Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

uscis.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 144 posts

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#91

Post by arcticbull »

chrisper wrote: post #55
vmarsy wrote: post #9

It looks like this rule would provide the entrepreneur a 5 year stay (2+3 additional if the start-up is doing well), but I don't see any mention of granting a green card, so what would happen to that entrepreneur on year 6? EDIT: from the medium link posted in another comment by yurisagalov: > DHS will also publish guidance to clarify when entrepreneurs may self-petition for lawful permanent residence (also known as…

It appears, it has the same issue as H-1B visas. At least in my opinion. If your business fails and you invested 5 years of your life, you are kicked out of the country and have to move your family and everything back to wherever you came from. This big uncertainty of the future is, in my opinion, a huge negative of both H1B and this parole.

Haha it's like it's written by Trump's USCIS: "We prefer immigrants whose businesses succeed."

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#92

Post by no1youknowz »

tostitos1979 wrote: post #41

I wish having an advanced degree was a criteria here. A few years ago, I noticed that Britain would give a blanket visa to anyone with an MBA from a list of top international schools. How about something like that for people with Masters/PhDs (in STEM) from top-50 schools in the world. That said, the proposed rule might mean if one gets into YC/techstars, etc. they would be able to get a visa for the US easily. The l…

> I wish having an advanced degree was a criteria here.

I don't.

I didn't do very well at school. Wasn't for me. As soon as I left and I started work at 16, I excelled.

Now, I could choose to work for a company in London @ +£120k a year or even apply to the US. But I choose to launch my own start-up instead where my passion and technical ability can potentially lead to 7/8+ figures salary. With this, I am definitely looking at the US primarily instead of secondary!

The only requisite here is that your start-up succeeds and through the company can satisfy the required amount of jobs.

My google fu isn't great right now, but 2 examples I can think of that didn't do well at school either. I hope they are correct. Richard Branson and Sir Alan Sugar.

> A few years ago, I noticed that Britain would give a blanket visa to anyone with an MBA from a list of top international schools. How about something like that for people with Masters/PhDs (in STEM) from top-50 schools in the world.

Great. Then make this another type of visa then. Don't penalise the individuals like myself who through self-tuition and hard work can start up a company and try to make it a success without an university education and sheer will.

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#94

Post by arcticbull »

Animats wrote: post #75

There's already a visa deal for foreign investors, the EB-5 visa. You have to invest at least $1M ($0.5M if you're willing to invest in a bad area of the US) and create 10 jobs. That's why downtown Palo Alto has all those rug stores.

There's also E-2 visas you can get (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-2_visa) to run your own business with a much smaller investment (15-100K) assuming you're a citizen of a treaty country.

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#96

Post by runesoerensen »

benmarten wrote: post #33

Please note that this does not seem to be any improvement for citizens of "US treaty countries", e.g. most northern and western european countries. Where the needed capital investment is only needed to be substantial to get an E-2 investor/entrepreneur visa. E.g. 100-150k of initial investment needed as far as I know ;)

This definitely seems like an improvement even if you're treaty country citizen; particularly if you don't have $100-150K to invest (or whatever is required depending on the industry), or you'd rather have US investors contribute the capital. The E-2 investor visa requires the foreign national to be the investor:

"The E-2 nonimmigrant classification allows a national of a treaty country (a country with which the United States maintains a treaty of commerce and navigation) to be admitted to the United States when investing a substantial amount of capital in a U.S. business" https://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/temporary-worker...

In any case more options is better for people seeking to start a business in the US (even people who are not paroled will benefit from not having to compete with paroled entrepreneurs over the same limited number of visas).

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#97

Post by throwawayIndian »

vmarsy wrote: post #74
chrisper wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It appears, it has the same issue as H-1B visas. At least in my opinion. If your business fails and you invested 5 years of your life, you are kicked out of the country and have to move your family and everything back to wherever you came from. This big uncertainty of the future is, in my opinion, a huge negative of both H1B and this parole.

