pappu
09-22 07:12 PM
Title: Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring Act
Sponsor: Sen Durbin, Richard [IL] (introduced 9/21/2010)
Cosponsors Sen Dorgan, Byron L. [ND] -
Sen Reid, Harry [NV] -
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY] -
Introduced in the Senate.
This bill will give companies a two-year holiday from their share of Social Security payroll withholding taxes for each employee they hire to replace a worker at a foreign-based facility. The Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring Act would bar companies from taking tax credits or deductions for the cost of closing a U.S.-based facility to move the operation overseas.Companies could still take deductions for severance and job placement services for employees who lose their jobs as a result of a U.S. plant closing. Under the legislation, companies that close a U.S.-based business and expand it overseas would no longer be allowed to defer U.S. income taxes on foreign subsidiaries.
Reid has the option to set up a procedural vote next week
Sponsor: Sen Durbin, Richard [IL] (introduced 9/21/2010)
Cosponsors Sen Dorgan, Byron L. [ND] -
Sen Reid, Harry [NV] -
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY] -
Introduced in the Senate.
This bill will give companies a two-year holiday from their share of Social Security payroll withholding taxes for each employee they hire to replace a worker at a foreign-based facility. The Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring Act would bar companies from taking tax credits or deductions for the cost of closing a U.S.-based facility to move the operation overseas.Companies could still take deductions for severance and job placement services for employees who lose their jobs as a result of a U.S. plant closing. Under the legislation, companies that close a U.S.-based business and expand it overseas would no longer be allowed to defer U.S. income taxes on foreign subsidiaries.
Reid has the option to set up a procedural vote next week
simple1
10-07 04:13 PM
Leave the usa immediatly. you are already out of status.
Consult your attorney before taking any decision.
hi,
I am in a similar situation.
I have a valid visa stamped on my passport till the sept 2010. And I moved to company B after I was let go by company A. The I 797 approval for company B I got did not have the I 94.
I got the approval yesterday with a letter saying that my extension of stay has been rejected.
The letter also said that I was staying in the country after my H1B with company A has been revoked, which is against the law. It is also mentioned that my I 129 has been mailed to the consulate of my choice(which is in India).
Does he mean that I need to attend the consulate to get my I 129? If so, has the visa stamp been revoked?
Is it ok if I attend the consulate in neighbouring countries like mexico or bahamas instead of going to India?
If the Visa stamping has not been revoked, can I just cross the border for an I 94 card?
Any advice is valuable to me.
Thanks in advance.
Consult your attorney before taking any decision.
hi,
I am in a similar situation.
I have a valid visa stamped on my passport till the sept 2010. And I moved to company B after I was let go by company A. The I 797 approval for company B I got did not have the I 94.
I got the approval yesterday with a letter saying that my extension of stay has been rejected.
The letter also said that I was staying in the country after my H1B with company A has been revoked, which is against the law. It is also mentioned that my I 129 has been mailed to the consulate of my choice(which is in India).
Does he mean that I need to attend the consulate to get my I 129? If so, has the visa stamp been revoked?
Is it ok if I attend the consulate in neighbouring countries like mexico or bahamas instead of going to India?
If the Visa stamping has not been revoked, can I just cross the border for an I 94 card?
Any advice is valuable to me.
Thanks in advance.
slowwin
06-11 08:36 AM
Hi,
vis-a-vis immigration, the burden of proof is on us not on the USCIS, reputed attorney like murthy always suggest to keep copies of I-94s at each stage to show proof of maintenance of status.
Try to collate as much info as possible. Since you have such a long history (H1-B etc) at each step of extension or transfer you must have submitted copies of original H1 documents valid at that time and also passport copies too, go back to those attorney/(s) and request copies form their files. As far as I-20's are concerned you need to talk to your school to get copies.
Thanks,
slowwin
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This not a legal advise. Please consult your attorney.
vis-a-vis immigration, the burden of proof is on us not on the USCIS, reputed attorney like murthy always suggest to keep copies of I-94s at each stage to show proof of maintenance of status.
