gcformeornot
06-06 06:55 PM
Job should be same or similar responsibilities and salary
salary is not requirement. It can not be less off course. It can be equal or more than LC.
Currently only 2 requirements
140 Approved and 485 pending more than 180 days.
Job should be same or similar title. Yes title only job duties do not matter.
This is per my lawyer.
salary is not requirement. It can not be less off course. It can be equal or more than LC.
Currently only 2 requirements
140 Approved and 485 pending more than 180 days.
Job should be same or similar title. Yes title only job duties do not matter.
This is per my lawyer.
wallpaper Star emo tattoo style for
solaris27
02-11 09:07 AM
In this forum you will not find a lot of peoples who won lottery .
but is my personal openion that you can't use your lottery case priority date for your eb3 case?
but is my personal openion that you can't use your lottery case priority date for your eb3 case?
Leo07
11-27 12:41 PM
Post July 15th 2007...Labor substitution is banned...Thanks to many cheap consulting companies for selling the Labor Certs in Black market.
2011 Star Tattoo Designs For Girls
Blog Feeds
07-09 12:30 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
more...
spaceguy
03-26 08:03 PM
Have you gone out of the country and came back to USA on H1B visa after that ?
If so, you are safe. Status is checked from the last lawful entry into US ( entry using AP does not help).
I never heard this? Any references to confirm this?
If so, you are safe. Status is checked from the last lawful entry into US ( entry using AP does not help).
I never heard this? Any references to confirm this?
somegchuh
03-04 06:30 PM
Same thing is true for me. For 4+years I was stuck in PBEC. Dates were current all along. Then filed 485 in Feb 07, dates were still current but name check was pending. Now that the NC isn't an issue, the dates are UNAVAILABLE! This whole thing is just screwing with my brain. To add to the mystery they decided to make a "soft" lud on my 140 yesterday. So just keep waiting like idiots ....
What about the thousands who lost 2-4 years because they were stuck in namecheck, now the name check is cleared but the dates will not move..frigging idiots..too little too late
Before giving the blue/green/red dots, think about this. they created a traffic jam and now they are suddenly releasing it. There were about 150-300k stuck in name check, now all of them are waiting for their PD to be current. (i am one of them too). Think how this will affect the overall queue.
What about the thousands who lost 2-4 years because they were stuck in namecheck, now the name check is cleared but the dates will not move..frigging idiots..too little too late
Before giving the blue/green/red dots, think about this. they created a traffic jam and now they are suddenly releasing it. There were about 150-300k stuck in name check, now all of them are waiting for their PD to be current. (i am one of them too). Think how this will affect the overall queue.
more...
psaxena
01-27 06:56 PM
I am in scottsdale
Lets fight this together.
Lets fight this together.
2010 treble clef tattoo girls,
DesiTech
06-01 07:10 PM
:) Thanks for you info.
more...
GCOP
08-22 01:21 PM
EAD Renewal RD: 6/24/08 at TSC
Still Waiting for EAD Renewal Approval
Still Waiting for EAD Renewal Approval
hair Beautiful Star Foot Tattoos
bashp
05-13 10:12 PM
I am in the similar situation. Attended for visa interview at Toronto US Consulate on May 6. VO just kept I129 (All the annexures), Client/vendor letters. Informed you will get replay within 1-2wks. Its already been a week, I didnt get any response back. Consulate called client on the same day. No updates after that.
Appreciate if someone could let us know, usually how long it takes to get any status update ? I have been working with the same Employer/Client for last 4 years.
Appreciate if someone could let us know, usually how long it takes to get any status update ? I have been working with the same Employer/Client for last 4 years.
more...
saroj76
07-25 02:46 PM
He handled my case from OPT, to H1B, to Green Card. He is a very professional lawer and very responsible. He replies emails right away and answers phone calls. On the top of that his fees are much less compared to all these big law firms. I was really satisfied and impressed by his service. I would have stayed with him but my company got bought out by another big firm, so I had to switch the law firm. Check out his website.
http://webberlaw.com/
http://webberlaw.com/
hot foot star tattoos.
rhoh
07-29 10:01 PM
Once you are on F-1 (in the rare case), then you'll file your tax returns as Non-resident Alien and this will mean abandonment of 485.
more...
house star tattoos for girls.
h1techSlave
04-04 09:16 PM
I think most of the HR folks may not know what is an EAD. So they may fear EAD is some kind of illegal thingie and deny job. It is best to just say I am authorized work in the US and no further explanation need to be given.
Today at Boeing interview event I got very good offer. The HR lady congratulated me, kept offer letter in my hand. Then I told her that I'm an EAD holder. All my fear came true, and she said a big sorry and said EAD is not acceptable at any cost. Also she said, she can keep the offer in hold for me for 5 months. How can I expect green card in hand in 5 months. GOD don't give this situation to any one. just trying to reduce my pain here...
Today at Boeing interview event I got very good offer. The HR lady congratulated me, kept offer letter in my hand. Then I told her that I'm an EAD holder. All my fear came true, and she said a big sorry and said EAD is not acceptable at any cost. Also she said, she can keep the offer in hold for me for 5 months. How can I expect green card in hand in 5 months. GOD don't give this situation to any one. just trying to reduce my pain here...
tattoo star tattoo designs for girls.
zerozerozeven
03-25 10:46 AM
We are most fortunate, thanks to Mr. Bill Gates, Rep Smith's current bill will triple our h1b cap and it will pass. all 3 american candidates support us. we are winning:D:D:D
I remember this bill being brought up last year also and was "supposed" to be passed but never even came up for voting...why do u anticipate this will go through this time? My wife is applying for her "H1B" and she is awaiting the lotto results...
I strongly disapprove of ppl waiting for their GC voicing against H1B cap increase because they have crossed that bridge and have H1B. I am only safely assume such ppl will voice against IV and all IV activities once they receive their GC...
I remember this bill being brought up last year also and was "supposed" to be passed but never even came up for voting...why do u anticipate this will go through this time? My wife is applying for her "H1B" and she is awaiting the lotto results...
I strongly disapprove of ppl waiting for their GC voicing against H1B cap increase because they have crossed that bridge and have H1B. I am only safely assume such ppl will voice against IV and all IV activities once they receive their GC...
more...
pictures Star Tattoos Ideas For Girls
bibhudc
08-21 02:40 PM
From http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=56&Itemid=25
"The annual limit for EB visa numbers is 140,000. This number also includes the dependents of an EB applicant. In addition there is a per-country limit set at 7% of the total."
By these numbers, it looks like there are 7%x140K = 9,800 GC approvals for India in each year. If we factor in 1 dependent for each GC applicant, the number of primary applicants approved is roughly 9,800/2 = 4900 Indians per year. And this supposedly includes the EB1, EB2, EB3 categories. If we divide that equally, it could mean hardly 4900/3 =1633 primary applicants get approved each year in each category !! Is my inferences incorrect ? [someone tell me its better than this]
I don't know how many Indians are waiting for their GCs, but it sure seems like everybody I meet on the street is waiting for his GC .. so, I guess its going to be a long long wait.
[I am an Indian and hence, I took the example of Indians above. I guess the numbers are similar for all other countries. My Labor PD is Jul-2002]
"The annual limit for EB visa numbers is 140,000. This number also includes the dependents of an EB applicant. In addition there is a per-country limit set at 7% of the total."
By these numbers, it looks like there are 7%x140K = 9,800 GC approvals for India in each year. If we factor in 1 dependent for each GC applicant, the number of primary applicants approved is roughly 9,800/2 = 4900 Indians per year. And this supposedly includes the EB1, EB2, EB3 categories. If we divide that equally, it could mean hardly 4900/3 =1633 primary applicants get approved each year in each category !! Is my inferences incorrect ? [someone tell me its better than this]
I don't know how many Indians are waiting for their GCs, but it sure seems like everybody I meet on the street is waiting for his GC .. so, I guess its going to be a long long wait.
[I am an Indian and hence, I took the example of Indians above. I guess the numbers are similar for all other countries. My Labor PD is Jul-2002]
dresses tattoo star designs, popular
yagw
11-02 01:48 PM
There are no plans for extended vacation.
I thought the 3 year h1b extension after 140 approval is a one time deal and there would be no further extensions :confused: .
I am not aware of the 12yr lifetime H1B limit. Can some one shed some light on this?
There is no lifetime cap on H1B. Also, there is no limit on how many 3 year terms you can extend it after I-140 approval. What would happen is, after the initial 3 years, your PD might become current and that will make you in-eligible for 3 years ext. (and just one year).
DISCLAIMER: I am not an Attorney and this is not a legal advice
I thought the 3 year h1b extension after 140 approval is a one time deal and there would be no further extensions :confused: .
I am not aware of the 12yr lifetime H1B limit. Can some one shed some light on this?
There is no lifetime cap on H1B. Also, there is no limit on how many 3 year terms you can extend it after I-140 approval. What would happen is, after the initial 3 years, your PD might become current and that will make you in-eligible for 3 years ext. (and just one year).
DISCLAIMER: I am not an Attorney and this is not a legal advice
more...
makeup Star tattoos are having highly
fromnaija
04-20 05:28 PM
IF you move to a different city that is not within the same Metroplolitan Area, yes you will have to restart your GC process. The good news however is that you can retain the priority date if your old I-140 is approved.
girlfriend Girls Star Tattoo Designs 2011
acecupid
09-06 08:33 PM
Read something interesting on TOI..
NRIs treated as Not Required Indians! - India - NEWS - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/NRIs-treated-as-Not-Required-Indians/articleshow/4979439.cms)
Indubhai Amin, a non-resident Indian (NRI) settled in the UK earns interest income of Rs 3 lakh on his non-resident ordinary account bank deposit in
India in the current FY 2009-10. Enjoying his personal exemption limit of Rs 1.60 lakh and the eligible deduction of Rs 1 lakh u/s 80C, Amin is comfortable paying income tax of Rs 4,000 in the first slab of 10 per cent on his effective taxable income of Rs 40,000.
Flat tax of 20% and 30%
A huge shock awaits Amin and millions of NRIs, in regard to taxation of their interest and investment income and capital gains earned in India, proposed to be treated under the draft Direct Tax Code as "income from special sources."
In 2011-12, on the same interest income of Rs 3 lakh, Amin will be required to pay a hefty tax of Rs 60,000 at the flat rate of 20 per cent, without being eligible to claim any basic exemption or other deduction, as provided under rule three of the First Schedule to the Code.
Moreover, all capital gains earned by a non-resident will attract a flat tax of 30 per cent, irrespective of the amount of capital gains. While a resident Indian will be required to pay tax of Rs 3.84 lakh on his taxable income of Rs 25 lakh, an NRI earning equivalent capital gains will be called upon to pay almost double tax of Rs 7.5 lakh.
Hair-raising drafting
New section 13 (2) provides that such �special income� shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of the Ninth Schedule, the drafting of which is literally hair-raising. It provides that the amount of accrual or receipt shall be computed as the taxable income, and no loss, allowance or deduction shall be allowed, as the same shall be presumed to have been granted. The only exception in this regard, in respect of capital gains arising from the transfer of equity shares or units of equity oriented mutual fund chargeable to STT, is quite amusing, as it stands redundant in view of the proposal to abolish STT (a classic instance of incoherent drafting).
The draftsman does not seem to have realized the harsh implications. It means that if an NRI sells a capital asset purchased for Rs 10 lakh at Rs 30 lakh, he will be required to pay tax of Rs 9 lakh at 30 per cent on the gross sale consideration of Rs 30 lakh without any deduction even for the cost of acquisition of Rs 10 lakh (not to mention any benefit of indexation on the same).
Determination of residential status
The residential status of an individual under the Code is proposed to be determined as per the current norms. However, the status of "not ordinarily resident" (NOR) is proposed to be eliminated. Despite the above, Clause 24 of the Sixth Schedule has still provided for exemption in respect of interest earned on foreign currency deposits in the case of NOR. Poor drafting indeed!
The Code has proposed to retain the current exemptions availed by a non-resident in case of interest earned on NRE and FCNR deposits with banks.
Special exemption for returning NRIs
A useful exemption has been provided in case of income earned outside India, if it is not derived from a business controlled from India, in the financial year in which the returning NRI becomes an Indian resident and the immediately succeeding financial year. However, the benefit of the said exemption would be available, only if such individual was a non-resident for nine years immediately preceding the financial year in which he becomes a resident.
Wealth-tax liability for NRIs
Proposed Section 102 of the Code provides for wealth tax liability in the case of the value of all global assets of an individual or HUF. However, an exemption has been provided in case of the value of assets located outside India in case of an individual who is not a citizen of India or an individual or HUF not resident in India. Hence, while returning NRIs who are non-citizens will enjoy wealth-tax exemption for their overseas assets, NRIs with Indian citizenship becoming residents will attract wealth-tax liability on such assets held abroad.
Illogical exemption under wealth-tax
Talking about wealth tax, the Code prescribes an exemption in respect of any house or plot of land belonging to an individual or HUF, if it is acquired before April 1, 2000. It is difficult to understand the logic as to why this exemption has been denied in all cases where such immovable property is acquired after March 31, 2000!
Proposals That Will Hurt the Global Indian Sentiment
Flat Rate of Tax
20% flat tax on interest & other investment income
30% flat tax on all capital gains
Apart from 20% & 30% TDS on above, TDS at a baffling rate of 35% prescribed on all residual income
No Personal Exemption
No personal exemption or deduction allowed in computing the above income treated as �income from special sources�.
Weird Interpretation
Poor drafting leads to such a weird interpretation that transfer of a capital asset may attract 30% tax on gross sale consideration.
What Discrimination!
Ironical but true! Non-Indian sportspersons, say Ricky Ponting or Shoaib Akhtar, required to pay a concessional tax of 10% on their game, advertisement and column earnings in India, thus enjoying a more privileged tax status than our own sons of the soil living abroad.
NRIs treated as Not Required Indians! - India - NEWS - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/NRIs-treated-as-Not-Required-Indians/articleshow/4979439.cms)
Indubhai Amin, a non-resident Indian (NRI) settled in the UK earns interest income of Rs 3 lakh on his non-resident ordinary account bank deposit in
India in the current FY 2009-10. Enjoying his personal exemption limit of Rs 1.60 lakh and the eligible deduction of Rs 1 lakh u/s 80C, Amin is comfortable paying income tax of Rs 4,000 in the first slab of 10 per cent on his effective taxable income of Rs 40,000.
Flat tax of 20% and 30%
A huge shock awaits Amin and millions of NRIs, in regard to taxation of their interest and investment income and capital gains earned in India, proposed to be treated under the draft Direct Tax Code as "income from special sources."
In 2011-12, on the same interest income of Rs 3 lakh, Amin will be required to pay a hefty tax of Rs 60,000 at the flat rate of 20 per cent, without being eligible to claim any basic exemption or other deduction, as provided under rule three of the First Schedule to the Code.
Moreover, all capital gains earned by a non-resident will attract a flat tax of 30 per cent, irrespective of the amount of capital gains. While a resident Indian will be required to pay tax of Rs 3.84 lakh on his taxable income of Rs 25 lakh, an NRI earning equivalent capital gains will be called upon to pay almost double tax of Rs 7.5 lakh.
Hair-raising drafting
New section 13 (2) provides that such �special income� shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of the Ninth Schedule, the drafting of which is literally hair-raising. It provides that the amount of accrual or receipt shall be computed as the taxable income, and no loss, allowance or deduction shall be allowed, as the same shall be presumed to have been granted. The only exception in this regard, in respect of capital gains arising from the transfer of equity shares or units of equity oriented mutual fund chargeable to STT, is quite amusing, as it stands redundant in view of the proposal to abolish STT (a classic instance of incoherent drafting).
The draftsman does not seem to have realized the harsh implications. It means that if an NRI sells a capital asset purchased for Rs 10 lakh at Rs 30 lakh, he will be required to pay tax of Rs 9 lakh at 30 per cent on the gross sale consideration of Rs 30 lakh without any deduction even for the cost of acquisition of Rs 10 lakh (not to mention any benefit of indexation on the same).
Determination of residential status
The residential status of an individual under the Code is proposed to be determined as per the current norms. However, the status of "not ordinarily resident" (NOR) is proposed to be eliminated. Despite the above, Clause 24 of the Sixth Schedule has still provided for exemption in respect of interest earned on foreign currency deposits in the case of NOR. Poor drafting indeed!
The Code has proposed to retain the current exemptions availed by a non-resident in case of interest earned on NRE and FCNR deposits with banks.
Special exemption for returning NRIs
A useful exemption has been provided in case of income earned outside India, if it is not derived from a business controlled from India, in the financial year in which the returning NRI becomes an Indian resident and the immediately succeeding financial year. However, the benefit of the said exemption would be available, only if such individual was a non-resident for nine years immediately preceding the financial year in which he becomes a resident.
Wealth-tax liability for NRIs
Proposed Section 102 of the Code provides for wealth tax liability in the case of the value of all global assets of an individual or HUF. However, an exemption has been provided in case of the value of assets located outside India in case of an individual who is not a citizen of India or an individual or HUF not resident in India. Hence, while returning NRIs who are non-citizens will enjoy wealth-tax exemption for their overseas assets, NRIs with Indian citizenship becoming residents will attract wealth-tax liability on such assets held abroad.
Illogical exemption under wealth-tax
Talking about wealth tax, the Code prescribes an exemption in respect of any house or plot of land belonging to an individual or HUF, if it is acquired before April 1, 2000. It is difficult to understand the logic as to why this exemption has been denied in all cases where such immovable property is acquired after March 31, 2000!
Proposals That Will Hurt the Global Indian Sentiment
Flat Rate of Tax
20% flat tax on interest & other investment income
30% flat tax on all capital gains
Apart from 20% & 30% TDS on above, TDS at a baffling rate of 35% prescribed on all residual income
No Personal Exemption
No personal exemption or deduction allowed in computing the above income treated as �income from special sources�.
Weird Interpretation
Poor drafting leads to such a weird interpretation that transfer of a capital asset may attract 30% tax on gross sale consideration.
What Discrimination!
Ironical but true! Non-Indian sportspersons, say Ricky Ponting or Shoaib Akhtar, required to pay a concessional tax of 10% on their game, advertisement and column earnings in India, thus enjoying a more privileged tax status than our own sons of the soil living abroad.
hairstyles cool star tattoos for girls
meridiani.planum
02-20 01:00 PM
Hi,
i would like to convert EB3- pd to Eb2.
My sistuation is like this . pls help mw if you know if this is possible:
1.With My current employer :I have EB2- labor approved and i-140 also approved with PD of sep 2005.
2. My current employer has Eb-3 approved labor with PD of june 2003 of some other employee and can be substituted for me and get I-140 approval.
Now question is : Is it possible to port PD of the Eb-3 approved labor substituion and after i-140 approval of substituted labor to my EB-2 labor.
If it is possible how exactly PD is convertible..means will the attorney need to mention to use PD of EB-3 at the time of applying I-485.
When exactly can apply for PD conversion..at the time of applying i-485 or i-140 ..
If somebody clarify me that is great .
Thanks
labor substitution was banned last year. Now you can only interfile your own LCs/I-140s....
So your only option is to file a new EB3 LC+I-140 and recapture your EB2 PD and thats only useful in the rare chance that EB3 dates happen to be better than EB2 like in current VB. But odds of that remaining the same are very low I think, so you will just have to wait in your place in the queue now. alongwith all the others.
RIP LC-substitution.
i would like to convert EB3- pd to Eb2.
My sistuation is like this . pls help mw if you know if this is possible:
1.With My current employer :I have EB2- labor approved and i-140 also approved with PD of sep 2005.
2. My current employer has Eb-3 approved labor with PD of june 2003 of some other employee and can be substituted for me and get I-140 approval.
Now question is : Is it possible to port PD of the Eb-3 approved labor substituion and after i-140 approval of substituted labor to my EB-2 labor.
If it is possible how exactly PD is convertible..means will the attorney need to mention to use PD of EB-3 at the time of applying I-485.
When exactly can apply for PD conversion..at the time of applying i-485 or i-140 ..
If somebody clarify me that is great .
Thanks
labor substitution was banned last year. Now you can only interfile your own LCs/I-140s....
So your only option is to file a new EB3 LC+I-140 and recapture your EB2 PD and thats only useful in the rare chance that EB3 dates happen to be better than EB2 like in current VB. But odds of that remaining the same are very low I think, so you will just have to wait in your place in the queue now. alongwith all the others.
RIP LC-substitution.
copsmart
06-16 09:07 AM
bump!
GCard_Dream
09-15 12:25 PM
Now that the "Secure Fence Act" has been approved in the house, will senate take on this bill and pass its own version? Has there been any indication at all from the senate leadership that they intend to pass something similar and if so, when? The reason I ask is that I strongly believe that if this bill were to taken on by the senate then our friendly senators like Specter might include some relief for us. This is the only chance I can see this year and next year is a whole different ball game.
No comments:
Post a Comment