Sakthisagar
08-06 02:14 PM
Is it a big blow for desi consulting firms??
US raises H-1B, L1 visa fee by $2000
Washington: The US Senate today approved a substantial increase in application fees for H-1B and L1 visas, most sought after by Indian IT professionals to fund a $ 600 million emergency package to improve security along the porous Mexican border.
The proposed massive increase in H-1B and L1 visa application fee would primarily affect the top Indian IT companies who rely majorly on these categories of visas to continue with their work in the US. The Senate measure increases the visa fee to $ 2,000 per application on those companies that have less than 50 percent of their employees as American citizens.
"I prefer our source, which is from these companies which are not, as I say they are companies whose whole purpose is to bring people in on H-1B and the vast majority of them from other countries who go back to the other countries. That is a better funding source," Senator Charles Schumer from New York said in his remarks on the Senate floor.
Schumer along with his other democratic colleagues including Senator Claire McCaskill has introduced the legislation in this regard, which was passed by unanimous consent. During the debate, however, Senator John McCain wanted to fund the security along the Mexican border with the stimulus money, which was turned down by Schumer.
"The bottom line is this. I like the H-1B programme, and I think it does a lot of good for a lot of American companies. In fact, in the immigration proposal I made, along with Senator Reid and Senator Menendez, as well as the outline with Senator Graham, we expand H-1B in a variety of ways," Schumer argued.
"There is a part of H-1B that is abused, and it is by companies that are not American companies or even companies that are making something. Rather, they are companies that take foreign folks, bring them here, and then they stay here for a few years, learn their expertise, and go back. We think we should increase the fees when they do that," the Senator said.
Rejecting McCain's proposal to get the funding from the stimulus money, Schumer said: "I hope, even though I cannot accept these amendments, that maybe we could come together on something that we could bring back in September because I do believe we have to secure the border."
Schumer said: "Even in the comprehensive proposal that we made, we said we have to secure the border and do other things as well. It is my belief that securing the border alone will not solve our immigration problems; that until we have comprehensive reform, particularly in making sure employers do not hire illegal immigrants which they now do, even though they do not know they are illegal immigrants because documents are so easily forged, that we have to do comprehensive. But we should do the border. To say we have to do comprehensive does not gainsay that we have to work on theborder and work on it quickly and soon."
It is not clear yet, if this increase would also apply only to those firms that are also H-1B-dependent.
All Politics, .. only senate approved this now Congress has to put on vote and pass this and The President has to Sign, then only this is a Law other wise this remains as a Proposal.
US raises H-1B, L1 visa fee by $2000
Washington: The US Senate today approved a substantial increase in application fees for H-1B and L1 visas, most sought after by Indian IT professionals to fund a $ 600 million emergency package to improve security along the porous Mexican border.
The proposed massive increase in H-1B and L1 visa application fee would primarily affect the top Indian IT companies who rely majorly on these categories of visas to continue with their work in the US. The Senate measure increases the visa fee to $ 2,000 per application on those companies that have less than 50 percent of their employees as American citizens.
"I prefer our source, which is from these companies which are not, as I say they are companies whose whole purpose is to bring people in on H-1B and the vast majority of them from other countries who go back to the other countries. That is a better funding source," Senator Charles Schumer from New York said in his remarks on the Senate floor.
Schumer along with his other democratic colleagues including Senator Claire McCaskill has introduced the legislation in this regard, which was passed by unanimous consent. During the debate, however, Senator John McCain wanted to fund the security along the Mexican border with the stimulus money, which was turned down by Schumer.
"The bottom line is this. I like the H-1B programme, and I think it does a lot of good for a lot of American companies. In fact, in the immigration proposal I made, along with Senator Reid and Senator Menendez, as well as the outline with Senator Graham, we expand H-1B in a variety of ways," Schumer argued.
"There is a part of H-1B that is abused, and it is by companies that are not American companies or even companies that are making something. Rather, they are companies that take foreign folks, bring them here, and then they stay here for a few years, learn their expertise, and go back. We think we should increase the fees when they do that," the Senator said.
Rejecting McCain's proposal to get the funding from the stimulus money, Schumer said: "I hope, even though I cannot accept these amendments, that maybe we could come together on something that we could bring back in September because I do believe we have to secure the border."
Schumer said: "Even in the comprehensive proposal that we made, we said we have to secure the border and do other things as well. It is my belief that securing the border alone will not solve our immigration problems; that until we have comprehensive reform, particularly in making sure employers do not hire illegal immigrants which they now do, even though they do not know they are illegal immigrants because documents are so easily forged, that we have to do comprehensive. But we should do the border. To say we have to do comprehensive does not gainsay that we have to work on theborder and work on it quickly and soon."
