Green.Tech
06-16 04:45 PM
Step up for yourself!
wallpaper hoja de cuaderno. D. HOJA INTERNA CUADERNO. The Economist. Apr 4,
transpass
02-23 01:05 PM
people,
i just returned from an infopass meeting... the guy i talked to said that they recently have a directive from the DHS/USCIS that they want to separate the legal stuff from the illegal stuff and hence they are planning to adjudicate a record number of EB apps in the next quarter or two... does anyone else concur? is this true or were my ears just ringing in that meeting?
--shark
But they can approve only based on available visa numbers...:confused:
i just returned from an infopass meeting... the guy i talked to said that they recently have a directive from the DHS/USCIS that they want to separate the legal stuff from the illegal stuff and hence they are planning to adjudicate a record number of EB apps in the next quarter or two... does anyone else concur? is this true or were my ears just ringing in that meeting?
--shark
But they can approve only based on available visa numbers...:confused:
onemorecame
07-24 12:14 PM
I think I have been very lucky so far. I don't think USCIS processes based on anything concrete, I think it's a little random. Or maybe I am just lucky.
I applied for PERM in Sep 2006 - EB3 - India.
I got approved for PERM in Mar 2007.
I applied for I-140 and I-485 concurrently in Jun 2007.
I-140 got approved July 20, 2007 and on July 23, 2007 I received all 4 receipts for I-140, I-485, EAD and AP. So my approval came before my receipt. I live in California so everything went to Nebraksa.
Lawyers emailed saying they also received the EAD card yesterday July 23, 2007.
Now I have to wait for only AP and Adjustment. And I still have 5 years left on my H1-B (2 years on this visa and then another extension).
So I say, anything is possible. I wake up every morning and pray to USCIS because they made my life better :) :) :)
how did you applied in i-485 on June 2007? or you applied on July 2nd?
I applied for PERM in Sep 2006 - EB3 - India.
I got approved for PERM in Mar 2007.
I applied for I-140 and I-485 concurrently in Jun 2007.
I-140 got approved July 20, 2007 and on July 23, 2007 I received all 4 receipts for I-140, I-485, EAD and AP. So my approval came before my receipt. I live in California so everything went to Nebraksa.
Lawyers emailed saying they also received the EAD card yesterday July 23, 2007.
Now I have to wait for only AP and Adjustment. And I still have 5 years left on my H1-B (2 years on this visa and then another extension).
So I say, anything is possible. I wake up every morning and pray to USCIS because they made my life better :) :) :)
how did you applied in i-485 on June 2007? or you applied on July 2nd?
2011 a una hoja de cuaderno con
vactorboy29
03-05 12:54 PM
I saw soft LUD on my 485 applications.I will update if any thing happens.
more...
Milind123
09-17 12:51 PM
Enough of serious talk. Lets all have a lighter moment. Chandu, and others, thanks for all the hard work you have put in. Please take a moment to enjoy this joke. It contains the word sex, yet is very clean.
A 11 year old boy goes to his dad and asks �Daddy what is sex?�. Poor daddy was not prepared to face this sudden unexpected question. Anyways, he gathers himself and replies back �Son, this is going to take sometime to explain. Why don�t we go to McDonald�s for lunch.� As they are driving to McDee�s, the father is trying to rearrange his thoughts to answer his son�s question. They have a nice lunch and the father is finally able to answer his son�s question using the birds and the bees as examples (at this time the two bees at the coke machine are probably complaining to each other, why all fathers never talk about the actual characters). Anyway, after listening to his father speak. The son replies back, drawing out a piece of paper �It is still confusing to me. How do I fit all that in this tiny box.� On the piece of paper are two boxes with M and F next to it.
Contributions are welcome if you enjoyed it and also believe in IV efforts.
A 11 year old boy goes to his dad and asks �Daddy what is sex?�. Poor daddy was not prepared to face this sudden unexpected question. Anyways, he gathers himself and replies back �Son, this is going to take sometime to explain. Why don�t we go to McDonald�s for lunch.� As they are driving to McDee�s, the father is trying to rearrange his thoughts to answer his son�s question. They have a nice lunch and the father is finally able to answer his son�s question using the birds and the bees as examples (at this time the two bees at the coke machine are probably complaining to each other, why all fathers never talk about the actual characters). Anyway, after listening to his father speak. The son replies back, drawing out a piece of paper �It is still confusing to me. How do I fit all that in this tiny box.� On the piece of paper are two boxes with M and F next to it.
