swede
06-30 09:40 AM
Got my LC approved June 05 2006.
Took only (!) 4 years from first application...
DOL recevied: Dec 5, 2002.
Got my 45 day letter in Feb 2005.
EB3-RIR
Filed in Philly DOL.
3 others from the same company got theirs LC approved 2.5 years ago and 2 of them have their green card since a year ago. And Im the only one with a US masters degree. Great system...
Took only (!) 4 years from first application...
DOL recevied: Dec 5, 2002.
Got my 45 day letter in Feb 2005.
EB3-RIR
Filed in Philly DOL.
3 others from the same company got theirs LC approved 2.5 years ago and 2 of them have their green card since a year ago. And Im the only one with a US masters degree. Great system...
wallpaper NAPOLEON DYNAMITE is the
nk2006
10-17 04:01 PM
Under the authority of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the CIS Ombudsman assists individuals and employers who experience specific problems during the USCIS benefits seeking process, largely to identify problems and to formulate recommendations to improve the USCIS service. Please see our website for more information about the CIS Ombudsman (www.dhs.gov/cisombudsman/).
Our office believes that first hand information from individuals like you is the best source for identifying systemic problems in the immigration benefits process. Accordingly, our office will consider the information you provided regarding AC21 as we develop recommendations to improve USCIS� practices and procedures.
Thank you for taking the time to contact our office, and for giving us the opportunity to serve you.
Sincerely,
CIS Ombudsman
Thanks for the update.
Its positive and a direct answer to try improving USCIS practises regarding AC21. Hope more people will get inspired with this and send letters.
Note: from the earlier experiences it was pointed out that we need to send letters in thousands to get immediate attention. please keep sending.
Our office believes that first hand information from individuals like you is the best source for identifying systemic problems in the immigration benefits process. Accordingly, our office will consider the information you provided regarding AC21 as we develop recommendations to improve USCIS� practices and procedures.
Thank you for taking the time to contact our office, and for giving us the opportunity to serve you.
Sincerely,
CIS Ombudsman
Thanks for the update.
Its positive and a direct answer to try improving USCIS practises regarding AC21. Hope more people will get inspired with this and send letters.
Note: from the earlier experiences it was pointed out that we need to send letters in thousands to get immediate attention. please keep sending.
browncow
07-05 05:09 PM
The idea is very brillinat and this actually benefits the current IV core too.
Usually, people get tired of leading a non-profit, too much of ones personal resources go into it.
A new leadership will bring new energy in form of people getting a title and make them more accountable to needs.
Every current commitee(current IV core) actually is the backbone of a non-profit, cos they carry lots of assets, in terms of connections they have developed, money they have accumulated, goals that they have set, etc...
So the current IV core can support the new commitee and take their help to take the organisation forward.
And as I previously mentioned, the organisation does not or should not cease to exits once our goals are met, they should then be lead by other non-immigrants who will have a whole different set of issues.
usually, a non-profits exec committee is elected by its members.
for eg. the 2009 members (paid), can vote for the IV president and the committe.
it doesnt make sense for evey EB immigant to go and start a new non-for-profit.
Usually, people get tired of leading a non-profit, too much of ones personal resources go into it.
A new leadership will bring new energy in form of people getting a title and make them more accountable to needs.
Every current commitee(current IV core) actually is the backbone of a non-profit, cos they carry lots of assets, in terms of connections they have developed, money they have accumulated, goals that they have set, etc...
So the current IV core can support the new commitee and take their help to take the organisation forward.
And as I previously mentioned, the organisation does not or should not cease to exits once our goals are met, they should then be lead by other non-immigrants who will have a whole different set of issues.
usually, a non-profits exec committee is elected by its members.
for eg. the 2009 members (paid), can vote for the IV president and the committe.
it doesnt make sense for evey EB immigant to go and start a new non-for-profit.
2011 Napoleon Dynamite Gets
chanduv23
06-01 03:37 PM
AILA (http://www.aila.org/) has an analysis of the immigration bill in an article "Top 5 Concerns Regarding Employment-Based Immigration in S. 1348":
there is a disturbing section in there:
Gaps in Green Card Availability � Immigrant visa petitions filed after May 15, 2007 on the basis of the current employment-based preference system will be rejected. � During the period between May 15, 2007 and the date the new merit based system is up and running (likely October 1, 2008), no new employment-based green card applications can be filed.
Any validity to this claim ?