It is not clear yet, if this increase would also apply only to those firms that are also H-1B-dependent.
All Politics, .. only senate approved this now Congress has to put on vote and pass this and The President has to Sign, then only this is a Law other wise this remains as a Proposal.
GCNirvana007
10-05 07:57 PM
Why do you care for Reds... and what is the guy who gave you a red losing..! Understand that first
Another moron sent this above
I dont care, its funny to think losers got so much time to do this
Another moron sent this above
I dont care, its funny to think losers got so much time to do this
natrajs
08-30 05:00 PM
Congrats and Best Wishes
Thanks for your support to IV
Thanks for your support to IV
seahawks
09-09 12:51 PM
Calling all WA State (OR also) IV members to join yahoo group. We need to coordinate stuff and contact all of you as a group, so please join the yahoo group created for channelizing IV message, organizing and sharing the vision and bringing awareness to Northwest region on Legal Immigration issues.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WA_Immigration_Voice/
Thanks and appreciate your help
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WA_Immigration_Voice/
Thanks and appreciate your help
more...
srikondoji
07-02 02:17 PM
Please step back. You need to grow up to know what is racism and you need to listen/read with some context in the background.
Plain reading is injurious to health and community.
I repeat "please step aside".
You are a disgrace for the "Senior Member" title. So much so that you will snap back at another Senior IV Member. Tcch...tcch....
Thanks,
Jayant
Plain reading is injurious to health and community.
I repeat "please step aside".
You are a disgrace for the "Senior Member" title. So much so that you will snap back at another Senior IV Member. Tcch...tcch....
Thanks,
Jayant
snathan
06-10 09:18 AM
I am very thankful for such a generous response in such a short span of time.
I have everything back with me except I-94 and VISA ( which can be had in india).
I owe this forum a lot.....:) and i will have to repay it ...
I am happy to know that your 'thefted' issue is solved . Is there any way you can help IV. There is a fund drive going on to solve some immigrant issue. If possible please contribute.
I have everything back with me except I-94 and VISA ( which can be had in india).
I owe this forum a lot.....:) and i will have to repay it ...
I am happy to know that your 'thefted' issue is solved . Is there any way you can help IV. There is a fund drive going on to solve some immigrant issue. If possible please contribute.
more...
saketkapur
07-06 02:50 PM
But I did have a valid H1B stamp in my passport at the time of entry......
You should confirm with your attorney as to if you will be able to maintain H1 status after entering on AP if you do not have a valid stamp...not sure about that......
regards
Saket
You should confirm with your attorney as to if you will be able to maintain H1 status after entering on AP if you do not have a valid stamp...not sure about that......
regards
Saket
kerstbrd
07-04 06:16 PM
I am from Bosnia, so yes I guess it's ROW (rest of the world).
I whish you all the best resolution of this crisis. Trully. I really feel your pain and the pain of many of my friends who are affected by this.
I know when I first came on this site, it was devastating to read about so much negative stuff, so many cases in a limbo for years. I wanted to read som positive stories too. So, I hope that cases like mine give some people hope.
Thanks for the positive update.
I whish you all the best resolution of this crisis. Trully. I really feel your pain and the pain of many of my friends who are affected by this.
I know when I first came on this site, it was devastating to read about so much negative stuff, so many cases in a limbo for years. I wanted to read som positive stories too. So, I hope that cases like mine give some people hope.
Thanks for the positive update.
more...
vicky007
05-10 12:16 PM
Sorry, the link is not working anymore.
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
andy garcia
07-30 08:45 PM
Let's hope everyone will be all right.
My son will turn 21 in December 07 and I stuck in name check for who knows how long.
My son will turn 21 in December 07 and I stuck in name check for who knows how long.
more...
pd_recapturing
05-23 07:10 AM
In my case, I have my EB3 labor and I140 approved with PD as May 2004. I have already started a new PERM EB2 from same company in order to port PD. I have not reached to the stage where I can apply I140 (under EB2) to actually start porting PD. With the new rule of "21st May 2007", I am not sure how would my case be treated? Can somebody shed some light on this?
Can someone please answer this ?
Can someone please answer this ?
rkotamurthy
09-29 02:24 PM
Bump ^^^
more...
lazycis
09-23 05:11 PM
Eventually they will accept it if it was wrongly rejected so you do not have to worry that you won't be able to re-file it after 9/30.
laborpains
09-15 12:58 PM
Any ideas? (My wife and son are in india now).
Anyway, I will support IV wholeheartedly going forward. Of course, I got benefitted from it. I am a long timer, 2001, EB3.