Contributions are welcome if you enjoyed it and also believe in IV efforts.
susie
07-15 11:19 AM
APPENDIX: REFORM SOLUTIONS
The Need for a Compassionate Visa
Solutions
Subsection (3) should be reworded to clarify its application to derivative beneficiaries as follows
�(3) RETENTION OF PRIORITY DATE- If the age of an alien is determined under paragraph (1) to be 21 years of age or older,
(A) for the purposes of subsections (a)(4), the alien's petition shall automatically be converted to the appropriate category and the alien shall retain the original priority date issued upon receipt of the original petition, and
(B) for the purposes of subsections (d), the petition on which the alien was a derivative beneficiary shall automatically be converted to a new petition with the appropriate category once their Parent has permanent resident status and the alien shall retain the original priority date issued upon receipt of the alien parent�s original petition. This is without prejudice to a Parent�s right to object to such converted petition. �
This new division into (A) and (B) makes a more appropriate distinction between principal beneficiaries and derivative beneficiaries. (B) also clarifies a Parent who does not want to petition their over 21 unmarried son or daughter, is permitted to oppose the automatic conversion of the application.
In addition, after four and half years since its enactment, the USCIS has still failed to issue implementing rules and a private bill should be introduced requiring the USCIS to perform its statutory duty to provide rules.
If the new points system is implemented, INA, section 203(h), becomes redundant in relation to future applicants. In this case a new provision should be added permitting all derivative beneficiaries to be considered as a child regardless of when they age out and when the petition becomes current. This would be a temporary relief measure for any derivative beneficiary currently subject to the family-based petitions so they do not age out while the remaining petitions are being cleared.
Removal of Child Status Protection Act of 2002 (CSPA), section 8
Section 8 of the CSPA provides provisions preventing the retroactive application of the legislation. As a result many beneficiaries have to wait in excess of 30 years for an immigrant visa. Derivative beneficiaries that were subject to wait times and aged out cannot apply the benefits of the CSPA if their parent�s petition was processed before August 2002. This means they are forced to back of the line; after already having waited up to 20 years, they are forced to wait for another lengthy period up to 20 years in the F2B category.
Therefore, section 8 has to be repealed to enable retroactive applicability. It cannot be right that if these same people had not abided with US immigration laws and entered illegally, they would be able to get status to remain and work in the USA under the proposed Z visa. However, by abiding by the law, they are instead forced to wait outside the USA for over 30 years in total since the start of the original immigrant visa application because they were ejected out of one line due to aging out as a result of the prolonged wait times, only to be forced to the back of a new immigrant visa line.
Dream Act
This is currently incorporated within the STRIVE Act (sections 621 et seq.) and presumably will be brought forward in the upcoming Bill subject to final agreement by the Senators. However, there is ambiguity as to whether children in the USA who enter legally benefit from its provisions. This has to be clarified to ensure it applies not only to children who entered the USA illegally, but also to those who entered legally, such as in derivative status on an E2 visa of their Parent. The ambiguity is made worse because the STRIVE Bill includes the Dream Act in subtitle B of Title VI Legalization of Undocumented Individuals. It is an absurd situation if legal nonimmigrant children are not given at least the same equal treatment as illegal children. The future Bill should incorporate the DREAM Act into a separate Title so does not give the appearance it applies to illegal migrant children only.
E2 Investors and Rep. Heather Wilson�s Proposed E2 Nonimmigrant Investor Adjustment Act of 2007
We strongly reiterate our support for this proposed legislation and urge you to do same. However, we urge you to go further by removing the proposed 3,000 cap or, at the very least, increase the proposed 3,000 annual cap to a more reasonable number such as 20,000 and/or provide annual increases to meet market demand to avoid backlogs and to avoid having to revisit the issue in future. Aside from our own members, E2 investors provide billions of dollars of investment in the US economy and much needed employment. They should be provided with a pathway to permanent residency and citizenship for their dedication and commitment to this country. It is undoubtedly very odd that illegal immigrants are receiving a pathway to permanent residency whereas E2 investors are not. It sends a clear message that entering the USA illegally is preferable because it provides a path to citizenship, whereas entering legally and working hard, investing substantial amounts of capital and employing US citizens for the benefit of the US economy does not (unless you are the extremely rare exception that qualifies under the EB5 investment visa).
