jung.lee
04-04 12:55 AM
:confused::confused:We cannot start a S-corp on EAD. Need to be GC holder or US Citizen.
...
Should a Corporation's owners later wish to be taxed as an S-Corporation, they would file a "Subchapter S" federal tax election (Form 2553) within 75 days of incorporating or within 75 days of the beginning of the calendar year. To do this, the Corporation would need to have less than 100 owners, all of whom must be either U.S. Citizens or permanent resident aliens ("green card" holders). Once the "S" tax election is made, the return to be filed is the 1120 "S", rather than the 1120. Whether or not you decide to be taxed as an S-Corporation, your company is still a "General Corporation" in the eyes of the state of incorporation.
...
[
But we can setup Solo or Partership or C-Corp. Don't run into legal issues by setting up S-Corp on EAD, before getting GC.
Good luck.
I am excerpting Internal Revenue Code Section 1361 below:
Internal Revenue Code
� 1361 S corporation defined.
(a) S corporation defined.
(1) In general.
For purposes of this title, the term �S corporation� means, with respect to any taxable year, a small business corporation for which an election under section 1362(a) is in effect for such year.
(2) C corporation.
For purposes of this title, the term �C corporation� means, with respect to any taxable year, a corporation which is not an S corporation for such year.
(b) Small business corporation.
(1) In general.
For purposes of this subchapter, the term �small business corporation� means a domestic corporation which is not an ineligible corporation and which does not�
(A) have more than 100 shareholders,
(B) have as a shareholder a person (other than an estate, a trust described in subsection (c)(2) , or an organization described in subsection (c)(6) ) who is not an individual,
(C) have a nonresident alien as a shareholder, and
(D) have more than 1 class of stock.
(2) Ineligible corporation defined.
For purposes of paragraph (1) , the term �ineligible corporation� means any corporation which is�
(A) a financial institution which uses the reserve method of accounting for bad debts described in section 585 ,
(B) an insurance company subject to tax under subchapter L,
(C) a corporation to which an election under section 936 applies, or
(D) a DISC or former DISC.
There is no mention here that the "resident" must be a permanent resident.
Here is an excerpt of the Federal Regulation that defines who is a "resident alien" for taxation purposes:
Reg �1.871-2. Determining residence of alien individuals.
Caution: The Treasury has not yet amended Reg � 1.871-2 to reflect changes made by P.L. 108-357
(a) General. The term �nonresident alien individual� means an individual whose residence is not within the United States, and who is not a citizen of the United States. The term includes a nonresident alien fiduciary. For such purpose the term �fiduciary� shall have the meaning assigned to it by section 7701(a)(6) and the regulations in Part 301 of this chapter (Regulations on Procedure and Administration). For presumption as to an alien's nonresidence, see paragraph (b) of �1.871-4.
(b) Residence defined. An alien actually present in the United States who is not a mere transient or sojourner is a resident of the United States for purposes of the income tax. Whether he is a transient is determined by his intentions with regard to the length and nature of his stay. A mere floating intention, indefinite as to time, to return to another country is not sufficient to constitute him a transient. If he lives in the United States and has no definite intention as to his stay, he is a resident. One who comes to the United States for a definite purpose which in its nature may be promptly accomplished is a transient; but, if his purpose is of such a nature that an extended stay may be necessary for its accomplishment, and to that end the alien make his home temporarily in the United States, he becomes a resident, though it may be his intention at all times to return to his domicile abroad when the purpose for which he came has been consummated or abandoned. An alien whose stay in the United States is limited to a definite period by the immigration laws is not a resident of the United States within the meaning of this section, in the absence of exceptional circumstances.
Here is the relevant Federal Regulation on Proof of Residence for determining status for tax purposes:
Reg �1.871-4. Proof of residence of aliens.
(a) Rules of evidence. The following rules of evidence shall govern in determining whether or not an alien within the United States has acquired residence therein for purposes of the income tax.