If so, Does this mean that all I-485 that can be filled with the latest jump in priority date will be voided ?
Is this valid/legal ?
Maybe for new L/C filings .. can anyone look at this interpretation??
there is a disturbing section in there:
Gaps in Green Card Availability � Immigrant visa petitions filed after May 15, 2007 on the basis of the current employment-based preference system will be rejected. � During the period between May 15, 2007 and the date the new merit based system is up and running (likely October 1, 2008), no new employment-based green card applications can be filed.
Any validity to this claim ?
If so, Does this mean that all I-485 that can be filled with the latest jump in priority date will be voided ?
Is this valid/legal ?
Maybe for new L/C filings .. can anyone look at this interpretation??
more...
Hope_GC
07-18 01:33 PM
Scheduled a Recurring $50 Payment monthly...
slammer
07-11 06:27 AM
Here's the link
http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html
No good news for EB 3 WW ?!
Rita
http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html
No good news for EB 3 WW ?!
Rita
more...
desi3933
08-13 04:02 PM
I don't think we can do 'anything' about EB3 I. We are 100% at the mercy of USA (politicians, USCIS, DOS or whoever).
We can write letters, emails, fax, contribute to IV but nothing is gonna help. This is the fact!
We are not going to get our GC when we need it but only when they give it. And, it is not going to happen anytime sooner.
The options that we have in front of us (which would work for sure):
1. Live with this. Don't come to any forum, don't think about VISA bulletin. Take your Gc when it comes to your doorstep. May be by then, we may not need it. We may be tired of being on the same job and GC may not bring any motivation to our career.
2. Move over to EB2 - If possible, take all the pains of changing job, place of living, unpredictability in PERM queue and I140 queue and move over to EB2. But you never know. One of our Indian brothers might have just won a lawsuit to stop us from moving over!! In that sense, EB3 I is worst than illegals. Least wanted legals in the USA!!
3. Get out of this country - Give up the American dream and come to reality and start a new dream. May be Canadian dream or Australian dream...
We are stuck. And, nobody is going to help us. This is hard fact. Believe it.
Wearing my optimist hat, the only thing I can think of is, whether IV supports it or not (reason I say this is - once we talk about this -the core is going to refer to poor 'high five' collection or 'low number of people calling congressmen' etc. Not blaming them. They have their own issues. For us, the problems are bigger. IV core will not do anything for EB3 I exclusive) some 50-100 EB3 I applicants should go to DC and meet high officials, CHC folks and every department that is influential to EB immigrant VISA and make them understand our plight. No guarantee that this would work. But, we will get a first hand response that may help atleast help us to chose from one of 3 options listed above.
The only practical solution, IMHO, is to move over to EB-2. Like they say, If you can't beat them, join them.
______________________________
US Permanent Resident since 2002
N-400 Oath Date on Aug 19th, 2008
We can write letters, emails, fax, contribute to IV but nothing is gonna help. This is the fact!
We are not going to get our GC when we need it but only when they give it. And, it is not going to happen anytime sooner.
The options that we have in front of us (which would work for sure):
1. Live with this. Don't come to any forum, don't think about VISA bulletin. Take your Gc when it comes to your doorstep. May be by then, we may not need it. We may be tired of being on the same job and GC may not bring any motivation to our career.
2. Move over to EB2 - If possible, take all the pains of changing job, place of living, unpredictability in PERM queue and I140 queue and move over to EB2. But you never know. One of our Indian brothers might have just won a lawsuit to stop us from moving over!! In that sense, EB3 I is worst than illegals. Least wanted legals in the USA!!
3. Get out of this country - Give up the American dream and come to reality and start a new dream. May be Canadian dream or Australian dream...
We are stuck. And, nobody is going to help us. This is hard fact. Believe it.
Wearing my optimist hat, the only thing I can think of is, whether IV supports it or not (reason I say this is - once we talk about this -the core is going to refer to poor 'high five' collection or 'low number of people calling congressmen' etc. Not blaming them. They have their own issues. For us, the problems are bigger. IV core will not do anything for EB3 I exclusive) some 50-100 EB3 I applicants should go to DC and meet high officials, CHC folks and every department that is influential to EB immigrant VISA and make them understand our plight. No guarantee that this would work. But, we will get a first hand response that may help atleast help us to chose from one of 3 options listed above.
The only practical solution, IMHO, is to move over to EB-2. Like they say, If you can't beat them, join them.