The Need for a Compassionate Visa
Solutions
Subsection (3) should be reworded to clarify its application to derivative beneficiaries as follows
�(3) RETENTION OF PRIORITY DATE- If the age of an alien is determined under paragraph (1) to be 21 years of age or older,
(A) for the purposes of subsections (a)(4), the alien's petition shall automatically be converted to the appropriate category and the alien shall retain the original priority date issued upon receipt of the original petition, and
(B) for the purposes of subsections (d), the petition on which the alien was a derivative beneficiary shall automatically be converted to a new petition with the appropriate category once their Parent has permanent resident status and the alien shall retain the original priority date issued upon receipt of the alien parent�s original petition. This is without prejudice to a Parent�s right to object to such converted petition. �
This new division into (A) and (B) makes a more appropriate distinction between principal beneficiaries and derivative beneficiaries. (B) also clarifies a Parent who does not want to petition their over 21 unmarried son or daughter, is permitted to oppose the automatic conversion of the application.
In addition, after four and half years since its enactment, the USCIS has still failed to issue implementing rules and a private bill should be introduced requiring the USCIS to perform its statutory duty to provide rules.
If the new points system is implemented, INA, section 203(h), becomes redundant in relation to future applicants. In this case a new provision should be added permitting all derivative beneficiaries to be considered as a child regardless of when they age out and when the petition becomes current. This would be a temporary relief measure for any derivative beneficiary currently subject to the family-based petitions so they do not age out while the remaining petitions are being cleared.
Removal of Child Status Protection Act of 2002 (CSPA), section 8
Section 8 of the CSPA provides provisions preventing the retroactive application of the legislation. As a result many beneficiaries have to wait in excess of 30 years for an immigrant visa. Derivative beneficiaries that were subject to wait times and aged out cannot apply the benefits of the CSPA if their parent�s petition was processed before August 2002. This means they are forced to back of the line; after already having waited up to 20 years, they are forced to wait for another lengthy period up to 20 years in the F2B category.
Therefore, section 8 has to be repealed to enable retroactive applicability. It cannot be right that if these same people had not abided with US immigration laws and entered illegally, they would be able to get status to remain and work in the USA under the proposed Z visa. However, by abiding by the law, they are instead forced to wait outside the USA for over 30 years in total since the start of the original immigrant visa application because they were ejected out of one line due to aging out as a result of the prolonged wait times, only to be forced to the back of a new immigrant visa line.
Dream Act
This is currently incorporated within the STRIVE Act (sections 621 et seq.) and presumably will be brought forward in the upcoming Bill subject to final agreement by the Senators. However, there is ambiguity as to whether children in the USA who enter legally benefit from its provisions. This has to be clarified to ensure it applies not only to children who entered the USA illegally, but also to those who entered legally, such as in derivative status on an E2 visa of their Parent. The ambiguity is made worse because the STRIVE Bill includes the Dream Act in subtitle B of Title VI Legalization of Undocumented Individuals. It is an absurd situation if legal nonimmigrant children are not given at least the same equal treatment as illegal children. The future Bill should incorporate the DREAM Act into a separate Title so does not give the appearance it applies to illegal migrant children only.
E2 Investors and Rep. Heather Wilson�s Proposed E2 Nonimmigrant Investor Adjustment Act of 2007
We strongly reiterate our support for this proposed legislation and urge you to do same. However, we urge you to go further by removing the proposed 3,000 cap or, at the very least, increase the proposed 3,000 annual cap to a more reasonable number such as 20,000 and/or provide annual increases to meet market demand to avoid backlogs and to avoid having to revisit the issue in future. Aside from our own members, E2 investors provide billions of dollars of investment in the US economy and much needed employment. They should be provided with a pathway to permanent residency and citizenship for their dedication and commitment to this country. It is undoubtedly very odd that illegal immigrants are receiving a pathway to permanent residency whereas E2 investors are not. It sends a clear message that entering the USA illegally is preferable because it provides a path to citizenship, whereas entering legally and working hard, investing substantial amounts of capital and employing US citizens for the benefit of the US economy does not (unless you are the extremely rare exception that qualifies under the EB5 investment visa).
more...
va_dude
03-04 10:06 AM
I don't think this is a pattern, its probably specific just to the lender you were working with.