(b) Nonresidence presumed. An alien, by reason of his alienage, is presumed to be a nonresident alien.
(c) Presumption rebutted.
(1) Departing alien. In the case of an alien who presents himself for determination of tax liability before departure from the United States, the presumption as to the alien's nonresidence may be overcome by proof�
(i) That the alien, at least six months before the date he so presents himself, has filed a declaration of his intention to become a citizen of the United States under the naturalization laws; or
(ii) That the alien, at least six months before the date he so presents himself, has filed Form 1078 or its equivalent; or
(iii) Of acts and statements of the alien showing a definite intention to acquire residence in the United States or showing that his stay in the United States has been of such an extended nature as to constitute him a resident.
(2) Other aliens. In the case of other aliens, the presumption as to the alien's nonresidence may be overcome by proof�
(i) That the alien has filed a declaration of his intention to become a citizen of the United States under the naturalization laws; or
(ii) That the alien has filed Form 1078 or its equivalent; or
(iii) Of acts and statements of the alien showing a definite intention to acquire residence in the United States or showing that his stay in the United States has been of such an extended nature as to constitute him a resident.
(d) Certificate. If, in the application of paragraphs (c)(1)(iii) or (2)(iii) of this section, the internal revenue officer or employee who examines the alien is in doubt as to the facts, such officer or employee may, to assist him in determining the facts, require a certificate or certificates setting forth the facts relied upon by the alien seeking to overcome the presumption. Each such certificate, which shall contain, or be verified by, a written declaration that it is made under the penalties of perjury, shall be executed by some credible person or persons, other than the alien and members of his family, who have known the alien at least six months before the date of execution of the certificate or certificates.
(c) Application and effective dates. Unless the context indicates otherwise, ��1.871-2 through 1.871-5 apply to determine the residence of aliens for taxable years beginning before January 1, 1985. To determine the residence of aliens for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1984, see section 7701(b) and ��301.7701(b)-1 through 301.7701(b)-9 of this chapter. However, for purposes of determining whether an individual is a qualified individual under section 911(d)(1)(A), the rules of ��1.871-2 and 1.871-5 shall continue to apply for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1984. For purposes of determining whether an individual is a resident of the United States for estate and gift tax purposes, see �20.0-1(b)(1) and (2) and � 25.2501-1(b) of this chapter, respectively.
In summary, I submit to you that if you work in the US for more than 6 months out of a given year, you are a resident alien, and therefore are eligible to set up an S-Corp.
Since I am still learning about this, any input/feedback/logical arguments with relevant proof/citations would be appreciated!
...
Should a Corporation's owners later wish to be taxed as an S-Corporation, they would file a "Subchapter S" federal tax election (Form 2553) within 75 days of incorporating or within 75 days of the beginning of the calendar year. To do this, the Corporation would need to have less than 100 owners, all of whom must be either U.S. Citizens or permanent resident aliens ("green card" holders). Once the "S" tax election is made, the return to be filed is the 1120 "S", rather than the 1120. Whether or not you decide to be taxed as an S-Corporation, your company is still a "General Corporation" in the eyes of the state of incorporation.
...
[
But we can setup Solo or Partership or C-Corp. Don't run into legal issues by setting up S-Corp on EAD, before getting GC.
Good luck.
I am excerpting Internal Revenue Code Section 1361 below:
Internal Revenue Code
� 1361 S corporation defined.
(a) S corporation defined.
(1) In general.
For purposes of this title, the term �S corporation� means, with respect to any taxable year, a small business corporation for which an election under section 1362(a) is in effect for such year.
(2) C corporation.
For purposes of this title, the term �C corporation� means, with respect to any taxable year, a corporation which is not an S corporation for such year.
(b) Small business corporation.
(1) In general.
For purposes of this subchapter, the term �small business corporation� means a domestic corporation which is not an ineligible corporation and which does not�
(A) have more than 100 shareholders,
(B) have as a shareholder a person (other than an estate, a trust described in subsection (c)(2) , or an organization described in subsection (c)(6) ) who is not an individual,
(C) have a nonresident alien as a shareholder, and
(D) have more than 1 class of stock.