Congratulations! Just curious did you got any RFE as it is a very early PD? I'm Jan 22 2002 EB3-I and am waiting with bated breath.
Anyway, I will support IV wholeheartedly going forward. Of course, I got benefitted from it. I am a long timer, 2001, EB3.
Congratulations! Just curious did you got any RFE as it is a very early PD? I'm Jan 22 2002 EB3-I and am waiting with bated breath.
more...
ggc
10-18 03:44 PM
Thank you all for your replies.
My attorney is in NY, he said he cannot come to CA for my interview.
Can I take a local attorney just for the interview purpose?
And we have a 1 year old kid, can we take kid to the interview?
My attorney is in NY, he said he cannot come to CA for my interview.
Can I take a local attorney just for the interview purpose?
And we have a 1 year old kid, can we take kid to the interview?
RajWantsGC
05-12 10:59 PM
Thanks Roger for the reply. Mine was 3 years degree. So they mentioned that it is not equvilent to U.S. Bachelor degree. They did not have any issue with my experience which is more than 5 years.
more...
smiling08
09-12 12:21 PM
I am in this case, and I am on my OPT in the US. If I have the I-794B now, and will be valid Oct 1, 2008, can I change my employer and transfer H1-B? Or I have to activate it first. Thanks a lot!
your employer while applying the h1b , they did not applied for change of status to h1b. they just applied for h1b only. so you did not got the i-94.
so until you out of the country and get it stamped h1b and re-enter you h1b will not be activated.
since you have your f1 valid until december...you can go for stamping before that date or you can also amend h1b for change of status thru your employer also.
hope this helps
your employer while applying the h1b , they did not applied for change of status to h1b. they just applied for h1b only. so you did not got the i-94.
so until you out of the country and get it stamped h1b and re-enter you h1b will not be activated.
since you have your f1 valid until december...you can go for stamping before that date or you can also amend h1b for change of status thru your employer also.
hope this helps
DDash
11-09 11:46 PM
Awesome idea....thanks for taking initiative. One minor suggestion, to avoid, spams may be you should lock the free membership...i.e. if someone wants to join the yahoo group, they should send a request, as opposed to join immediately. Just a thought.
Best wishes!
Best wishes!
green_mile
10-04 02:09 PM
Is it advisable to put in a big % of your income into the retirement account. There seems to be a nearly 30% early withdrawal loss if you ever were to pull money early out of that prior to 60 years of age. So basically your own money will be lost.
Any ideas on this issue? It is not that I am planning to withdraw early but just for information purpose.
1)If you have a company match(if you contribute certain percentage company also contributes certain percentage towards the account) then it is wise to put money in 401K.
If not given the crappy funds offered by the 401K plan provider it is not a good idea.
2)Also don't go overboard with this 401K , don't put too much money , if you still want to invest there are other vehicles like Roth IRA.
3)Talk to qualified financial adviser instead of seeking advice from annonymous folks, especially when it comes to your money.
Any ideas on this issue? It is not that I am planning to withdraw early but just for information purpose.
1)If you have a company match(if you contribute certain percentage company also contributes certain percentage towards the account) then it is wise to put money in 401K.
If not given the crappy funds offered by the 401K plan provider it is not a good idea.
2)Also don't go overboard with this 401K , don't put too much money , if you still want to invest there are other vehicles like Roth IRA.
3)Talk to qualified financial adviser instead of seeking advice from annonymous folks, especially when it comes to your money.
brb2
03-26 08:58 PM
The worst thing about TOI is that they routinely censor out on-line posts which are critical of their article/opinion. Since then I have stopped posting anything on TOI. On-line editors seem to be control freaks.
nanneh
04-27 06:51 PM
I think I had a birth certificate in native language(devangiri) and it had no name since I was named in a naming ceremony as per the customs and culture. I spoke to my attorney about this.She advised me that i get the BC transalated to english and for no name get affidavites by two people saying that the birth certificate was indeed me and i was named later as per customs and culture.I got affidavtes sworn by my mother and father.
Also I dont think that you should have names of both father and mother in BC . ninety pecenty of Birth Certificates issued in India only have fathers name on it.
This is my expereince but i would suggest please consult an attorney.
Yes milind70, you are right. That is the reason i am looking specific format which contains Father's and Mother's information on "BC".
Also I dont think that you should have names of both father and mother in BC . ninety pecenty of Birth Certificates issued in India only have fathers name on it.
This is my expereince but i would suggest please consult an attorney.
Yes milind70, you are right. That is the reason i am looking specific format which contains Father's and Mother's information on "BC".
No comments:
Post a Comment