Frankly speaking the lender has the right to deny you the loan for whatever reason they feel is risky. So no point arguing with them.
Try another lender and hope it works.
-va_dude
Frankly speaking the lender has the right to deny you the loan for whatever reason they feel is risky. So no point arguing with them.
Try another lender and hope it works.
-va_dude
2010 Antigua Hoja De Cuaderno
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!
more...
IN2US
07-09 06:20 PM
I live in Southbay 90503.
hair hoja de cuaderno. Hoja de cuaderno; Hoja de cuaderno. TuffLuffJimmy
indio0617
03-09 11:35 AM
Has Any Senetor Brought An Amendment To Reinstate Ac21 Provison To Eliminate Country Quota(10%), If Demand Of Visas Is Less Than Supply? The Orignial Spector Markup Deleted This Provision From The Ina. This Is A Big Blow To Oversbuscribing Countries, Unless The Current Markup Is Modified Thro An Amendment.
Is There Any Update From Iv Core Members On This Issue?
No. Nothing on that. They are not done with the discussions yet and have more titles to discuss. They only finished title 2..
OK ... guys.... Bye..
Is There Any Update From Iv Core Members On This Issue?
No. Nothing on that. They are not done with the discussions yet and have more titles to discuss. They only finished title 2..
OK ... guys.... Bye..
more...
desi3933
08-04 12:49 PM
Desi3933
I don't understand why you are picking up on facts and faults on other post.What mirage is saying is true.I know 3 families stuck up in this GC process...all true cases.
There are some lucky people who have bought old labor substitution ;)who came to US in 2004 and got their GC's cleared and are very :D.
Some really who have come here to study...living in US for past 10 years genuine appliers are really stuck in this.They have all applied their labor and got them cleared only dec 2006.
people who are interested can send those letters if not ignore the thread.
If you are EB2 good for you...Its not that easy to change jobs having families..and when you are satisfied with the employer ,why would they change.
Everyone here want GC to stay in this country.And we all are here to find solutions thru IV - active participation is better.
Pani's letter is not that bad...if you dont like alter what you want to express and send it.People can write what they are facing only.
this is not an argument...just felt bad when you were point blankly picking on them.
I dont undestand :confused:
But one thing I understand there are many , in general like to irritate and hurt other's sentiments and thoughts and pinpoint only faults.
Becoz of this lack of unity only ,most of us face problems.
First of all, I do support issues faced by EB-3 India applicants. However, a letter with many factual errors and words like bonded is not going to help. I am just trying to present my views.
If I were OP, I will at least show my letter for some kind of legal review before sending. After all who would like to make condition bad to worse?
Please refer to post by internet couple of posts back. He has raised many good points.
Good Luck to everyone!
I don't understand why you are picking up on facts and faults on other post.What mirage is saying is true.I know 3 families stuck up in this GC process...all true cases.
There are some lucky people who have bought old labor substitution ;)who came to US in 2004 and got their GC's cleared and are very :D.
Some really who have come here to study...living in US for past 10 years genuine appliers are really stuck in this.They have all applied their labor and got them cleared only dec 2006.
people who are interested can send those letters if not ignore the thread.
If you are EB2 good for you...Its not that easy to change jobs having families..and when you are satisfied with the employer ,why would they change.
Everyone here want GC to stay in this country.And we all are here to find solutions thru IV - active participation is better.
Pani's letter is not that bad...if you dont like alter what you want to express and send it.People can write what they are facing only.
this is not an argument...just felt bad when you were point blankly picking on them.
I dont undestand :confused:
But one thing I understand there are many , in general like to irritate and hurt other's sentiments and thoughts and pinpoint only faults.
Becoz of this lack of unity only ,most of us face problems.
First of all, I do support issues faced by EB-3 India applicants. However, a letter with many factual errors and words like bonded is not going to help. I am just trying to present my views.
If I were OP, I will at least show my letter for some kind of legal review before sending. After all who would like to make condition bad to worse?
Please refer to post by internet couple of posts back. He has raised many good points.
Good Luck to everyone!
hot una hoja de cuaderno pero
digital2k
05-07 04:20 PM
Vowww
It feels great to have called everyone and making sure friends call as well ..