(2) Ineligible corporation defined.
For purposes of paragraph (1) , the term �ineligible corporation� means any corporation which is�
(A) a financial institution which uses the reserve method of accounting for bad debts described in section 585 ,
(B) an insurance company subject to tax under subchapter L,
(C) a corporation to which an election under section 936 applies, or
(D) a DISC or former DISC.
There is no mention here that the "resident" must be a permanent resident.
Here is an excerpt of the Federal Regulation that defines who is a "resident alien" for taxation purposes:
Reg �1.871-2. Determining residence of alien individuals.
Caution: The Treasury has not yet amended Reg � 1.871-2 to reflect changes made by P.L. 108-357
(a) General. The term �nonresident alien individual� means an individual whose residence is not within the United States, and who is not a citizen of the United States. The term includes a nonresident alien fiduciary. For such purpose the term �fiduciary� shall have the meaning assigned to it by section 7701(a)(6) and the regulations in Part 301 of this chapter (Regulations on Procedure and Administration). For presumption as to an alien's nonresidence, see paragraph (b) of �1.871-4.
(b) Residence defined. An alien actually present in the United States who is not a mere transient or sojourner is a resident of the United States for purposes of the income tax. Whether he is a transient is determined by his intentions with regard to the length and nature of his stay. A mere floating intention, indefinite as to time, to return to another country is not sufficient to constitute him a transient. If he lives in the United States and has no definite intention as to his stay, he is a resident. One who comes to the United States for a definite purpose which in its nature may be promptly accomplished is a transient; but, if his purpose is of such a nature that an extended stay may be necessary for its accomplishment, and to that end the alien make his home temporarily in the United States, he becomes a resident, though it may be his intention at all times to return to his domicile abroad when the purpose for which he came has been consummated or abandoned. An alien whose stay in the United States is limited to a definite period by the immigration laws is not a resident of the United States within the meaning of this section, in the absence of exceptional circumstances.
Here is the relevant Federal Regulation on Proof of Residence for determining status for tax purposes:
Reg �1.871-4. Proof of residence of aliens.
(a) Rules of evidence. The following rules of evidence shall govern in determining whether or not an alien within the United States has acquired residence therein for purposes of the income tax.
(b) Nonresidence presumed. An alien, by reason of his alienage, is presumed to be a nonresident alien.
(c) Presumption rebutted.
(1) Departing alien. In the case of an alien who presents himself for determination of tax liability before departure from the United States, the presumption as to the alien's nonresidence may be overcome by proof�
(i) That the alien, at least six months before the date he so presents himself, has filed a declaration of his intention to become a citizen of the United States under the naturalization laws; or
(ii) That the alien, at least six months before the date he so presents himself, has filed Form 1078 or its equivalent; or
(iii) Of acts and statements of the alien showing a definite intention to acquire residence in the United States or showing that his stay in the United States has been of such an extended nature as to constitute him a resident.
(2) Other aliens. In the case of other aliens, the presumption as to the alien's nonresidence may be overcome by proof�
(i) That the alien has filed a declaration of his intention to become a citizen of the United States under the naturalization laws; or
(ii) That the alien has filed Form 1078 or its equivalent; or
(iii) Of acts and statements of the alien showing a definite intention to acquire residence in the United States or showing that his stay in the United States has been of such an extended nature as to constitute him a resident.
(d) Certificate. If, in the application of paragraphs (c)(1)(iii) or (2)(iii) of this section, the internal revenue officer or employee who examines the alien is in doubt as to the facts, such officer or employee may, to assist him in determining the facts, require a certificate or certificates setting forth the facts relied upon by the alien seeking to overcome the presumption. Each such certificate, which shall contain, or be verified by, a written declaration that it is made under the penalties of perjury, shall be executed by some credible person or persons, other than the alien and members of his family, who have known the alien at least six months before the date of execution of the certificate or certificates.