Try to collate as much info as possible. Since you have such a long history (H1-B etc) at each step of extension or transfer you must have submitted copies of original H1 documents valid at that time and also passport copies too, go back to those attorney/(s) and request copies form their files. As far as I-20's are concerned you need to talk to your school to get copies.
Thanks,
slowwin
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This not a legal advise. Please consult your attorney.
raamskl
07-20 09:57 PM
I sent in form G-325 for both me and my wife along with my I-485 instead of the G-325A as required on I-485 instructions by oversight. What do you guys recommend I do? Should I send in a new application or just send in the G-325A form with a letter stating the issue? Please help.
browsing through this link
http://www.ilw.com/seminars/august2002_citation2b.pdf
it seems they do use all the 4 pages of G325A (Check out section 3). But page 10 also mentions that if only one copy G28 is present, then the manual instructs the contractor to make a copy. Well, they might be able to make copies, but that is just a guess. And if you skim through this pdf it talks about various mistakes that the applicants might make and on how the contractor (guy handling the application) should work around it. So they seem pretty forgiving.
My advice is to call USCIS and inquire about it, sometimes they are very helpful.
Cheers.
browsing through this link
http://www.ilw.com/seminars/august2002_citation2b.pdf
it seems they do use all the 4 pages of G325A (Check out section 3). But page 10 also mentions that if only one copy G28 is present, then the manual instructs the contractor to make a copy. Well, they might be able to make copies, but that is just a guess. And if you skim through this pdf it talks about various mistakes that the applicants might make and on how the contractor (guy handling the application) should work around it. So they seem pretty forgiving.
My advice is to call USCIS and inquire about it, sometimes they are very helpful.
Cheers.
more...
ajju
09-07 12:07 PM
Doesn't matter. MS+0 works just fine. (My EB-2 was MS+0).
If you've been working for this company for past 2 years and now they are going to file your GC... and you've no prior experience.. you can mention in your employment letter that you've been working since 2 years and could attach an experience letter from them to highlight the fact.. This is definitely doable and lawyer should have correct format to do this...
If you've been working for this company for past 2 years and now they are going to file your GC... and you've no prior experience.. you can mention in your employment letter that you've been working since 2 years and could attach an experience letter from them to highlight the fact.. This is definitely doable and lawyer should have correct format to do this...
rockets12345
10-30 01:04 PM
Any one please?
more...
cool_guy_onnet1
06-01 01:28 PM
New Immigration Bill Amendment Could Help Keep Foreign Tech Workers In U.S.
A proposal to create a dual green-card system that favors high tech talent has bi-partisan support in the Senate.
By Marianne Kolbasuk McGee
InformationWeek
May 31, 2007 04:50 PM
A bi-partisan group of U.S. senators next week is expected to introduce to the immigration reform bill an amendment that proposes to retain a pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored green cards for foreign workers seeking permanent residence in the United States.
Amendment S.1249, being co-sponsored by senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash), John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Orrin Hatch (R-Pa.), and Robert Bennett (R-Utah) proposes that the U.S. create a dual green-card system that, in addition to a new merit-point green card system that's proposed in the main bill, would also keep an annual pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored based green cards for foreign workers.
The revised legislation also proposes the United States establish no limit on H-1B visas for foreign professionals with masters or doctoral degrees in science, technology, engineering and math, or STEM fields.
"This would set up a complementary and parallel employer-sponsored system to the merit system" said Robert Hoffman, Oracle VP of government affairs and co-chair of Compete America, a coalition of technology companies. "This system would be more like Australia's" where immigration is granted in dual programs that includes employer-based sponsorship and merit points.
By the U.S. retaining a system allowing employer-based green cards to be issued each year, businesses would have better control over the talent they'd like to keep in the U.S., say tech employers.
One of the biggest criticisms that tech employers have about the current immigration reform bill being hammered out in the Senate is the proposed merit-based green card system. The process awards individuals with points based on the person's education, skills, and other factors.