Pls Don't wait any longer, pick up your phone and be part of it NOW
Make sure you motivate others also
Let those phones be busy for the GOOD
For your convenience here are all the details :
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum85-action-items-for-everyone/1391371-cir-national-phone-campaign-29th-april-2010-to-14th-may-2010-a-post1751338.html#post1751338 (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum85-action-items-for-everyone/1391371-cir-national-phone-campaign-29th-april-2010-to-14th-may-2010-a-post1751338.html#post1751338)
This is The call
Don't miss the chance
IV and We suceeded in July, 2 Year EAD and many more ...
Pls pick up the phone and do your bit
IV is YOU and is Your Best Friend
It feels great to have called everyone and making sure friends call as well ..
Pls Don't wait any longer, pick up your phone and be part of it NOW
Make sure you motivate others also
Let those phones be busy for the GOOD
For your convenience here are all the details :
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum85-action-items-for-everyone/1391371-cir-national-phone-campaign-29th-april-2010-to-14th-may-2010-a-post1751338.html#post1751338 (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum85-action-items-for-everyone/1391371-cir-national-phone-campaign-29th-april-2010-to-14th-may-2010-a-post1751338.html#post1751338)
This is The call
Don't miss the chance
IV and We suceeded in July, 2 Year EAD and many more ...
Pls pick up the phone and do your bit
IV is YOU and is Your Best Friend
more...
house HOJA DE CUADERNO DE PAPEL DE
GCVir
07-28 08:36 PM
Age Out Issue for filing I-485: Gurus, please advise me on the age out issue of my son.
(1) Dates & Calculations effecting filing I_485: Here are the dates and the calculations I did which result in effective age of �21 yrs + 1 month + 1 day� thus making it Age-out issue for filing for I-485 for my son.
(A) Priority date : Nov, 2005
(B) I-140 receipt : 2/22/2006 I-140 approval : 3/22/2006
(C) I-140 pending period : One month (too fast where it was not a help!)
(I-140 was approved in my son�s 20th year � however, I learned that it is not of any help for filing his I-485)
(D) Applied for I-485 (for rest of family � not for son) (Thanks to IV) : First week of July 2007
(E) DOB of son : 3/30/1986
(F) Currant age : 21 yrs + 4 months (Currently on F1 and doing his under grad in US)
(G) Date to be considered for determining the age for filing I-485 : 6/1/2007
(since the monthly bulletin is released on 6/12/2007)
(H) Age as on above date (6/1/2007) : 21 yrs + 2 month + 1 day
(I) Benefit from CSPA :(I-140) pending days (C) : 1 month
(J) Effective age for filing I-485 during current window : (H) � (J) : 21 yrs + 1 month + 1 day
(2) Since, he aged out for filing for I-485 (also based on attorney�s calculation), his papers were not included and only papers for rest of the family were filed in July, 2007. Friends, is there any other interpretation of CSPA � which could be helpful in this scenario?
(3) Other Particulars (which could potentially offer any other solution / advice): I am from India and in US from sep 1998 (change of employer forced me to restart my GC process) and my son entered USA in Oct 1999 at his 13 � yrs and stayed continuously & studied in USA from 9th standard. Currently, he is in final yr of under graduate study and is on F1 visa from March 2007 (after completing 21 yrs) paying high (2.5 times the instate fee) international student fee.
(4) Can I do any thing in the current window when dates are current (until 8/17/07): Friends, if there is any way of filing his I-485, it will be of great help � since he could continue his graduate study at reasonable cost (at instate tuition fee). Are there any other options in this situation? Is there any possibility of I-485 getting receipted (if filed) � since he is supposed to have his PD frozen for his application for family based I-485 at parent�s PD (if applied with in one year of parent�s I-485?) (I am referring to a clause in CSPA � which states that the application will automatically be converted to family based I-485 if applied with in one year � Of course, these dates are not current now).
(5) I am not aware of how many others are affected with age-out issue in EB based cases. Can we come together through IV and identify potential action items? Can IV and immigration community help in addressing the age-out issue in bills proposed to be introduced (like DREAM / SKILL etc�) now on� (Particularly since the percentage of affected people may be very low with less voice that could be heard). I am thankful to IV & the core team for their extraordinary efforts and shall be contributing my part shortly.
Sorry for the long note � I thought the complexity of the issue needs it.