______________________________
US Permanent Resident since 2002
N-400 Oath Date on Aug 19th, 2008
2010 Napoleon Dynamite Gets
GoldRod
09-10 02:38 PM
Green card is a gold rod. anybody knows why?
more...
reachag
12-18 03:35 PM
Clarification - i meant Senior Member based on seniority on this Site and not based on age :). This idea has been brain stormed many times in the past and ruled out by many as it is not in our best interests and also not workable. Members who have been visting this site for some time would know and hence the comment about Seniority :)
Agreed, my thoughts on this are different from yours. Good..not every one thinks the same otherwise we would be short of ideas :)
first, I don't know what you mean by "Senior Member like you coming up with this idea". Seniority on this site I think is determined by how long a member has been registered. Second, even if it means older members, what does age have to do with this idea?
I have already said that most IV members (clearly you are one) are opposed to this.
My thoughts happen to be different from yours, and I dont plan on changing my ideas anytime soon.
Of course for this to work there has to be a signficant number of participants, otherwise actually nothing is going to work. And even with significant participation, there are no guarantees: look at how many people called Sen Sessions, but still made no difference.
Last, dont you guys get vacation?? Who is talking abut losing money? If you are paid hourly then dont take part.
and if you dont agree you dont need me to tell you dont be a part of this.
But, as mentioned many, many, many times before, I am for this idea, or something that gets attention in a big way.
Agreed, my thoughts on this are different from yours. Good..not every one thinks the same otherwise we would be short of ideas :)
first, I don't know what you mean by "Senior Member like you coming up with this idea". Seniority on this site I think is determined by how long a member has been registered. Second, even if it means older members, what does age have to do with this idea?
I have already said that most IV members (clearly you are one) are opposed to this.
My thoughts happen to be different from yours, and I dont plan on changing my ideas anytime soon.
Of course for this to work there has to be a signficant number of participants, otherwise actually nothing is going to work. And even with significant participation, there are no guarantees: look at how many people called Sen Sessions, but still made no difference.
Last, dont you guys get vacation?? Who is talking abut losing money? If you are paid hourly then dont take part.
and if you dont agree you dont need me to tell you dont be a part of this.
But, as mentioned many, many, many times before, I am for this idea, or something that gets attention in a big way.
hair Napoleon Dynamite
dhirajs98
07-14 09:08 PM
My contribution: $20.00
It was easy ... not a big deal guys ... go ahead .. contribute :)
It was easy ... not a big deal guys ... go ahead .. contribute :)
more...
gchopes
11-05 01:15 PM
Its been over a month and I haven't received my permanent license in mail. They keep giving temporary 20 day license asking me to wait. Anybody in NC who recently renewed license on EAD and still waiting to get the permanent license in hand?
hot Trailer:
Milind123
09-16 02:27 AM
Just made a one time contribution of $100
Order Details - Sep 15, 2007 23:30 GMT-07:00
Google Order #412727833594707
Unfortunately I cannot be at DC, but Thank You all for the efforts.
Thank you very much for your contibution. I really appreciate your contribution.
Order Details - Sep 15, 2007 23:30 GMT-07:00
Google Order #412727833594707
Unfortunately I cannot be at DC, but Thank You all for the efforts.
Thank you very much for your contibution. I really appreciate your contribution.
more...
house We missed out on Napoleon
Macaca
10-01 10:00 AM
As illustrated below, since 1994 there have been over 218,000 un-recaptured employment-based visas lost due to underutilization of the employment-based visas."
Some unused EB #s were recaptured for families in following year. For example, in 1994 there were 29,430 (column 2) unused EB #s. However, 27,721 (= 253,721 (column 3) - 226,000 (family quota)) of these #s were recaptured for families. Thus, only 29,430 - 27,721 = 1,709 (column 4) were un-recaptured.
Also, 50,000 unused EB #s from 01-04 were recaptured for Schedule A.
Finally, unused EB #s in 99 and 00 were recaptured, hopefully for EB.
Thus, unused EB #s are more important then un-recaptured EB #s (mentioned above) since some of them have not been recaptured for EB.
The unused EB #s is 506,384 (total column 2) - 98,941 (99 recaptured for EB) - 31,098 (00 recaptured for EB) = 376, 345
Annual Report to Congress June 2007 (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual_Report_2007.pdf)
Some unused EB #s were recaptured for families in following year. For example, in 1994 there were 29,430 (column 2) unused EB #s. However, 27,721 (= 253,721 (column 3) - 226,000 (family quota)) of these #s were recaptured for families. Thus, only 29,430 - 27,721 = 1,709 (column 4) were un-recaptured.
