
09-09 04:03 PM
but the question is can someone mail the AP to India by postal mail or can someone take it along with them for their spouse if they are travelling. Precisely my question is when someone has applied for AP and when its not approved, can they travel without it and come back with AP that was approved after travel to India? This is always a grey area and no one seems to have a clear answer.
the rule states that you have to be present in the country when you apply for AP. It does not say anything on where you need to be when it is approved. There are many cases where the applicant left the US to have the document mailed or taken along with someone to the person out of the US. The applicants on return were not asked anything. It was business as usual.
the rule states that you have to be present in the country when you apply for AP. It does not say anything on where you need to be when it is approved. There are many cases where the applicant left the US to have the document mailed or taken along with someone to the person out of the US. The applicants on return were not asked anything. It was business as usual.
more...
pictures hot justin bieber pictures
pappu
09-14 06:20 PM
Thanks to all those who tuned in.
dresses hot hot justin bieber pics
americandesi
04-06 01:31 PM
Refer http://www.murthy.com/pr_thngs.html and search for
"It is also important to understand that the green card approval will be reviewed at the time of the naturalization interview. For employment-based cases, this means inquiries into how long the individual worked for the employer after obtaining the green card. If the period is extremely short, there may be questions about the bona fide nature of the green card process."
As suggested by "Optimystic", any time between 6 to 12 months should be ok.
"It is also important to understand that the green card approval will be reviewed at the time of the naturalization interview. For employment-based cases, this means inquiries into how long the individual worked for the employer after obtaining the green card. If the period is extremely short, there may be questions about the bona fide nature of the green card process."
As suggested by "Optimystic", any time between 6 to 12 months should be ok.
more...
makeup hot justin bieber wallpapers
The7zen
09-29 01:44 PM
Central Board of Excise and Customs (http://www.cbec.gov.in/)
Personally we never had problem carrying personal Jewelery.
Personally we never had problem carrying personal Jewelery.
girlfriend Hot+justin+ieber+2011+
venky08
07-27 02:52 PM
Related to the questions on this thread.
What happens when:
AOS has been filed and it is more than 180 days AND
dependent has started working on EAD AND
primary applicant loses job
Case 1: primary applicant is also on EAD
Case 2: primary applicant continues on H1 without using EAD
Do the primary applicant and/or spouse become out of status in either of these situations? Can the primary applicant invoke AC21 and look for another job - how much time does he/she have? i.e. does the AOS filing provide primary applicant a cushion in case of job loss?
thanks!
the key is that in any case, if the applicant does not have a H1-B backup and is solely relying on EAD, then he/she needs to make sure that the I-485 should not be denied. because if it does, it automatically makes the applicants out of status forcing them to leave the country. so it is always safe to have H1-B status maintained eventhough you have EAD. my2c
What happens when:
AOS has been filed and it is more than 180 days AND
dependent has started working on EAD AND
primary applicant loses job
Case 1: primary applicant is also on EAD
Case 2: primary applicant continues on H1 without using EAD
Do the primary applicant and/or spouse become out of status in either of these situations? Can the primary applicant invoke AC21 and look for another job - how much time does he/she have? i.e. does the AOS filing provide primary applicant a cushion in case of job loss?
thanks!
the key is that in any case, if the applicant does not have a H1-B backup and is solely relying on EAD, then he/she needs to make sure that the I-485 should not be denied. because if it does, it automatically makes the applicants out of status forcing them to leave the country. so it is always safe to have H1-B status maintained eventhough you have EAD. my2c
hairstyles hot justin bieber 2011 haircut
kumar26fl
09-22 11:53 PM
"Word-of-Mouth" seems to be the most effective way of campaigning! I had sent mails, and left voice to couple of my friends some time back. They became aware of IV, but not yet registered. Talked to them today, and got both of them registered. (kasas & aksrao).
Requested them to spread the word, "IV". I am sure they will read this thread and campaign for "IV".
Thanks
Requested them to spread the word, "IV". I am sure they will read this thread and campaign for "IV".
Thanks
antihero
11-26 01:15 PM
You won't have any issue with Indian Emigration officials in India. They are well aware of advanced parole as a means of entry to US.
Thanks for encouraging words. So can you confirm that the reentry to US does not require any other visa if one is carrying I-485 receipt and AP?
Also, can somebody who traveled in such a share the experience with me?
Thanks for encouraging words. So can you confirm that the reentry to US does not require any other visa if one is carrying I-485 receipt and AP?