Thx GCVir
(1) Dates & Calculations effecting filing I_485: Here are the dates and the calculations I did which result in effective age of �21 yrs + 1 month + 1 day� thus making it Age-out issue for filing for I-485 for my son.
(A) Priority date : Nov, 2005
(B) I-140 receipt : 2/22/2006 I-140 approval : 3/22/2006
(C) I-140 pending period : One month (too fast where it was not a help!)
(I-140 was approved in my son�s 20th year � however, I learned that it is not of any help for filing his I-485)
(D) Applied for I-485 (for rest of family � not for son) (Thanks to IV) : First week of July 2007
(E) DOB of son : 3/30/1986
(F) Currant age : 21 yrs + 4 months (Currently on F1 and doing his under grad in US)
(G) Date to be considered for determining the age for filing I-485 : 6/1/2007
(since the monthly bulletin is released on 6/12/2007)
(H) Age as on above date (6/1/2007) : 21 yrs + 2 month + 1 day
(I) Benefit from CSPA :(I-140) pending days (C) : 1 month
(J) Effective age for filing I-485 during current window : (H) � (J) : 21 yrs + 1 month + 1 day
(2) Since, he aged out for filing for I-485 (also based on attorney�s calculation), his papers were not included and only papers for rest of the family were filed in July, 2007. Friends, is there any other interpretation of CSPA � which could be helpful in this scenario?
(3) Other Particulars (which could potentially offer any other solution / advice): I am from India and in US from sep 1998 (change of employer forced me to restart my GC process) and my son entered USA in Oct 1999 at his 13 � yrs and stayed continuously & studied in USA from 9th standard. Currently, he is in final yr of under graduate study and is on F1 visa from March 2007 (after completing 21 yrs) paying high (2.5 times the instate fee) international student fee.
(4) Can I do any thing in the current window when dates are current (until 8/17/07): Friends, if there is any way of filing his I-485, it will be of great help � since he could continue his graduate study at reasonable cost (at instate tuition fee). Are there any other options in this situation? Is there any possibility of I-485 getting receipted (if filed) � since he is supposed to have his PD frozen for his application for family based I-485 at parent�s PD (if applied with in one year of parent�s I-485?) (I am referring to a clause in CSPA � which states that the application will automatically be converted to family based I-485 if applied with in one year � Of course, these dates are not current now).
(5) I am not aware of how many others are affected with age-out issue in EB based cases. Can we come together through IV and identify potential action items? Can IV and immigration community help in addressing the age-out issue in bills proposed to be introduced (like DREAM / SKILL etc�) now on� (Particularly since the percentage of affected people may be very low with less voice that could be heard). I am thankful to IV & the core team for their extraordinary efforts and shall be contributing my part shortly.
Sorry for the long note � I thought the complexity of the issue needs it.
Thx GCVir
tattoo hoja de cuaderno pegada en
sj2273
08-04 04:40 PM
How about if we frame a well thought out letter..and present facts and start mass mailing - maybe once a month - every month. That we they will hear from us every month - in bulk.
How about if we dont use words like bonded etc and just repeatedly request the system to be repaired. Use of words like bonded etc can send a wrong signal.
We can also add our stories in there to give that emotional/human touch - eg. I can say that I have been in this country since 1999 and still waiting. If I look at my W-2s from 2001 (when I started working), I must have consistently paid about 10k in taxes to the Federal Govt and another 3k to the State every year. that makes my tax contribution to about 90k-100k in 8years..I think thats huge and I am still waiting, for being a tax paying and law abiding citizen just because the Immigration system is broken. I am a recruiter and I recruit US Citizens in large numbers for large govt projects, offering them really high salaries - while I am helping them "indirectly" realize their American Dream - my dreams are nowhere in the horizon. My wife works in the Child Welfare System and she helps broken families get back on their feet - while she is putting together their broken families - our family is still stranded in the system with no sign of moving forward.
Just a passing thought! I thought I should run this by you all. Thanks for reading.
How about if we dont use words like bonded etc and just repeatedly request the system to be repaired. Use of words like bonded etc can send a wrong signal.