Also, 50,000 unused EB #s from 01-04 were recaptured for Schedule A.
Finally, unused EB #s in 99 and 00 were recaptured, hopefully for EB.
Thus, unused EB #s are more important then un-recaptured EB #s (mentioned above) since some of them have not been recaptured for EB.
The unused EB #s is 506,384 (total column 2) - 98,941 (99 recaptured for EB) - 31,098 (00 recaptured for EB) = 376, 345
Annual Report to Congress June 2007 (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual_Report_2007.pdf)
tattoo A post with trailers for
Green.Tech
06-12 11:29 AM
got 1 friend to donate yest., he should be posting the receipt Id soon.. I have the ID but didn't wanna post myself to double count.
Guys, please persuade your friends and coworkers.
Thanks.
Good work, add78!
Guys, please persuade your friends and coworkers.
Thanks.
Good work, add78!
more...
pictures serious Napoleon Dynamite?
satishku_2000
07-05 04:04 PM
I just finished my call with Julia Preston of Nytimes ..I am so happy and did my part :)
dresses Napoleon Dynamite Cartoon
gc_maine2
04-04 10:27 AM
:confused::confused:
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!
Very good info, thanks for the posting. BUt its still not clear whether the spouse who is on EAD and does not work at all or for that matter 6 months in a given year, will she/he be eligible for setting up a S -corp??
Thanks
sree
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!
Very good info, thanks for the posting. BUt its still not clear whether the spouse who is on EAD and does not work at all or for that matter 6 months in a given year, will she/he be eligible for setting up a S -corp??
Thanks
sree
more...
makeup Maybe Napoleon Dynamite WILL
Kodi
06-22 02:59 PM
can some one share there login user name and password to check status of labor. My lawyer has not shared this with me and i have to check with him every other day ... wish i could do it myself ... you can pm me if u prefer
-M
Login is uniqe for each employer. My login will not work for you.
-M
Login is uniqe for each employer. My login will not work for you.
girlfriend Napoleon Dynamite#39;s Animated
learning01
04-25 05:39 PM
Go back and look at the forum postings. There are much more amenable and practical suggestions made. This PD thing doesn't pass the basic test: was there a precedence or prior history, can it be done and does it lessen the time for one to apply for I-485 and GC. Does it reduce backlog?
PD as the date of < insert whatever> doesn't pass this basic test.
I have to respectfully disagree with you on that...just because it was never brought up doesn't mean it should never be taken up. I think you core members know better...if this does not sound practial...End of discussion.
Thanks
PD as the date of < insert whatever> doesn't pass this basic test.
I have to respectfully disagree with you on that...just because it was never brought up doesn't mean it should never be taken up. I think you core members know better...if this does not sound practial...End of discussion.
Thanks
hairstyles Napoleon Dynamite is a popular
priti8888
07-18 04:04 PM
I am still confused in regards to who whould be eligible for a visa number.
For instance (assumption:all other factors same for both A and B(name check, country etc)
Senario A
EB3
PD 2004
485 receipt date 2005
OR
Senario B
EB3
PD 2003
485 receipt date 2006
So under present circumstances when everything is current, who whould get alloted a visa number first??
For instance (assumption:all other factors same for both A and B(name check, country etc)
Senario A
EB3
PD 2004
485 receipt date 2005
OR
Senario B
EB3
PD 2003
485 receipt date 2006
So under present circumstances when everything is current, who whould get alloted a visa number first??
reddog
09-15 05:32 PM
Is this worth it, gctest and the 9 others who voted in the poll are people who have no values in life.
And take a poll only for EB2 people who would not even want to relate to gctest or his ideas.
I can guarantee that he is a supporter of Raj thackeray and speaks the same language.
And take a poll only for EB2 people who would not even want to relate to gctest or his ideas.
I can guarantee that he is a supporter of Raj thackeray and speaks the same language.
leoindiano
07-11 11:39 AM
karan,
thats true, You will not get red marks. Coz, everybody agrees with that. It is just some good news and hope for EB2. Otherwise, people will be left with no option but to move back to their home country's in current markets.
thats true, You will not get red marks. Coz, everybody agrees with that. It is just some good news and hope for EB2. Otherwise, people will be left with no option but to move back to their home country's in current markets.
No comments:
Post a Comment