Tech companies complain that a point-based system would shift to government bureaucrats too much control about the kind of talent pool that's available to employers in U.S. Amendment S.1249 proposes retaining employer-based immigration and expanding permanent residency to those foreigners with advanced STEM degrees, said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes eliminating caps on H-1B visas issued to foreign students who have advanced degrees from U.S. universities. Right now, in addition to the 65,000 H-1B visas issued each year by the United States, an additional 20,000 H-1B visas are available to foreign students with advanced degrees from U.S. universities. The new amendment would eliminate that annual ceiling for advanced U.S. degrees.
In addition, the amendment also proposes providing 20,000 H-1B visas annually to foreigners with advanced degrees in STEM fields from foreign schools.
"Masters and PhDs would be exempt from the cap on H-1Bs and green cards," said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes retracting a provision in the immigration reform bill that H-1B visa holders must have degrees that match their jobs. However, under the amendment, an H-1B visa holder with a degree in mathematics could continue to apply for work in a software engineering job, even without the software engineering degree.
"We're strongly in favor of this amendment," said Hoffman. "It's the single most important amendment in this [immigration] bill," he said.
Not everyone feels the same way. In a statement, U.S tech-professional advocacy group the Programmers Guild, called the amendment "a declaration of war on American tech workers."
A proposal to create a dual green-card system that favors high tech talent has bi-partisan support in the Senate.
By Marianne Kolbasuk McGee
InformationWeek
May 31, 2007 04:50 PM
A bi-partisan group of U.S. senators next week is expected to introduce to the immigration reform bill an amendment that proposes to retain a pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored green cards for foreign workers seeking permanent residence in the United States.
Amendment S.1249, being co-sponsored by senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash), John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Orrin Hatch (R-Pa.), and Robert Bennett (R-Utah) proposes that the U.S. create a dual green-card system that, in addition to a new merit-point green card system that's proposed in the main bill, would also keep an annual pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored based green cards for foreign workers.
The revised legislation also proposes the United States establish no limit on H-1B visas for foreign professionals with masters or doctoral degrees in science, technology, engineering and math, or STEM fields.
"This would set up a complementary and parallel employer-sponsored system to the merit system" said Robert Hoffman, Oracle VP of government affairs and co-chair of Compete America, a coalition of technology companies. "This system would be more like Australia's" where immigration is granted in dual programs that includes employer-based sponsorship and merit points.
By the U.S. retaining a system allowing employer-based green cards to be issued each year, businesses would have better control over the talent they'd like to keep in the U.S., say tech employers.
One of the biggest criticisms that tech employers have about the current immigration reform bill being hammered out in the Senate is the proposed merit-based green card system. The process awards individuals with points based on the person's education, skills, and other factors.
Tech companies complain that a point-based system would shift to government bureaucrats too much control about the kind of talent pool that's available to employers in U.S. Amendment S.1249 proposes retaining employer-based immigration and expanding permanent residency to those foreigners with advanced STEM degrees, said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes eliminating caps on H-1B visas issued to foreign students who have advanced degrees from U.S. universities. Right now, in addition to the 65,000 H-1B visas issued each year by the United States, an additional 20,000 H-1B visas are available to foreign students with advanced degrees from U.S. universities. The new amendment would eliminate that annual ceiling for advanced U.S. degrees.
In addition, the amendment also proposes providing 20,000 H-1B visas annually to foreigners with advanced degrees in STEM fields from foreign schools.
"Masters and PhDs would be exempt from the cap on H-1Bs and green cards," said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes retracting a provision in the immigration reform bill that H-1B visa holders must have degrees that match their jobs. However, under the amendment, an H-1B visa holder with a degree in mathematics could continue to apply for work in a software engineering job, even without the software engineering degree.
"We're strongly in favor of this amendment," said Hoffman. "It's the single most important amendment in this [immigration] bill," he said.