We can also add our stories in there to give that emotional/human touch - eg. I can say that I have been in this country since 1999 and still waiting. If I look at my W-2s from 2001 (when I started working), I must have consistently paid about 10k in taxes to the Federal Govt and another 3k to the State every year. that makes my tax contribution to about 90k-100k in 8years..I think thats huge and I am still waiting, for being a tax paying and law abiding citizen just because the Immigration system is broken. I am a recruiter and I recruit US Citizens in large numbers for large govt projects, offering them really high salaries - while I am helping them "indirectly" realize their American Dream - my dreams are nowhere in the horizon. My wife works in the Child Welfare System and she helps broken families get back on their feet - while she is putting together their broken families - our family is still stranded in the system with no sign of moving forward.
Just a passing thought! I thought I should run this by you all. Thanks for reading.
more...
pictures la primera hoja Cuaderno
ags123
03-02 01:47 PM
Finally 7 more days to go :)
One more consistent fact for the last few bulletins is that it is published on the dot on the monday after the first week.
In this case March 9th.
Also another interesting titbit I found was VB moves only by dates
1st
8th
15th and
22nd
When the VB is 1st Feb 05 it covers dates 1st to 7th , when it is 8th 8th to 14th and so on.
One more consistent fact for the last few bulletins is that it is published on the dot on the monday after the first week.
In this case March 9th.
Also another interesting titbit I found was VB moves only by dates
1st
8th
15th and
22nd
When the VB is 1st Feb 05 it covers dates 1st to 7th , when it is 8th 8th to 14th and so on.
dresses CUADERNO PEDAGOGICO
I_need_GC
02-27 02:16 PM
Feb 07 2008 I made an infopass appointment and saw an IO he accepts my request to expedite. Finally I get a LUD saying Documents mailed to applicant on Feb 20 2008. Then on feb 21 2008 I see a soft LUD Till today I have not received the AP. Do you thinking making an infopass appointment and requesting a copy will help. The problem is I should have been in Canada on the 9th. I don't know what else to do. This is ridiculous. Gurus please an suggestions:mad: This case was filed with the Nebraska Service center.
more...
makeup hoja de cuaderno. Hoja de cuaderno 2; Hoja de cuaderno 2
GTGC
09-13 07:52 PM
Press Release sent to
Star TV Asia
Buffalo News
Star TV Asia
Buffalo News
girlfriend una hoja de cuaderno,
eb3_nepa
07-14 01:33 PM
sent $10.00 instead of $5 to make up for someone that doesn't.:)
Used Bank Bill Pay Conf : 119124506
WAY to go hariswaminathan. THAT is the spirit.
Used Bank Bill Pay Conf : 119124506
WAY to go hariswaminathan. THAT is the spirit.
hairstyles Hoja de Cuaderno. Página 11.
vparam
09-17 08:59 PM
we are planning to start an LLC as a group of three here......one of them being in india.i was wondering about the tax issues for a member of an LLC if he is based in India.Can he get an tax identification number.thank you.
Yes you can have international partners in LLC but they also need to pay tax, Unless it is a single member LLC , when you get taxed as individual otherwise you get taxed as a corporations. I think it is better to ask an accountant on how to include the international partner
Yes you can have international partners in LLC but they also need to pay tax, Unless it is a single member LLC , when you get taxed as individual otherwise you get taxed as a corporations. I think it is better to ask an accountant on how to include the international partner
missourian
06-01 05:04 PM
My PD EB3 01/15/2005
Applied I140 PP 05/18/2007
Approved I140 05/23/2007
Man I am screwed
Applied I140 PP 05/18/2007
Approved I140 05/23/2007
Man I am screwed
roseball
08-23 09:49 AM
AFAIK, this memo only applies to those I-140 petitions which do NOT require a labor certification approval. It does NOT apply to EB-2 Advanced degree holder petitions which require a certified labor and BS + 5 yrs or MS + 0 yrs of experience.
Though, for now, most of us who are filing in EB-2 Advanced degree holder category have nothing to worry, this definitely looks like a targeted approach where they are coming after everybody, one category at a time. So its just a matter of time it seems when they come up with something which targets everyone...
As per Matthew Oh's blog, this will be adopted on Sep 3rd.
Though, for now, most of us who are filing in EB-2 Advanced degree holder category have nothing to worry, this definitely looks like a targeted approach where they are coming after everybody, one category at a time. So its just a matter of time it seems when they come up with something which targets everyone...
As per Matthew Oh's blog, this will be adopted on Sep 3rd.
No comments:
Post a Comment