(c) Application and effective dates. Unless the context indicates otherwise, ��1.871-2 through 1.871-5 apply to determine the residence of aliens for taxable years beginning before January 1, 1985. To determine the residence of aliens for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1984, see section 7701(b) and ��301.7701(b)-1 through 301.7701(b)-9 of this chapter. However, for purposes of determining whether an individual is a qualified individual under section 911(d)(1)(A), the rules of ��1.871-2 and 1.871-5 shall continue to apply for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1984. For purposes of determining whether an individual is a resident of the United States for estate and gift tax purposes, see �20.0-1(b)(1) and (2) and � 25.2501-1(b) of this chapter, respectively.
In summary, I submit to you that if you work in the US for more than 6 months out of a given year, you are a resident alien, and therefore are eligible to set up an S-Corp.
Since I am still learning about this, any input/feedback/logical arguments with relevant proof/citations would be appreciated!
wallpaper portal 2 logo. 2010 portal 2 logo wallpaper. 2010 portal 2 logo wallpaper.
mmanurker
09-26 11:00 AM
This is the worst DMV in NJ... You may be better off going to Jersey City, Princeton or anywhere else.
Princeton/Trenton are also worst...FYI...My DL already expired on 9th Sept.
I went to Trenton with original receipt and employer letter but still they refused to renew my license.
My attorney forgot to upgrade my H1 application to premium process and then started to defend himself by saying that he did not get any approval from my employer and at the same time he never told me that he did not get my employer authorization till Sept 11th where as I asked him to upgrade to premium sometime in last week of July'07. So from July to Sept'11th he kept making excuses one after another but never mentioned that he needs an employer authorization.Thats how these attorneys work and screw our lives....
Princeton/Trenton are also worst...FYI...My DL already expired on 9th Sept.
I went to Trenton with original receipt and employer letter but still they refused to renew my license.
My attorney forgot to upgrade my H1 application to premium process and then started to defend himself by saying that he did not get any approval from my employer and at the same time he never told me that he did not get my employer authorization till Sept 11th where as I asked him to upgrade to premium sometime in last week of July'07. So from July to Sept'11th he kept making excuses one after another but never mentioned that he needs an employer authorization.Thats how these attorneys work and screw our lives....
eb3retro
09-11 04:28 PM
count me in too
2011 makeup Portal+2+ackground portal 2 logo wallpaper. portal wallpaper hd.
chisinau
07-30 01:13 AM
Sens. Schumer and Hutchison have offered the Bridge amendment. The amendment has been withdrawn but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is permanently withdrawn. According to www.shusterman.com It has a chanse to pass in September, just after the summer recess.
I believe all our efforts should be concentraited on this legislation!
Core Team, we badly need your advise, how can we help, what should we do in order to lobby this ammendment? It might be difficult because the majority of Schedule A professionals are still outside the US..... There in US we have only our lawers, who seems to me are not willing or can help us.
I believe all our efforts should be concentraited on this legislation!
Core Team, we badly need your advise, how can we help, what should we do in order to lobby this ammendment? It might be difficult because the majority of Schedule A professionals are still outside the US..... There in US we have only our lawers, who seems to me are not willing or can help us.
more...
lskreddy
04-30 03:59 PM
I don't understand how removing the country limit may have resorce implications, as how I understand is, instead of adjucation an EB-2(2008) from Mali you'll be adjucating an EB-2(2004) from India, what difference it is for them ???
It certainly would at the consular posts, esp India and China. It may not impact how the applications are handled with in USCIS.
It certainly would at the consular posts, esp India and China. It may not impact how the applications are handled with in USCIS.
maine_gc
07-19 10:29 AM
Do you know Aman spent $64000+ in the past 18 months for IV?
Please read this thread before you make a decision on your donation. We need to step up and contribute.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10633
Thanks Aman and the core team for your efforts.
Can any one know how to edit subscription amount in paypal. I signed up for a $50 recurring contribution last week. After reading above mentioned thread i want to change my subscription amount to $100
Please read this thread before you make a decision on your donation. We need to step up and contribute.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10633
Thanks Aman and the core team for your efforts.
Can any one know how to edit subscription amount in paypal. I signed up for a $50 recurring contribution last week. After reading above mentioned thread i want to change my subscription amount to $100
more...
conundrum
04-30 03:13 PM
The member from Chicago is mainly concerned about the family based limits. He wants to know what the limit is or if there is a cap in the first place
2010 Half-Life 2
singhsa3
09-11 05:18 PM
What about the issues like not following RD or PD?
What about being rude on the call?
What about the wild fluctuation in the bulletein?
Should we let these thing to continue?
What we are expecting after this calc. camp ? I dont think so they will revise bulletin nor they will give single extra visa above 140k. I think we should focus on HR 5882 .. We should send something to lawmakers.
Just a thought.
What about being rude on the call?
What about the wild fluctuation in the bulletein?
Should we let these thing to continue?
What we are expecting after this calc. camp ? I dont think so they will revise bulletin nor they will give single extra visa above 140k. I think we should focus on HR 5882 .. We should send something to lawmakers.
Just a thought.
more...
needhelp!
09-13 03:46 PM
This will be great for the rally if everyone sends their personal stories in and why they are going.
Thanks Pappu
Thanks Pappu
hair tattoo portal 2 wallpaper 1920. portal 2 logo wallpaper. img Portal+2+
java_jaggu
06-02 08:33 PM
Canadian_Dream, I think your interpretation is wrong..
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what AILA, our core group and other attorneys are trying to say is that as long as you filed before May 15, 2007 you will be fine regardless of whether your petition is pending or approved. There is no dispute about this point. Any applications that were filed after May 15, 2007 will become null and void the day this bill is signed by the president to make it a law. The 'effective date' ( Oct 1, 2008 ) does not apply for applications filed after May 15, 2007. I will be glad if you can prove me wrong :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what AILA, our core group and other attorneys are trying to say is that as long as you filed before May 15, 2007 you will be fine regardless of whether your petition is pending or approved. There is no dispute about this point. Any applications that were filed after May 15, 2007 will become null and void the day this bill is signed by the president to make it a law. The 'effective date' ( Oct 1, 2008 ) does not apply for applications filed after May 15, 2007. I will be glad if you can prove me wrong :)
more...
Nibiru
09-02 08:39 AM
Came here in 98. Applied in 2003. Waiting ever since. Had enough of this BS. I was ok until they started screwing around with EAD's and AP's this year. Recently, got a a couple of offers in India ranging from 30 - 45 lac / yr. Thinking of going back. Its not worth waiting in this line anymore.
hot portal 2 logo png. portal 2 logo png. portal 2; portal 2 logo png. portal 2
pbojja
09-11 05:17 PM
What we are expecting after this calc. camp ? I dont think so they will revise bulletin nor they will give single extra visa above 140k. I think we should focus on HR 5882 .. We should send something to lawmakers.
Just a thought.
I think they will improve the communication between USCIS and DOL . Dont you think it unjustice for 2003-2005 PD holders when they move dates to 2006 and approve 2006 cases ? cant they just move it to 2005 and say approve as many cases as possible for them ? why approve 2006 cases .
Yes focus on HR 5882 is very important but nothing wrong with this campign either ....Just my thoughts
Just a thought.
I think they will improve the communication between USCIS and DOL . Dont you think it unjustice for 2003-2005 PD holders when they move dates to 2006 and approve 2006 cases ? cant they just move it to 2005 and say approve as many cases as possible for them ? why approve 2006 cases .
Yes focus on HR 5882 is very important but nothing wrong with this campign either ....Just my thoughts
more...
house portal 2 logo png. portal 2
Mouns
04-30 03:26 PM
Due to 9/11?
Do you understand the frustration among people who want to make this work and who want to defend the system?
In other way, what good is there to follow the law while illegals have it easier?
Great question!
--- Answer
yes we understand (sure...). Two kinds of backlogs:
1) Processing backlogs, due to the surge and other issues. We try to provide services timely, we understand our responsibility (no info as to what is being done and how this will change in the future)
2) Limitations due to law: (PDs). Demands is greater than the visa numbers (China, India, Mexico, Philipine: You are screwed here!) => 20 years or more of waiting.
Do you understand the frustration among people who want to make this work and who want to defend the system?
In other way, what good is there to follow the law while illegals have it easier?
Great question!
--- Answer
yes we understand (sure...). Two kinds of backlogs:
1) Processing backlogs, due to the surge and other issues. We try to provide services timely, we understand our responsibility (no info as to what is being done and how this will change in the future)
2) Limitations due to law: (PDs). Demands is greater than the visa numbers (China, India, Mexico, Philipine: You are screwed here!) => 20 years or more of waiting.
tattoo girlfriend In The Final Hours of Portal 2 portal 2 logo png. portal 2 logo
newbee7
07-05 12:16 PM
We must try to aviod the I485/ EAD language though.
more...
pictures portal 2 logo png. portal 2 logo png. wii 2 logo.
drirshad
06-10 08:19 AM
I was watching one of these stand up comedy:
The guy says, why do the diamond companies come out with logos like
Diamonds are forever, just say Diamonds - that will shut her up.
The EB-GC is like the diamond for us buddies, it will sure shut us up.
We already have lost a decade of our lives in this grinding be it another, ain't got anything better to do.
The guy says, why do the diamond companies come out with logos like
Diamonds are forever, just say Diamonds - that will shut her up.
The EB-GC is like the diamond for us buddies, it will sure shut us up.
We already have lost a decade of our lives in this grinding be it another, ain't got anything better to do.
dresses portal 2 logo wallpaper. portal 2 wallpaper for iPhone
mirage
08-18 11:11 AM
This is what we are sending..
Charles Oppenheim / Visa Section
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520
From,
Your Name/Your Address/EB-3 India Applicant
Priority Date: May 2003
Some City,
OK-2#####
Dear Sir/Madam,
Sub: Statistics on Employment Based AOS(Adjustment of Status) applications pending at USCIS under various categories
I am writing to you to express my sense of helplessness over the unpredictability of Visa Number allotment to various employment based category. I want to bring to your attention that it�s been nearly a �Decade� since we saw any meaningful Visa Date movement from year 2001 for EB-3 Green Card applicants from India.
It is important to know that despite of severe visa retrogression and random visa cutoff date movements, USICIS or DOS hasn�t released any official information on how many Adjustment of Status applications are pending at USCIS under various categories which leaves thousands of AOS(Adjustment of Status) applicants in complete darkness and dependent on guessing games by various Law firms.
A green card application requires enormous amount of efforts and money from the beneficiary and his/her employer. People who are waiting for 7-8 years now would have had already spent average $15,000-$20,000, in maintaining their statuses and keep the Green Card process going on. Being stuck in a green card process keeps us bonded with 1 employer, job type etc.
We need to know if there is any light at the end of the tunnel. We need to know for how long we have to live our life in limbo. If there is hope than we need to be patient and plan to live like that for another 1-2 years. But if there�s no light at the end of the tunnel than we need to move on with our careers and other family commitments. Only your office and USCIS can help us by releasing statistics on the number and categories of applications pending with USCIS people waiting in this category can plan their lives accordingly.
It will be a great help if DOS or USCIS could tell us about the number of AOS application pending at USCIS along with their Categories(EB-3, EB-2, EB-1) and chargeable country.
We have been waiting for a decade and continue to wait would it be reasonable to request you for some guidance with regards to the Visa allotment. I request your office to provide some statistics on home many Adjustment of Status applications are pending at USCIS.
We understand that you work with in the limits of the law as set by the Congress and are limited by various constraints that are beyond your agency realm of work. We appreciate your hard work and sincerely thank you for all the hard work.
God Bless America!
Thank you for you attention,
(Your Name OR EB-3 India Applicant )
Priority Date: April 02
Category: EB-3
Member ImmigrationVoice.Org
Copy Sent to
Honorable Secretary of State
Dr. Condoleezza Rice
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520
Honorable Director, USCIS
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20529
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
Department of Homeland Security
Attention: Case Problems
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Senator John Cornyn
Chairman - United States Senate Judiciary subCommittee on
Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship
517 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Main: 202-224-2934
Fax: 202-228-2856
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman - United States House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship,
Refugees, Border Security, and International Law
102 Cannon HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Telephone (202) 225-3072
I also wanted to send the letter, but saw a ton of comments on the original letter. It would be a good idea, if some one goes thru the comments and update the letter in the original post. I think we should all send a decent letter.
Charles Oppenheim / Visa Section
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520
From,
Your Name/Your Address/EB-3 India Applicant
Priority Date: May 2003
Some City,
OK-2#####
Dear Sir/Madam,
Sub: Statistics on Employment Based AOS(Adjustment of Status) applications pending at USCIS under various categories
I am writing to you to express my sense of helplessness over the unpredictability of Visa Number allotment to various employment based category. I want to bring to your attention that it�s been nearly a �Decade� since we saw any meaningful Visa Date movement from year 2001 for EB-3 Green Card applicants from India.
It is important to know that despite of severe visa retrogression and random visa cutoff date movements, USICIS or DOS hasn�t released any official information on how many Adjustment of Status applications are pending at USCIS under various categories which leaves thousands of AOS(Adjustment of Status) applicants in complete darkness and dependent on guessing games by various Law firms.
A green card application requires enormous amount of efforts and money from the beneficiary and his/her employer. People who are waiting for 7-8 years now would have had already spent average $15,000-$20,000, in maintaining their statuses and keep the Green Card process going on. Being stuck in a green card process keeps us bonded with 1 employer, job type etc.
We need to know if there is any light at the end of the tunnel. We need to know for how long we have to live our life in limbo. If there is hope than we need to be patient and plan to live like that for another 1-2 years. But if there�s no light at the end of the tunnel than we need to move on with our careers and other family commitments. Only your office and USCIS can help us by releasing statistics on the number and categories of applications pending with USCIS people waiting in this category can plan their lives accordingly.
It will be a great help if DOS or USCIS could tell us about the number of AOS application pending at USCIS along with their Categories(EB-3, EB-2, EB-1) and chargeable country.
We have been waiting for a decade and continue to wait would it be reasonable to request you for some guidance with regards to the Visa allotment. I request your office to provide some statistics on home many Adjustment of Status applications are pending at USCIS.
We understand that you work with in the limits of the law as set by the Congress and are limited by various constraints that are beyond your agency realm of work. We appreciate your hard work and sincerely thank you for all the hard work.
God Bless America!
Thank you for you attention,
(Your Name OR EB-3 India Applicant )
Priority Date: April 02
Category: EB-3
Member ImmigrationVoice.Org
Copy Sent to
Honorable Secretary of State
Dr. Condoleezza Rice
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520
Honorable Director, USCIS
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20529
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
Department of Homeland Security
Attention: Case Problems
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Senator John Cornyn
Chairman - United States Senate Judiciary subCommittee on
Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship
517 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Main: 202-224-2934
Fax: 202-228-2856
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman - United States House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship,
Refugees, Border Security, and International Law
102 Cannon HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Telephone (202) 225-3072
I also wanted to send the letter, but saw a ton of comments on the original letter. It would be a good idea, if some one goes thru the comments and update the letter in the original post. I think we should all send a decent letter.
more...
makeup Widescreen Portal 2 Corner
NKR
04-03 08:13 AM
First, try to ask the question properly with specifics. It could easily be understood the way I understood it. U ask a dumb question and u get a dumb answer . Also, there was never any sort of communication between ssnd and myself. That itself shows who's dumb.