Not everyone feels the same way. In a statement, U.S tech-professional advocacy group the Programmers Guild, called the amendment "a declaration of war on American tech workers."
amitjoey
03-18 04:24 PM
Hello
I have substituted a Labor in 2004, My priority date is 4/4/2002. My I-140 is pending since May 2004 and i renew my EAD every year, EAD expires in July 2008. I got my 9th year H1 extensions till july 2007 from the same company/employer.
I tried to change the employer and file a new H1 which was denied this month. The reason for denial is USCIS is not satisfied with the place of work, I have re-applied H1 again on the same company. Now can i apply another NEW H1 from a different company.
I am tensed as my I-140 has been pending since so long....can someone please help me in this matter and suggest me what to do.
Thanks
Raghu
My I140 has been pending for a long time too, without any reason. So finally after many service requests, I have talked to one of the senators of my state. I have explained the situation, ofcourse used the opportunity to highlight IV and EB immigrants problems and then talked about my specific case. There is a routine paperwork that my senators office has that they use to get authorisation from individuals like us to pursue the case with the USCIS. I have filled that paperwork and the request to look into my case. I have a strong notion that it is going to work. The senators office had looked into an earlier case for me with success where I needed to obtain a pending AP in a hurry. I have my own labor (NO Substitute)
I have no idea what the deal is with the H1- Why it was denied.
I suggest you talk to your senator's office.
I have substituted a Labor in 2004, My priority date is 4/4/2002. My I-140 is pending since May 2004 and i renew my EAD every year, EAD expires in July 2008. I got my 9th year H1 extensions till july 2007 from the same company/employer.
I tried to change the employer and file a new H1 which was denied this month. The reason for denial is USCIS is not satisfied with the place of work, I have re-applied H1 again on the same company. Now can i apply another NEW H1 from a different company.
I am tensed as my I-140 has been pending since so long....can someone please help me in this matter and suggest me what to do.
Thanks
Raghu
My I140 has been pending for a long time too, without any reason. So finally after many service requests, I have talked to one of the senators of my state. I have explained the situation, ofcourse used the opportunity to highlight IV and EB immigrants problems and then talked about my specific case. There is a routine paperwork that my senators office has that they use to get authorisation from individuals like us to pursue the case with the USCIS. I have filled that paperwork and the request to look into my case. I have a strong notion that it is going to work. The senators office had looked into an earlier case for me with success where I needed to obtain a pending AP in a hurry. I have my own labor (NO Substitute)
I have no idea what the deal is with the H1- Why it was denied.
I suggest you talk to your senator's office.
more...
pcs
11-15 12:28 PM
You should try for emergency appointment & should be able to get it based on approved 797.
By the way, my Canadian PR is maturing & I am asked to pay landing fee & do the medical by 1st Jan 2007. Can I pay the landing fee in time but delay the medical without compromising Canadian PR ? I want postpone my landing. Can you please share your advise ??
Thanks
By the way, my Canadian PR is maturing & I am asked to pay landing fee & do the medical by 1st Jan 2007. Can I pay the landing fee in time but delay the medical without compromising Canadian PR ? I want postpone my landing. Can you please share your advise ??
Thanks
addsf345
10-29 02:18 PM
can anyone answer this
I know a person who had to leave his employer only after 60 days of filling his 485(not even 180 days for ac21) and still got GC.
There are thousands who already working for new employer using AC21 after 180 days.
and you are scared to death even after getting GC. Let me ask you this...are you a man or chicken?
I know a person who had to leave his employer only after 60 days of filling his 485(not even 180 days for ac21) and still got GC.
There are thousands who already working for new employer using AC21 after 180 days.
and you are scared to death even after getting GC. Let me ask you this...are you a man or chicken?
more...
quizzer
11-04 01:11 PM
Guru's
My I140 is approved on October 24 2007 and original document has got my lawyer and employer, but I have not received any original document. My question is: Does I can get original document or I have to ask to my lawyer or employer?
EB2 or EB3?
NSC or TSC?
when was it filed?
My I140 is approved on October 24 2007 and original document has got my lawyer and employer, but I have not received any original document. My question is: Does I can get original document or I have to ask to my lawyer or employer?
EB2 or EB3?
