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

131–140 of 144 posts

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#131

Post by Sophie_Alcorn »

mkolodny wrote: post #109
yurisagalov wrote: post #2

A less "PR"-ey take (but still PR-ey non the less) on the White House Medium blog: https://medium.com/the-white-house/welcoming-international-e... As an international founder who has had to suffer the stresses of dealing with US immigration while building a company based in the states, this is incredibly welcome news.

Really important blurb from that article: "The proposed rule is open for public comment for 45 days, allowing stakeholders to provide valuable feedback to DHS before the final rule is ultimately published. (We encourage you to read the details and submit your comments.)" And from the proposal [0]: "You may submit comments directly to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) by e-mail at uscisfrcomment@dhs.go…

Hi, I'm doing research on this topic to draft a public comment for USCIS and I'd like to request everybody's input:

-Is it reasonable to limit this to only 3 founders per company, or should it be 4?

-Reasonable for a successful founder to own at least 10% at the end of the 2 year period (which could be 5 years after founding the startup)?

-Reasonable to require $345k within the 1st 3 years to qualify? Too much capital?

-Is $500k annual revenue with average annualized revenue growth of at least 20% a good minimum requirement for proving "substantial and rapidly increasing revenue"?

-Will certain industries like biotech or medical devices be harmed if there is a requirement that the investor funding and application must occur within the first 3 years after founding? Are there some types of companies that take longer to get traction?

-Is winning pitch events or other competitions a good indicator of potential for rapid growth and job creation?

-Does getting into an incubator show a potential for success?

Thanks Sophie Alcorn

My blogs about this program: http://alcornimmigrationlaw.com/international-entrepreneur-r...

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#132

Post by stringlytyped »

arcticbull wrote: post #94
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.

The problem with the E-2 visa is that you never become eligible to apply for a green card.

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#133

Post by Sophie_Alcorn »

e15ctr0n wrote: post #35

For those looking to get a much more comprehensive look at this proposed rule from USCIS, read the advance version of the notice to be published in the Federal Register: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Laws/Article... (PDF, 649 KB, 155 pages) The sections most relevant to those who wish to apply under this rule would be: IV. Proposed Changes A. Overview of Parole for Entrepreneurs (pages 30 - 32) B. C…

I extracted the text of the proposed rule from the 155 page pdf and posted it here: http://bit.ly/2bXrguq

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#134

Post by chx »

qaq wrote: post #121
chx wrote: post #102

Who knows what happens. The Canadian startup visa in three years managed to bring in 100 people including dependents http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/start-up-program-disap...

For Canada there are so many options it's hard to compare to US

Are there? Express Entry, family unification (and that's a very limited one!) and some provincial programs. I managed to immigrate a few years ago and now I am a citizen but doesn't look like "so many".

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#135

Post by qaq »

chx wrote: post #134
qaq wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For Canada there are so many options it's hard to compare to US

Are there? Express Entry, family unification (and that's a very limited one!) and some provincial programs. I managed to immigrate a few years ago and now I am a citizen but doesn't look like "so many".

If you go to study you can work half time. If your spouse goes to study you can work full time. That's pretty much opens the door for pretty much anyone.

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#136

Post by duncanawoods »

Sophie_Alcorn wrote: post #131
mkolodny wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really important blurb from that article: "The proposed rule is open for public comment for 45 days, allowing stakeholders to provide valuable feedback to DHS before the final rule is ultimately published. (We encourage you to read the details and submit your comments.)" And from the proposal [0]: "You may submit comments directly to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) by e-mail at uscisfrcomment@dhs.go…

Hi, I'm doing research on this topic to draft a public comment for USCIS and I'd like to request everybody's input: -Is it reasonable to limit this to only 3 founders per company, or should it be 4? -Reasonable for a successful founder to own at least 10% at the end of the 2 year period (which could be 5 years after founding the startup)? -Reasonable to require $345k within the 1st 3 years to qualify? Too much capita…

> Reasonable to require $345k within the 1st 3 years to qualify? Too much capital?

An international founder probably wants to come to the states for funding and scaling. Having pre-conditions on both scale and funding seems like a chicken and egg. Requiring funding rules out all bootstrapped businesses which are likely candidates.

> $500k annual revenue

The conditions feel like they select for small businesses like restaurants but filter out the potentially massive ones e.g. pre-revenue consumer facing like Facebook / WhatsApp or R&D heavy businesses like Biotech. Neither of these may see revenue in the first few years but have evidence potential in user growth, engagement or scientific achievement.