> It appears, it has the same issue as H-1B visas. At least in my opinion. For India/China natives on EB-2 or EB-3 categories, I agree. For all the others, being able to self-petition for the green card as an entrepreneur means you won't need a company to sponsor you. (or your own start-up is sponsoring you?), and the full process could be done in less than 5 years. The downside here would be the legal costs and hass…

Thanks to the unquestionable red tape and annoyingly (really annoying) slow and sloppy work-culture at the USCIS it is a privilege here to share with you that even the EB1 categories of both India & China are now s̶i̶g̶n̶i̶f̶i̶c̶a̶n̶t̶l̶y̶ ̶b̶a̶c̶k̶l̶o̶g̶g̶e̶d̶ frozen [1].

Yes, welcome to 2016.

A significant portion of talent that used to earlier fall in H1B->(Eb2/Eb3) category has now grown up in life and also gone up the corporate ladder to only come back and (re)apply as multinational managers/executive in the EB1C category.

No matter what the USCIS tries to do now it cannot make up for the pile of shit (at the cost of anxiety and torture of millions of legal immigrants) accumulated in the past fifteen/twenty years. The beast is simply too big.

[1] money.cnn.com/2016/08/19/technology/eb1-visa-india-china/

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#98

Post by vmarsy »

arcticbull wrote: post #90
vmarsy wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, that's an important thing to consider! Usually you just have the "substantial presence test" to determine if you are a us taxpayer. which is : If you spent >180 days in the US this year, you are considered resident for tax purposes. Otherwise you're non resident. Visa like the Student visa give you a 5 year exemption, where during that time you only have to report money made in the US, it would be great…

That's not how substantial presence test works exactly. SPT only counts time spent on a qualifying visa type (TN, O1, H1B, L1, etc) and not time spent on F/J/M/Q/A/G, which is I think what OP was alluding to. It's also not >180 days, it's if: QualifyingDaysThisYear > 31 AND QualifyingDaysThisYear + 1/3(LastYear) + 1/6(YearBefore) > 183 For further information: https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/s…

you're right, I was making the assumption of a simple case: you're coming as an Entrepreneur, you spend the full year in the US, so 365 > 183 , there's no need to even count further 1/3 and 1/6 as you weren't in the US before this.

Running a start-up by spending only a few hundred days a year in the US could be challenging, but if the law allows you to, why not.

F/J (Idk anything about M/Q/A/G) are only exempt 5 years. I have friends who did their undergrad and are on their Phd on F-1 who are still on F-1 but are now considered "us resident for tax purposes" because the 5 exempt calendar years are now used up, so they fall back to the 183 days rule.

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#99

Post by winter_blue »

beagle3 wrote: post #83

Anyone here aware of tax implications of the parole status? Usually, "us taxpayer" status is only triggered with a proper visa (H1B, L1, O1, etc.) or permanent resident status (green card). I've never met any mention of tax status on parole. To someone who has any non-trivial financial life outside the US (which I expect to be true for most people who would apply for this), a us taxpayer status is a horrible curse: Y…

With a few exceptions, immigration status is irrelevant to US tax status. US tax status is determined by the Substantial Presence Test: https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/subs...

Certain visas (specifically A, G, F, J, M, Q) are exceptions to the general rule. For example, the F (student) visa allows you to treat yourself as a non-resident for tax purposes for up to 5 years.

But everyone else, including undocumented immigrants all get treated as "U.S. residents for tax purposes" once they meet the timeline for the substantial presence test.

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#100

Post by int_19h »

klunger wrote: post #85
serge2k wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have a path to a green card then 5 years is a pretty solid amount of time for most places (not india/china). If they made it a separate quota for entrepreneurs then you could get most people a green card within that timeline.

Why is China and India the exception here? They keep getting mentioned as an exception in this discussion.

A single country of origin is not allowed to use up more than 7% of the total green card quota. Thus, very populous countries with lots of qualified potential immigrants, and strong incentives to immigrate (e.g. significant quality-of-life difference), are at a disadvantage.
Post reply on HN