NSC or TSC?
when was it filed?
pasupuleti
07-05 12:37 PM
Could someone with privileges update IV in the news Page?
Thanks
Thanks
more...
anurakt
01-21 02:12 PM
I joined Immigration voice on orkut. My name is Chandrakanth
Thanks , I see lot of people joining now.
Thanks , I see lot of people joining now.
pns27
06-28 04:34 PM
Please don't create any new thred.. Please close it .. We already have 4 threds going with different rumers.. No need to put another one..
My answer is - No body knows what will happen.. So just chill and enjoy..
Hi ramus can you point to the others threads going on this subject?:o I did check other threads to put this info. In fact I don�t want create any new threads. After looking for one that is appropriate, which I did not find, I started this one. The closest one would be the �June 1st filers - receipt � which is a diffrent subject.
This is not a rumor, this a fact and I thought I should share with all so that every one will chill, take it easy and will not stressout in anticipation of 485 approval.
thx.
My answer is - No body knows what will happen.. So just chill and enjoy..
Hi ramus can you point to the others threads going on this subject?:o I did check other threads to put this info. In fact I don�t want create any new threads. After looking for one that is appropriate, which I did not find, I started this one. The closest one would be the �June 1st filers - receipt � which is a diffrent subject.
This is not a rumor, this a fact and I thought I should share with all so that every one will chill, take it easy and will not stressout in anticipation of 485 approval.
thx.
more...
perm2gc
08-26 01:19 AM
Dude it is pretty clear you dont belong here. If you joined a body-shop that replaced americans with cheap bodies then your employer violated the law and you were a willing accomplice. You are no better than an illegal alien. No wonder you are so scared of being replaced by yet another cheap body ! IV does not represent people like you.
Now get the hell out of here.well said dude
Now get the hell out of here.well said dude
nyckings
10-15 12:44 PM
My wife attended for H4 stamping at Hyderabad consulate yesterday, 10/13/09. The consulate officer was asking for my current visa copy even though my wife gave my H1B extension approval copy with valid I-94.
Here is the immigration status so far:
1. Current H1 valid from Oct 09-Sep 11 with I-94
2. Earlier changed from L1 to H1 in April 2007. Then traveled to India using AP as I filed for 485 in Aug 07.
3. Had L1 visa stamping in Jan 2006.
So my old passport has L1 visa and new passport has AP stamp. Now I am thinking to answer the US Consulate Hyderabad explaining my current status - that I have a approved H1 petition but no visa stamping.
Please let me know your suggestions!!! Is there any chance that the visa can be rejected and revoked.
Now my last option is to apply for AP for my wife while she is in India.
Can I apply for AP when she is in India?
Thanks
Here is the immigration status so far:
1. Current H1 valid from Oct 09-Sep 11 with I-94
2. Earlier changed from L1 to H1 in April 2007. Then traveled to India using AP as I filed for 485 in Aug 07.
3. Had L1 visa stamping in Jan 2006.
So my old passport has L1 visa and new passport has AP stamp. Now I am thinking to answer the US Consulate Hyderabad explaining my current status - that I have a approved H1 petition but no visa stamping.
Please let me know your suggestions!!! Is there any chance that the visa can be rejected and revoked.
Now my last option is to apply for AP for my wife while she is in India.
Can I apply for AP when she is in India?
Thanks
more...
sankap
07-14 06:21 PM
Houston
jungalee43
02-16 03:11 PM
I did some research on murthy.com and found that AC21 did abolish 'per country of birth quota' on recycled numbers. I am posting a link to this murthy.com article of Oct 6, 2000 which clarifies the issue.
http://www.murthy.com/news/UDh1det.html
If the link fails I am reporducing the paragraph here: -
Major highlights of ACTA are listed below :
Per Country Quotas for Immigrant Visas
"Under Section 104, with respect to immigrant visas, the per country quota, which has been adversely affecting those from China and India and which the U.S. State Department had stated could possibly affect those from the Philippines in the near future, may have been resolved with this Bill. It has always been the case that not all of the available immigrant visas were issued, since most countries did not have enough applicants to use the total available. ACTA provides that if the INS or the U.S. State Department does not issue all of the immigrant visas that should be issued in that FY, the unused immigrant visa numbers should be made available to all countries without the per country quota limit applying."