Looks like all the dumb ppl r getting lots of green dots. Amazing forum...IV ki jai.
Oh, you couldn�t grasp the obvious and telling me that my question had to be more specific and on top of that you agree that your answer was dumb, lol. No wonder you are dumb.
BTW ssnd and I are not rude in calling you dumb. It�s ok to call a spade a spade.
The bagel is tasting soooo good this morning, yummy�
Looks like all the dumb ppl r getting lots of green dots. Amazing forum...IV ki jai.
Oh, you couldn�t grasp the obvious and telling me that my question had to be more specific and on top of that you agree that your answer was dumb, lol. No wonder you are dumb.
BTW ssnd and I are not rude in calling you dumb. It�s ok to call a spade a spade.
The bagel is tasting soooo good this morning, yummy�
girlfriend portal 2 logo. portal 2 glados
cjain
08-10 05:55 PM
what time (format HH:MM)NSC processed our case and we mail that on june 30th , uscis recd. the same on 2-july-07
our recd. number starts from LIN 072275####
our recd. number starts from LIN 072275####
hairstyles portal 2 logo png. portal 2
sheela
09-28 07:38 PM
[QUOTE=JunRN;175492]They are working overtime for it, hopefully 24 hours as well.
Let us hope like on july 2nd week-end (when they worked on sat-sun to make 60,000 visa numbers available and adjucated even when name checks were not cleared for many applicants) these guys are working the same way this weekend ......
Let us hope like on july 2nd week-end (when they worked on sat-sun to make 60,000 visa numbers available and adjucated even when name checks were not cleared for many applicants) these guys are working the same way this weekend ......
ramus
07-06 01:29 PM
When you come with such statement please give source?
it seems they are planning to honor the July VB and make chanes in Aug VB. So I guess they will accept the applications in July. :rolleyes:
it seems they are planning to honor the July VB and make chanes in Aug VB. So I guess they will accept the applications in July. :rolleyes:
Macaca
10-01 10:00 AM
As illustrated below, since 1994 there have been over 218,000 un-recaptured employment-based visas lost due to underutilization of the employment-based visas."
Some unused EB #s were recaptured for families in following year. For example, in 1994 there were 29,430 (column 2) unused EB #s. However, 27,721 (= 253,721 (column 3) - 226,000 (family quota)) of these #s were recaptured for families. Thus, only 29,430 - 27,721 = 1,709 (column 4) were un-recaptured.
Also, 50,000 unused EB #s from 01-04 were recaptured for Schedule A.
Finally, unused EB #s in 99 and 00 were recaptured, hopefully for EB.
Thus, unused EB #s are more important then un-recaptured EB #s (mentioned above) since some of them have not been recaptured for EB.
The unused EB #s is 506,384 (total column 2) - 98,941 (99 recaptured for EB) - 31,098 (00 recaptured for EB) = 376, 345
Annual Report to Congress June 2007 (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual_Report_2007.pdf)
Some unused EB #s were recaptured for families in following year. For example, in 1994 there were 29,430 (column 2) unused EB #s. However, 27,721 (= 253,721 (column 3) - 226,000 (family quota)) of these #s were recaptured for families. Thus, only 29,430 - 27,721 = 1,709 (column 4) were un-recaptured.
Also, 50,000 unused EB #s from 01-04 were recaptured for Schedule A.
Finally, unused EB #s in 99 and 00 were recaptured, hopefully for EB.
Thus, unused EB #s are more important then un-recaptured EB #s (mentioned above) since some of them have not been recaptured for EB.
The unused EB #s is 506,384 (total column 2) - 98,941 (99 recaptured for EB) - 31,098 (00 recaptured for EB) = 376, 345
Annual Report to Congress June 2007 (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual_Report_2007.pdf)
No comments:
Post a Comment