> Is winning pitch events or other competitions a good indicator of potential for rapid growth and job creation?

> Does getting into an incubator show a potential for success?

If a founder is wanting to relocate from a non-startup friendly region then neither of these are may have been available. IMHO both competitions and second-rate incubators are "playing at business" and distractions from the truly necessary steps.

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#137

Post by geomark »

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…

You raise a very good point. When I first saw this announcement I thought it was a great deal for foreign founders. But as a US expat I know what a curse it is to be a "US taxpayer". Foreign founders who end up being US taxpayers without planning for the consequences could suffer greatly. That scenario of your home bank closing your account is very real in countries that refuse to submit to the FATCA reporting requirements.

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#138

Post by thr0waway1239 »

harichinnan wrote: post #129
throwawayIndian wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 gon…

EB1 visas are now taken away by highly skilled and talented "managers" from TCS, Infosys, Cognizant etc. There's a special category of EB1 visas, EB1C which is on offer for managers. Skills that these companies face severe shortage in US include HR, Relationship Management, Finance/Accounting.

It will be interesting to see what happens to these people if Trump were to get elected, given his promise to investigate H1 visas.

Will he ask whistleblowers to step forward? Perhaps deport these "extraordinary individuals" and hand over their green cards to the actually deserving ones in the queue? Or is the number of affected people too small to matter?

Many people on message boards rarely seem to appreciate the actual pull of a person like Trump. Very few people actually want to support Trump, but the system badly needs a shake-up, even one that might well be too arbitrary and might negatively affect more people than it helps. The alternative feels like being the frog boiling in water.

While I am on the matter, I would also comment that the H1B visa lottery mess itself can be cleared quite quickly by someone who is not catering to lobbyists. Ask the ones who obtained their higher degree in the US if they genuinely think there are more people who are qualified to get the visa than the number of people who actually receive it - that is, does it make sense that there would be a lottery for the visa?

I know this opens an entirely new can of worms - why does getting a degree in the US give any more credibility? Here is a not very PC answer: being a student in the US actually gives you a chance to understand the culture and work ethic which makes the US what it is, which is almost 100% lacking in people who suddenly find themselves in the corporate environment of a completely different culture from their country, don't particularly care for assimilating, and often cause a lot of questions to be raised about whether the H1 visa is actually serving its designed purpose.

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#139

Post by bernardlunn »

duncanawoods wrote: post #136
Sophie_Alcorn wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, I'm doing research on this topic to draft a public comment for USCIS and I'd like to request everybody's input: -Is it reasonable to limit this to only 3 founders per company, or should it be 4? -Reasonable for a successful founder to own at least 10% at the end of the 2 year period (which could be 5 years after founding the startup)? -Reasonable to require $345k within the 1st 3 years to qualify? Too much capita…

> Reasonable to require $345k within the 1st 3 years to qualify? Too much capital? An international founder probably wants to come to the states for funding and scaling. Having pre-conditions on both scale and funding seems like a chicken and egg. Requiring funding rules out all bootstrapped businesses which are likely candidates. > $500k annual revenue The conditions feel like they select for small businesses like r…

Just nodding and agreeing with all your points.

Re: USCIS Proposes Rule to Welcome International Entrepreneurs

#140

Post by throwawayIndian »

thr0waway1239 wrote: post #138
harichinnan wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EB1 visas are now taken away by highly skilled and talented "managers" from TCS, Infosys, Cognizant etc. There's a special category of EB1 visas, EB1C which is on offer for managers. Skills that these companies face severe shortage in US include HR, Relationship Management, Finance/Accounting.

It will be interesting to see what happens to these people if Trump were to get elected, given his promise to investigate H1 visas. Will he ask whistleblowers to step forward? Perhaps deport these "extraordinary individuals" and hand over their green cards to the actually deserving ones in the queue? Or is the number of affected people too small to matter? Many people on message boards rarely seem to appreciate the a…

> why does getting a degree in the US give any more credibility?

It does not! And probably never will. A lot of people who I know went on to get a phd because of lack of options or because of frustration and failure in corporate life. The latter is statistically a sizeable number; consider unless the kid in your class went off immediately after school.

Whereas a multinational manager is usually directly contributing into the US economy for years with sweat and hard work, including engineering and research -- if needed, for their business to survive and grow. I'd rather say they gather and implement more according to the culture and edge it off with cultural gaps between the host country and their own. Of course now we're entering a class war. :-)

Post reply on HN