Retrogression started as the recycled numbers are no longer available and with that country quota showed its horrible effect. It is clear guys we have to concentrate our energy and our thoughts on this quota. Quota on the basis of "country of birth" on talent or skill needed is really hard to explain and we can have good logical arguments to support its abolition.
http://www.murthy.com/news/UDh1det.html
If the link fails I am reporducing the paragraph here: -
Major highlights of ACTA are listed below :
Per Country Quotas for Immigrant Visas
"Under Section 104, with respect to immigrant visas, the per country quota, which has been adversely affecting those from China and India and which the U.S. State Department had stated could possibly affect those from the Philippines in the near future, may have been resolved with this Bill. It has always been the case that not all of the available immigrant visas were issued, since most countries did not have enough applicants to use the total available. ACTA provides that if the INS or the U.S. State Department does not issue all of the immigrant visas that should be issued in that FY, the unused immigrant visa numbers should be made available to all countries without the per country quota limit applying."
Retrogression started as the recycled numbers are no longer available and with that country quota showed its horrible effect. It is clear guys we have to concentrate our energy and our thoughts on this quota. Quota on the basis of "country of birth" on talent or skill needed is really hard to explain and we can have good logical arguments to support its abolition.
dixie
10-13 07:36 PM
You are right .. the US has a big headstart; but that doesnt mean it will remain that way forever. For instance, close to 40% of all US patents are being bagged by either non-US entities or foreign outposts of US organizations. For a comparison, it was just 10% in 1995 .. dont remember where I read this, but I will post the link if I can find it again.
The US is still the most competitive but the lead is shrinking...its clear that China, India and the emerging Asian economies have the size, the resources and the talent to catch up and probably surpass the US
The US is still the most competitive but the lead is shrinking...its clear that China, India and the emerging Asian economies have the size, the resources and the talent to catch up and probably surpass the US
gchope07
07-20 03:17 PM
Hi,
My lawyer used a G325-A which was not downloaded from the USCIS website but was a physical form which had 4 pages of the same form in different colors(I think blue,green,yellow and pink).
I filled the first one and it automatically carbon copied it to the other 3.
Has anybody used such a form? and it is o.k to sign the first one and have the other 3 with carbon copy signatures?
Let me know if this is o.k
My lawyer used a G325-A which was not downloaded from the USCIS website but was a physical form which had 4 pages of the same form in different colors(I think blue,green,yellow and pink).
I filled the first one and it automatically carbon copied it to the other 3.
Has anybody used such a form? and it is o.k to sign the first one and have the other 3 with carbon copy signatures?
Let me know if this is o.k
gcwait2007
12-25 05:55 PM
Your PD does not have to be current (it changes from month to month), if it was current at some time in the past, that will be enough.
Fight for your rights!
Hello lazycis,
I have a quick question. Many of our PD were current in July 2007. If our names are stuck in FBI name check for 2 yrs, can we file for WoM? Please advise. Many of us are under the impression that the our PD dates have to be current at the time of WoM and our namecheck should be stuck at FBI atleast for 1 year during which the PD date is current. In other words, the PD date should be current over a period of 12 months at the time of filing WoM.
Q 2. Is there any limit countrywise, for issuing GC?
Thanks in advance.
Fight for your rights!
Hello lazycis,
I have a quick question. Many of our PD were current in July 2007. If our names are stuck in FBI name check for 2 yrs, can we file for WoM? Please advise. Many of us are under the impression that the our PD dates have to be current at the time of WoM and our namecheck should be stuck at FBI atleast for 1 year during which the PD date is current. In other words, the PD date should be current over a period of 12 months at the time of filing WoM.
Q 2. Is there any limit countrywise, for issuing GC?
Thanks in advance.
No comments:
Post a Comment