Also, can somebody who traveled in such a share the experience with me?
go_guy123
02-28 09:53 AM
Silicon Valley Immigration Lawyer Blog Has Just Posted the Following:
The Federal government is about to start knocking on the doors of employers, demanding to see I-9 records and more. The Wall Street Journal reported that more than 1,000 audit notices (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703961104576148590023309196.html?K EYWORDS=miriam+jordan), or notices of inspection, are to be sent out by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), part of the Department of Homeland Security, within the next few days. These "audit notices" are actually subpoenas, requiring employers to present original I-9 employment verification forms and payroll documentation. An employer is usually required to produce this documentation within three days. A sample I-9 subpoena is below.
Sample I-9 Subpoena (2-2011) (http://www.scribd.com/doc/49508862/Sample-I-9-Subpoena-2-2011)
The second page of this subpoena shows that ICE demands more than I-9 forms. They request records of all employees hired within the past three years, copies of the documents the employee provided when completing the I-9, detailed information about independent contractors, any Social Security no-match letters, and detailed payroll filings.
Employers should realize that these I-9 audits can target any employer, of any size and in any sector, whether or not the employer has H-1B (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054805.html)workers, L-1 (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054809.html) workers, or sponsors foreign nationals for employment-based green cards (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054839.html). As all employers must complete I-9's for new hires and maintain payroll records, all employers should be prepared for an audit. Fines for uncorrected technical and substantive errors on the I-9 forms range from $110 to $1,100. If an employer had technical or substantive errors on their I-9 forms, they might not necessarily realize this and could be exposing themselves to substantial fines.
These audits come as ICE has created an Employment Compliance Inspection Center. The Head of ICE recently explained that this new center would "address a need to conduct audits even of the largest employers with a very large number of employees." (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703951704576092381196958362.html?K EYWORDS=I-9+audit)The center is supposed to be staffed with specialists to pore over I-9 employee files of targeted companies.
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8z A (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:yIl2AUoC8zA) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rIT s (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:qj6IDK7rITs) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?i=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:V_sGLiPBpWU (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:V_sGLiPBpWU) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKB A (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:7Q72WNTAKBA)
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom/~4/DpyqOn5n_Us
More... (http://rss.justia.com/~r/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom/~3/DpyqOn5n_Us/silicon-valley-employers-must.html)
In the era of big government and job growth mainly through increased government payrolls, we will see more of such jobs being "created" and "invented" and in case of the USCIS the costs being passed on in term of increased fees etc.
Unless US is dragged to WTO over these out of control H1B/ L1 fees this will never stop.
The Federal government is about to start knocking on the doors of employers, demanding to see I-9 records and more. The Wall Street Journal reported that more than 1,000 audit notices (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703961104576148590023309196.html?K EYWORDS=miriam+jordan), or notices of inspection, are to be sent out by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), part of the Department of Homeland Security, within the next few days. These "audit notices" are actually subpoenas, requiring employers to present original I-9 employment verification forms and payroll documentation. An employer is usually required to produce this documentation within three days. A sample I-9 subpoena is below.
Sample I-9 Subpoena (2-2011) (http://www.scribd.com/doc/49508862/Sample-I-9-Subpoena-2-2011)
The second page of this subpoena shows that ICE demands more than I-9 forms. They request records of all employees hired within the past three years, copies of the documents the employee provided when completing the I-9, detailed information about independent contractors, any Social Security no-match letters, and detailed payroll filings.
Employers should realize that these I-9 audits can target any employer, of any size and in any sector, whether or not the employer has H-1B (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054805.html)workers, L-1 (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054809.html) workers, or sponsors foreign nationals for employment-based green cards (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054839.html). As all employers must complete I-9's for new hires and maintain payroll records, all employers should be prepared for an audit. Fines for uncorrected technical and substantive errors on the I-9 forms range from $110 to $1,100. If an employer had technical or substantive errors on their I-9 forms, they might not necessarily realize this and could be exposing themselves to substantial fines.
These audits come as ICE has created an Employment Compliance Inspection Center. The Head of ICE recently explained that this new center would "address a need to conduct audits even of the largest employers with a very large number of employees." (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703951704576092381196958362.html?K EYWORDS=I-9+audit)The center is supposed to be staffed with specialists to pore over I-9 employee files of targeted companies.
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8z A (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:yIl2AUoC8zA) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rIT s (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:qj6IDK7rITs) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?i=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:V_sGLiPBpWU (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:V_sGLiPBpWU) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKB A (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:7Q72WNTAKBA)
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom/~4/DpyqOn5n_Us
More... (http://rss.justia.com/~r/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom/~3/DpyqOn5n_Us/silicon-valley-employers-must.html)
In the era of big government and job growth mainly through increased government payrolls, we will see more of such jobs being "created" and "invented" and in case of the USCIS the costs being passed on in term of increased fees etc.
Unless US is dragged to WTO over these out of control H1B/ L1 fees this will never stop.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario