I never really understood about PERM. Suppose I am a manager on a team and one of my employees is going through the PERM process.
I'm supposed to put out a job advertisement (but the job isn't real) for my employer. If an applicant passes the interview process, I don't have to hire that person (I probably can't - I don't have budget or permission from the organization). But I do have to honestly say if they have all the required skills -- I'm not permitted to say "wouldn't be a culture fit."
Nor do I have to fire my employee. But maybe my employee won't get a green card six years down the road.
1) Do I have any details wrong here? The one time I talked to a law firm about this they more-or-less refused to state the above outright, but answered all questions in this direction.
2) Doesn't this seem disrespectful to, among others, the applicants to the fake job?
I think everyone would agree that the PERM process is an awful process for both applicants and for employers. The job is supposed to be treated as an open position and the recruitment is supposed to be done in good faith. So, if a qualified, willing, able, and available U.S. worker applies for a PERM job, the employer either must hire this person or terminate the PERM process and wait at least 6 months before restarting it. Now, where there are multiple openings for the position, then it's possible for an employer to hire a U.S. worker without terminating the PERM process for the foreign national employee.
> The job is supposed to be treated as an open position and the recruitment is supposed to be done in good faith. So, if a qualified, willing, able, and available U.S. worker applies for a PERM job, the employer either must hire this person or terminate the PERM process and wait at least 6 months before restarting it.
The "or" part in the last sentence is worth noting. At the place I've worked, the employer invokes the second clause (i.e. PERM process is canceled/suspended, and they try again 6-12 months later).
The way it worked there was: Employer publishes an open req. We get lots of resumes. Manager calls the few people who may be a match. Then the manager has to justify why the person doesn't have the skills and the process continues.
Sometimes (and this is likely a bit random), the government does an audit, where they get the details of all who applied. Then they call the manager and start grilling him on why a particular candidate was rejected. If the manager can convince them, the PERM process continues. If not, they fail the Department of Labor Certification and the PERM process is canceled.
The person doesn't lose his job. They're just ineligible and need to apply again after a certain window.
I do know folks applying for PERM who were rejected twice because of this. The insane thing was that their roles (EE with specific specialty) were legitimately hard to fill, whereas other people in the team doing trivial scripting easily got through PERM.
Generally lawyers need to be involved to make sure any rejections are compliant. There's a whole cottage industry around this.
Personally, given the state of unemployment in the tech sector right now, I think it should be virtually impossible to fill a PERM right now because pretty much any position could be filled with a US LPR or citizen and the only reason it isn't is because the whole process is deliberately obfuscated or artificial barriers are put up purposefully to disqualify candidates.
I also think that doing layoffs in the US should disqualify you from doing any PERM or sponsoring any visa for 2-3 years.
> I also think that doing layoffs in the US should disqualify you from doing any PERM or sponsoring any visa for 2-3 years.
I am sure this would have terrible second order effects. This does not sound well thought out. Also, many companies are so large that in parallel one part might be shrinking (or a division closing) and others might be growing. It is not always possible or reasonable to internally transfer 100% of laid-off staff.
> I also think that doing layoffs in the US should disqualify you from doing any PERM or sponsoring any visa for 2-3 years.
This is a very SW mindset, and makes no sense in other circumstances.
If my company canceled a large SW project, and laid off a lot of SW folks, why should that prevent them from sponsoring someone to work on nanoelectronics?
In this day and age where every company is playing _very_ fast and loose with their LPR/citizen employees' lives and livelihoods, yes, I think PERM should be a very strict and easily lost privilege across the board for the whole company, not a right. If we had sane employee protections in this country maybe my opinion would be different.
> why should that prevent them from sponsoring someone to work on nanoelectronics?
Because companies should be held accountable when they make mistakes in hiring. The employees shouldn’t have to bear the burden of their employers mistakes.
The specificied purpose of PERM is to to fill a position that otherwiswe can't be filled by a US LPR or citizen..
If you need to hide your job postings on an internal physical caulk board in a basement and post them in only physical copies of The Columbus Dispatch then it should be pretty clear you're not following the spirit of the program. If, even after doing that, you then disqualify candidates for pretty fake reasons and you somehow still have qualified candidates so you pull the position and try again in 6-12 months then you should absolutely fail a USCIS audit and you should lose your privileges for hiring foreign workers and sponsoring people for residency, at least for a time.
Legitimate employers and jobs can't get a visa in the H1B lottery because of widespread visa abuse. People from certain countries (particularly India) have to wait 10-15+ years because of abuse of the system. Fake employers with H1B schemes, bodyshops that really pay below prevailing wage and can keep Indian-born people as effectively indentured servants, spamming the system with H1B applications because they don't really care how many they get.
We're in permanent layoff culture now where pretty much every sufficiently-sized employer will probably fire 5-10% of their staff every year while still hiring people. This is to suppress wages and make people do more work for free. There should be a cost to this.
If you're an immigrant, a completely arbitrary layoff can be devastating. You have a short period to find a new job and if you don't, you have to leave the country. Employers who will do that to immigrants shouldn't be alloweed to hire immigrants.
You can be both pro-immigration and anti-immigration abuse.
You are conflating several unrelated issues. In your previous post, you expressed how you wish PERM worked ("I also think that doing layoffs in the US should disqualify you from doing any PERM or sponsoring any visa for 2-3 years."), to which my response was why have PERM at all. You are still talking about how you wish the world worked. There are a lot of shoulds in your reply. PERM, H-1B, etc. all exist as a carefully brokered compromise bw different factions that want different things. It is the correct amount of broken by design. Posting in a Sunday newspaper is a requirement in the regulations. Everyone is in the right amount of compliance to maintain equilibrium. There are any number of things that could be or should be, but aren't.
certain employers can use h1bs to fill specific employment needs really well, and have a ton of experience with both sourcing foreign labour and matching it to work that needs doing in the US.
its doing exactly what the program is looking for, filling a labour quantity at the price employers are looking for.
The US government is optimizing for being able to do some volume of technical work, and the the h1 is intended to make sure that the industry isnt limited by labour availability. its not particularly abusive to do that in an efficient way where the same h1b can serve many businesses
the alternative thats coming is going to be moving a lot of the work to india and instead having the local engineers be liasons for where the real work is happening
people in india havw to wait long periods because the green card system of country limits has no per capita normalization, not because of h1 visa abuse. its sheer volume of good people working for american companies in america, wanting to stay in america. Your anti-abuse metrics will bring it down from 15 years to 13 or 14. not a meaningful difference
Nothing will convince me that the likes of Tata and Infosys are a good use of H1Bs. And because they flood the system with H1B applications, other actually valuable positions go unfilled.
If the customers for these bodyshops could save money by outsourcing directly to India, they would've already.
And beyond those big bodyshops you have any number of smaller H1B fraud schemes eg [1][2][3][4].
If you're Indian-born and are waiting 10-15+ years for your green card then you should be mad about these companies because they're making your life more difficult.
> The US government is optimizing for being able to do some volume of technical work, and the the h1 is intended to make sure that the industry isnt limited by labour availability
First, I disagree with this claim. The US government is optimizing to suppress wages.
Second, when there's significant unemployment in the sector then there is by definition availability. It further goes to my argument that the main purpose is to suppress wages.
> given the state of unemployment in the tech sector right now, I think it should be virtually impossible to fill a PERM right now because pretty much any position could be filled with a US LPR or citizen
are crazy deluded about the quality of the average US citizen software engineering job applicant vs the quality of the person doing that job. Or you haven't ever actually done hiring for a big tech company (who use most of the H1B and perm processes).
I'm not saying Americans are dumb. But the average CS graduate from an average or low tier college in the US (of which there are many many many) is not as good of a hire as the average int'l MSCS degree holder. There's obvious statistical reasons for this: namely the int'l is likely richer in his/her country than the average US citizen is here bc that person can afford to pay for a degree here and move here and get in here.
But this perspective treats these jobs as if they are factory jobs that as long as the position is filled, money can be made and that's not true in software engineering. The quality matters and it's one of many things the PERM process wasn't built to handle and which also many people don't understand who haven't done this hiring process
It is well known at the companies that I've worked for that there is no good faith at all in the process and it's basically ritual to justify the application.
Since they are clearly violating the law, how can I report this?
Oh come on, are we seriously acting like jobs building out react components or java endpoints are remotely complicated and not a skill that could be trained within 3 months?
It's a fairly well-founded contention eg [1][2][3].
Here's a problem I often see when technical people, particular engineers, try to analyze legal issues: they tend to look for technical compliance (or noncompliance) or use standards like absolute proof but the law simply doesn't work that way.
Legal decisions tend to come down to things like witness credibility, a holistic view of the facts and whatever evidence standard is being used (eg preponderence of the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, clear and convincing evidence).
An example I like to use is back when prosecutions for downloading something illegal were more in the news. A technical person might argue "an IP address doens't mean anything. It could've been anybody". But the law will look at the totality of the evidence (eg browser history, time when it happened, were you home at the time, whether such media was found on your PC, etc. And the way the Rules of Evidence work, you might not even be able to suggest certain alternative theories (eg "my Wifi was hacked") without evidence.
Another good example is sponsoring someone for a marriage-based green card. You need to be in a bona fide marriage and you'll get people who will look for technical compliance. Is having a joint bank account enough? Photos? A joint lease? Filing a joint tax return? Those are some of the factors USCIS uses but no single factor is sufficient. USCIS will look at the totality of the evidence in determining if a marriage is bona fide.
so back to PERM abuse, arguments like "we made an error with the email address" or "we accidentally lost some US citizen applications" or even "we complied with the technical requirements for advertising a position" may not carry the day because the totality of the evidence may still amount to immigration fraud.
Lastly, it should be noted that a lack of a prosecution (yet?) is not proof of legality or compliance either.
>it should be noted that a lack of a prosecution (yet?) is not proof of legality or compliance either.
Prosecution or lack of prosecution in this area are both political. The previous DOJ also sued SpaceX for not hiring asylees. I am not aware of an actual court victory. These tend to settle out of court and both sides get to claim victory and make headlines.
>they tend to look for technical compliance
I'm taking a more holistic view here, which is that the whole thing is so farcical that enforcing compliance here does more harm than good. Look at the operation that chained Hyundai workers and deported them for a photo op. What did it achieve? It created a diplomatic incident, the battery plant stopped producing batteries, and the state lost tax revenue.
>Those are some of the factors USCIS uses but no single factor is sufficient.
That's a whole different can of worms. There is endless litigation over things that USCIS does in its infinite wisdom. Fortunately, we have the APA and Loper Bright overturned Chevron, so it should restore some sanity to it.
Aside:
>prosecutions for downloading something
There is no real prosecution for downloading. It's only uploading. The technical definition is the same as the legal one. The way DMCA prosecution works is that if you are in a torrent swarm and are uploading, you are distributing content, which is easier to prove under copyright law.
When you have an IR-1 in the process, but we decided to move to Europe is it then better to cancel that application or is it better to just let it go through the system and sort of cancel it at the point when we're invited for an interview?
Does H1-B really carry that 100k per-case fee? I remember hearing of it, but afterwards also individual stories of people getting H1-B. I don't know them personally unfortunately; not sure whether it was sponsored by not-for-profit research institutes or for-profit companies. I can't imagine this rule being economically feasible for most, though. And if the answer is actually a yes, would the company want to make sure that here's a repayment clause in the contract, e.g. if the worker leaves within X years, he/she will have to refund the company for Y% of this visa fee? Is that even legal?
Related, iirc H1-B has a 6-year limit. Under the current policy what's the path forward if the holder is not ready to adjust their status to PR within the timeframe or not qualified to EB category? O1? But there were a wave of news stories about O1 being abused and I wouldn't be surprised if that was a prelude to major changes to the category.
Yes, the $100K fee exists and applies under certain circumstances, essentially if the beneficiary is outside the U.S. or ineligible for a change of status or change of employer. Most companies are simply not pursuing H-1B petitions where the $100K fee would apply but there are exceptions.
It's possible to extend H-1B status beyond the 6-year max-out period if the beneficiary is in the green card process. But if the beneficiary isn't in the green card process, then the most common option is the O-1 and while it's getting harder to get an O-1, it's still within reach of many talented professionals and founders.
Also that the fee exists as a proclamation but is being litigated. It is on appeal in the DC circuit and there is a separate case in ND CA as well. In light of learning resources, my money is on it being overruled.
We're not using AI much at all. We're using it a bit to search and organize documents but not much beyond that. It's almost always a little wrong when responding to immigration-related questions/providing immigration legal advice and a little wrong makes it completely unreliable except as a first step in trying to get answers.
What's the best path from zero to a fully legal status (visa first I imagine, but eventually citizenship) in the US for someone coming over from the Western Balkans (non-EU), with a bachelors degree in EE or CS and no prior work experience? Thanks for doing this.
The options are limited: an H-1B for employment (which involves an annual lottery), an F-1 for schooling, or a J-1 for internship/training (which requires a "host" company/employer).
OP didn't state their exact country, but E-2 visa may be applicable. It's not just for investors/business starters. Companies that are privately owned by people from E-2 countries can transfer/hire citizens from other E-2 countries. Probably the most realistic option for a junior/mid-level developer IMO. See if your country is an E-2 country and apply to companies that qualify. E-2 is a non-immigrant visa so moving onto green card is more difficult but not impossible.
There's also the L1B Company transfer, if you work for a company with offices in the US and they would be able to transfer you after a year. Bit of a gamble to find a company that would be willing to do this though, and you gotta work for probably years to find out.
H-1B, if you're not already in the US has a 100k fee attached to it. Though AFAIK that was a proclamation that expires at some point, but probably won't. So it's really not an option for 99% of people.
I'm not a lawyer, so definitely verify what i say, but i'm pretty sure these are also valid options.
Thanks! Very good points. The E-2 is also a great option for founders (with their own funding or with funding from citizens/VCs from their own country).
Another idea: Get a master's degree in the US. Expensive, but will give you a very good chance to get a job offer in US. PhD is even better, but will take 4-5 years.
Also: Try the green card lottery. You can Google to find info.
It's definitely more difficult but well within reach of founders (particularly founders with funding and organic press coverage) and talented professionals. That is, until very recently. It's too early to say whether this is a trend or an aberration but the past few weeks we've seen USCIS apply a different standard, one similar to the EB1A standard. If this is a trend, then I suspect that the RFE and denial rates for O-1s will skyrocket.
What are you seeing with the new $100k H1B fee? Is it being applied only to people currently outside the US? Do you have any estimates on whether it's likely to be renewed in September and/or struck down?
It's being applied to those outside the U.S. or those in the U.S. who are ineligible for a U.S.-based change of status or change of employer. This fee primarily has impacted employers seeking to hire people who are outside the U.S. and also limited when people can travel,
What's the climate like around TN visas nowadays? Specifically, from Canada to the US. (Thinking of Waterloo grad-types but also humanities types coming to join in non-eng roles)
Since a Canadian TN can be applied for when traveling to the U.S. from Canada, it's a very fast process and still generally easy for Canadians with engineering degrees.
Our small company offers a remote paid mentorship for students anywhere in the world - often times, international students in the US want to apply but then there’s substantial confusion on whether they can be paid without jeopardizing their status. The stipends we pay are all 1099 and it’s mostly self-directed work so we’re a bit at a loss in regards to the CPT/OPT qualifications. Many end up forgoing their stipend which sucks for students in an expensive place.
The students should speak with their DSOs (Designated School Officials) because they must have work authorization to get paid whether they're paid by a U.S. or foreign source or paid as a 1099 contractor or W-2 employee. But I don't see why both CPT and pre-completion OPT wouldn't work.
Are you able to comment on J-1 visa limitations around duration of international travel?
I'm a postdoc at a US university. My school's international office suggested there was no limit on how long I could travel outside of the US, but most sources online suggest there is a limit of 30 days before the SEVIS record goes inactive. It seems this can be avoided if the university sponsor records the travel in SEVIS. I think I've finally convinced them that this is a real limitation, but some actual expert knowledge would still be very appreciated! I am Canadian, in case that affects the answer.
My understanding is that time outside the U.S. of more than 30 days while in J-1 status is permissible but triggers a SEVIS alert and requires the ISSO to verify in the SEVIS system that you are continuing with your J-1 work while outside. So, you would want to advise the ISSO before you leave the U.S. and get his or her okay.
Not an attorney so I don’t know the details but it is definitely possible to leave the US several months in a row on a J1. When I did it (also as postdoc), it was an involved process that escalated to the (vice?)president’s office to get permission so there are clearly questions the university needed to address...
I didn’t have any visibility into it all but what I was told about regarded taxes mainly (since getting paid abroad).
So technically possible but also a tall ask (I didn’t know at the time of asking and my PI went with it).
I then came back and carried on without any immigration issues.
I have been living and working Estonia for around 2 years now, I have mostly US clients for a saas that I direct, this saas brings me around steady income of around 200k euros per year, at least 130k come from east coast companies.
Can I apply for the E1 treaty trader visa? Even if my company is not incorporated in Greece?
Thanks for doing this Peter!
I am an Indian national on H1-B with an active, non-withdrawn I-140 and a Priority Date of August 2016 from a previous employer. My current employer has an approved PERM, but their I-140 is still pending.
If the Dates for Filing (DFF) chart reaches my priority date, what is the latest viable timeline to return to my previous employer to file an I-485 based on their approved petition? Additionally, are there legal risks to joining after the date has already become current?
As long as your PD is current per the DFF chart in effect, then there's no date by which you must file your I-485. It's different if the Final Action chart were current. In that case, assuming it remained current, you would need to take I-485 or IV steps within one year. Of course, if you return to your current employer, it would need to be a bona fide job in the same/similar position.
It's definitely more stressful and challenging traveling back to the U.S. using an AP but for the most part it's still fine and we are advising clients to continue to travel on their APs but to consult with us/an immigration attorney before their first international trip so they understand what questions they might be asked by CBP when they return.
I switched from e3 (NOT eb3) to h1b and then they did the $100k eo, so it doesn't feel like a good idea to remain on h1b.
Now, my us citizen spouse and I are filing a spouse based green card application. (of course, we also filed for EA and AP)
Anything you can tell us about how long it might take, how many requests for extra documents they might ask for? (I understand you haven't seen our application, to our minds it's very thorough, like 400 pages, but yeah, in all generality)
Even now, marriage-based green card applications are quick and easy. Because almost always they end in an interview at a local USCIS field office, the timing depends in part on the volume and efficiency of that local office but we are seeing most marriage-based green card applications approved within 6 months, regardless of the location. Requests for additional evidence in the marriage-based green card context are rare and when they happen are usually easy to address.
How about marraige based green cards when residing outside the US? Any indication how long this takes and how complicated the process is? My wife and daughter are both US citizens and we live in Germany. I am a German citizen and have no type of visa in the US.
Probably the desire to apply for a green card. Technically you are not supposed to do this in an E3 because it demonstrates immigrant intent, and the E3 doesn’t allow this. I know people who have done it successfully but I also chose to get an H1B before putting in a green card application years ago, and I would be even more cautious in today’s atmosphere.
My family and I all have green cards, but for the last 3 years, we have been living outside the US (in India) with re-entry permits. I work for a large tech company and have technically been "on assignment" for that time, but honestly, we've more or less shifted base entirely to India at this point.
Our re-entry permits are coming up for renewal soon. We're considering giving up my wife's and kids' green cards, and keeping only mine. The reason for keeping mine is twofold: (1) most of my assets are in the US, and I want to take my time shifting to non-US-domiciled assets to avoid the non-resident estate tax; and (2) I still travel frequently to the US -- 3 or 4 times a year -- for work.
Do you foresee any problems with my family giving up their green cards now, and me holding on to it?
There's some information online that says if you get an employment-based green card, you must stay at your employer for 6 months after receiving it or else it will cause problems in the future. And others say there's no such rule. Can you clarify if there's any restriction like that and where it comes from?
There's no such rule. The requirement is that the green card applicant must have the intent to work for the sponsoring employer and the sponsoring employer must have the intent to employ the sponsored employee after the employee becomes a green card holder but this isn't inconsistent with finding a great job after getting a green card. This concern typically arises when a green card holder applies to become a citizen but I've never seen this actually be an issue. The concern is even less now with green card portability, which allows green card applicants to change jobs before they receive their green card without jeopardizing their green card applications. The short answer is that it's fine to change jobs soon after getting a green card but still I'd recommend having a quick consultation with an immigration beforehand.
I am looking for some legal advise as a F1-OPT student, how to register and incorporate the company in Delaware, c-corp with SAFEs ? any contacts will appreciate.
I have had an RFE for my Eb5 I -829 petition and my attorney submitted my RFE 3+ months ago but haven't heard anything back. Is it true that USCIS responds to RFE within 3 months or have you seen delays in RFE processing in Eb5 cases?
For someone starting law school in Canada who hopes to eventually work as in-house counsel for US-based tech companies or startups, what career paths tend to work best?
Is the common route something like BigLaw (possibly New York) first, then transitioning in-house later, or are there better alternatives?
I took a non-traditional path so I'm not a good person to ask but the TN makes it possible - pretty easy in fact - for Canadian-trained attorneys to work in the U.S.
As a co-founder (Australian citizen) of a Series A funded software startup, is there an easy decision matrix on whether to apply for an E3 or O1 visa? It seems like I don't fully fit into either category.
E-3s are super quick and easy so this is definitely the first option to explore. But it requires a bachelor's degree or its equivalent in a field related to the job. And being a founder/owner can complicate the process but doesn't automatically mean an E-3 isn't an option. There's no helpful decision matrix. If you'd like, send me your resume and schedule a call and I can tell you which option to pursue.
On the business side, two broad changes come to mind: I would make it easier for entrepreneurs/founders to start businesses and also make it easier for the super skilled/talented (in both the arts and business) to get visas without needing employer sponsorship. I also would like to see the U.S. government come up with a list every few years of occupations (both skilled and semi/unskilled) that are considered critical or in short supply in the U.S. and make it easier for foreign nationals to get visas or even green cards for those occupations.
If someone on H-1B in California gets (ostensibly) terminated via email with the reason being given as money, but the company does not send over final pay stubs and instead wires a lump sum, but not for the full amount (no 401k payments deposited into retirement account and I think at least one paycheck) then asks the person to sign a document agreeing they are not owed any money, what steps should that person take? It seems like the issues are 1) change of visa status needs documentation but also importantly 2) they can't get their spouses insurance without final pay stubs. The company said there were problems with ADP and has been delaying on responses.
Unfortunately, although the person is in H-1B status, this is really an employment law question, not an immigration one, so I'm not in a position to respond.
Can a employee sponsored greencard holder move jobs within 3 months after getting greencard approved granted the new role is pretty similar to one before? will there be any issues in terms of naturalization/reapproval.?
The short answer is yes, the employee can move, and while the employee should be aware of this when applying for citizenship, in reality, it's never an issue.
The naturalization application form requires the applicant to list out his or her employment history and this would show that the applicant left his or her sponsored employment soon after getting a green card.
Hi Peter, have you noticed either increased processing times or denial rates of N400 applications? I know about several people waiting to have a citizenship interview scheduled for 12 months or even longer, this seems out of the ordinary. Thank you!
This is just anecdotal but I haven't seen an increase in denial rates although processing seems to have slowed. Under the previous administration, there was a stated commitment and policy to process N-400s within 6 months. Now, depending on the local USCIS field office, we're seeing processing taking 9-12 months and even longer.
The current administration has made it very hard for tech workers to get perm status. Many larger companies are no longer sponsoring perm applications for workers on h1-bs because it is so difficult to meet the new requirements. Which of the new requirements is the most difficult for companies to meet and have you seen any creative solutions, especially for smaller companies and startups trying to get their H1-B folks on greencard track.
1) constant layoffs which each time pause PERM authorization
2) some (but not all) major tech companies having to settle with the DoL or other similar entity about how they were making applications public for the labor market test. These settlements did not happen during this admin. And the higher exposure to average job seekers means defending the PERM is harder (partly bc you cannot claim that your employee is a higher quality employee, only that the on paper requirements like a degree and knowledge of various things, is met or not met)
The challenges I see with green card applications now are not with PERM applications (yet) but with EB1A and NIW applications. The primary stumbling blocks for PERM applications are layoffs, which require companies to suspend and pause the PERM process. This is a big issue with big tech because of the constant downsizing over the past couple of years.
Since you have an approved EB1A petition, you shouldn't have any issues finishing the process and getting a green card. But it's becoming harder and harder to get an approved EB1A.
I beg to differ. The companies have made it difficult by doing constant rounds of layoffs. The state of unemployment in the sector is such that pretty much any vanilla position could be filled by a US LPR or citizen and the process is designed to obfuscate it so those people never see the job (eg internal job posting boards, advertising in physical newspapers).
PERM isn't meant to be an automatic process. I get that the employee wants permanent status but the employer can't have it both ways. You can't constantly need to be doing layoffs AND be unable to fill what is probably a pretty generic position (like "software engineer").
Not sure if this is too high level, but do you have a "dashboard" of sorts for very high level US immigration stats for tech you could share? Perhaps you have access to a series of charts that show overall visa applications, then broken down by type, the change over time (by year, for instance) and then the approval/denial rates and the change in those rates over time?
You obviously have a front-row seat to how current US immigration policy is impacting tech and so would love to see some high level stats showing the actual change.
We don't handle DV applications (we just advise our clients to handle on their own because the application process is easy) but my understanding is that the current 2027 DV process has been paused. Although the government hasn't published statistics yet, by all accounts the selection rate this year in the H-1B lottery was much higher than last year and in years past and I believe that this is in part the result of the $100K fee.
What travel restrictions are applied to applicants/spouses going through the PERM labor cert green card process? I am on an L1-B (wife is L2) and we are currently at the step before the I-485 submission and travel lots to see family
I certainly travelled during the PERM phase, and my lawyer didn’t even suggest I think about it. I did not travel after submitting the application while waiting for the EAD.
I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: years ago, Peter helped me secure authorization to become employee #1 at one of the most successful AI companies to come out of YC. Without his advice, I honestly don’t think I’d have the career I have today.
Since then, he has guided me and many friends through complex immigration processes, always flawlessly and on time. I’d strongly recommend listening to his advice and considering his services.
I've had a B1/B2 for almost 10 years and went to the US many times for conferences, interviews and company get-togethers. I've never had issues at the airport. I might have to travel again for another company meetup. I'm hesitant to do so out of fear of being imprisoned in a random concentration camp with no explanation. What are the chances of that nightmare scenario happening and have you dealt with clients in that situation?
As long as the purpose falls within permissible B-1/B-2 activities and it's clear that you will be returning home after the completion of this purpose, then the risk is very low. That being said, if you have traveled a lot to the U.S., then I'd recommend consulting with an immigration attorney before traveling.
With all the turbulence around visas, how does the TN visa situation look these days? Is it relatively easy to get a role in the US from Canada? Cheers king!
While there's been some tightening, the TN is still a very good and workable option for Canadian and Mexican citizens, particularly those clearly coming to work in one of the TN occupations and with a clearly related degree.
Would having prior valid TNs reduce risk or is there any such notion as having too many TNs? I have heard of this anecdotally but it might have been speculation on their part.
What’s the situation for tech workers from Europe who want to go to the US solely for touristic purposes? There have been plenty of horror stories about people who were accused of plotting to work in the US from their laptop on false pretence of being on vacation.
> There have been plenty of horror stories about people who were accused of plotting to work in the US from their laptop on false pretence of being on vacation.
I'm currently on an F-1 STEM OPT got the H1B Lottery. I need to travel in August. If my H1B is approved before my travel date in August, would I be able to keep my 'Change of Status' status if I come back using my F-1 visa? I do not want to trigger the $100k H1B fee if it switches to Consular Processing. Is it risky? Should I stay in the U.S from approval until October 1st?
Historically, travel while in F-1 STEM OPT status after the approval of an H-1B change of status petition and return prior to October 1st would not impact the change of status request. It's not clear how USCIS is going to view this now so given the uncertainty and the repercussions if wrong, we are advising our clients to remain in the U.S. from the time of filing the H-1B petition until October 1st (or even later if the petition isn't approved by then).
Hi Peter, thanks for doing this AMA. I'm an F-1 CS student starting Post-
Completion OPT 07/15/2026 as a solo founder of my CA single-member LLC
(disregarded entity), building a real-time AI lecture translation product.
A few areas where I've found USCIS guidance / online sources contradictory
or silent — would love your take on any of these:
1. STEM OPT + self-employment: I've seen the E-Verify employer requirement,
but conflicting takes on whether a solo founder's own LLC enrolling in
E-Verify and W-2'ing the owner is acceptable to USCIS in practice. Is
this a viable path, or has USCIS effectively foreclosed it?
2. The structural conflict: a single-member LLC is a disregarded entity
(IRS doesn't allow owner W-2). But STEM OPT effectively requires W-2.
Should solo founders convert to S-Corp or C-Corp before STEM OPT? When
in the timeline?
3. SEVP Portal reporting for self-employed: what do you actually put for
"Employer Name" — the LLC, or your own name? Any common mistakes here
that trigger DSO/USCIS scrutiny?
4. The "20 hours/week" and "directly related to major" bars for solo
founders pre-revenue: how does USCIS actually evaluate product-building
time vs. business-side time during audits? Any compliance pitfalls
you've seen?
5. International travel during OPT for self-employed: the "employer letter"
requirement when self-employed — do you write it to yourself? Any real
re-entry risks for solo founders, especially F-1 visa renewal abroad?
6. Pre-OPT business activity: I formed the LLC and have been doing
product development before OPT starts (no revenue). Where's the line
between permissible "preparation" vs. unauthorized employment for F-1?
7. Long-term path post-OPT for a solo technical founder (early-stage, no
funding/revenue yet): realistic timelines and success rates for O-1A
vs. EB-2 NIW (Matter of Dhanasar) vs. cap-subject H-1B? When should I
start building the case?
Even partial answers on any of these would be hugely helpful. Thank you!
Not Peter. All your domestic stuff can probably be resolved by a skilled attorney, but travel definitely has risks. You can't do anything if you are denied entry or if your visa renewal is denied. There is virtually no legal recourse.
Pending Green Card applications are going through "extended vetting", which I understand means resubmitting biometrics against an FBI database which now contains more nationwide data. Do you know anything about this process?
Nothing has been announced yet. USCIS indicated that these expanded background checks shouldn't delay the process by much but of course no one knows. Right now, it's just wait and see,
They've always had nationwide data. The database is NCIC. It's an imperfect database that has hits for any interaction with law enforcement. USCIS/DHS/State routinely use this database. So there's not much that's new there.
How do you see the increase in robotics and AI on your work over the next couple of years? Will demand drop in general or will we continue to see an influx of people with a diminishing amount of jobs?
That's a good question. I've thought various changes over the years would slow the influx of people to the U.S. but they never have and in fact the interest in living and working in the U.S. only continues to grow.
My wife is a US citizen now. I'm not that worried, but of course I see the reports on TV about the Trump admin abducting and imprisoning lawful residents and citizens.
To be clear, we were completely honest on every form required to do this and my wife isn't part of any political groups and doesn't do much interesting stuff in that regard, so I don't think they would have much room to strip her citizenship.
On the off chance that this abduction happens from ICE, what is the best thing for us to do? Just call a lawyer?
The reports have scared a lot of people but you and your wife should be fine. That being said, if she were detained by ICE, then yes, immediately call an immigration or criminal defense lawyer.
Thank you. I have my immigration attorney's number directly available if the worst happens.
As I said, I'm not that worried; the only concern I have is that we are traveling internationally at the end of the year and while I have no doubt that they are outlier cases, I have heard of a lot of scary stuff happening during customs upon reentry.
The short answer is yes but the EU citizen might be restricted in what he or she can do or where he or she can go. We have many clients in ITAR-regulated industries and they routinely hire foreign nationals.
There's a major difference between individual L-1 petitions filed with USCIS and blanket L-1 petitions/visa applications filed with U.S. Consulates abroad, with the former much more challenging than the latter. This is the case now and has been the case for many years. The main change with blanket L-1 petitions/visa applications now is the result of a policy change (put in place about 6 months ago) limiting where an applicant can apply for a visa, essentially, limiting visa applications to the applicant's country of citizenship or legal permanent residence.
Can a person be eligible to purchase a ACA health plan in CA if they're on a B2 visa considering they have been in the USA for several years on prior work visas?
I know there are some recent changes with OBBBA that will kick in Jan 2027 but as per my understanding only affect PTCs not ACA eligibility.
Unfortunately, that's a benefits question, not an immigration one, so I'm not in a position to answer. That being said, I believe that your understanding is correct in CA.
What sorts of processing times are you seeing for I-130 green card applications? I filed for my wife in late July, and we've still not received anything but a receipt notice.
Hi Peter, are you seeing longer wait times for N-400 and citizenship processing? Can one travel out of the country for a few weeks while the application is pending or will this impact the residency requirements?
There's a been a massive jump in EB processing times in the last couple of months, specifically EB3 ROW which is my category. Do you think this quick advancement will continue over the next few months?
The general feeling is that it should continue for the foreseeable future but at some point as always happens this advancement is going to slow down or even retrogress as the volume of applicants continues to increase.
I applied for a EB1-A in October 2024 and still haven’t heard anything.
I’m French with a valid O-2 until October 2027, working in corporate event planning with pharmaceutical companies.
Do you think I’ll hear back this year? Is my application compromised with the actual economical and geopolitical context ?
Should I plan on trying to extend my O?
No we only filed the O with premium processing cause my lawyer said that UsCIS is usually asking more evidence and makes it harder when you request a premium processing on a EB1A petition
Any decent immigration attorney who works with tech companies has a virtually unlimited stream of work available. I very much doubt this is the reason for the posts.
No one is asking you to read them. Feel free to ignore it. I don’t see anything wrong with YC’c immigration attorney doing an AMA on HN which is hosted by YC.
Yes, the processes are separate so you will need to apply for a new green card to be able to travel internationally but after you apply, you should be able to travel on your green card renewal application receipt notice (along with your expired green card).
There still are multiple visa options for founders (E-1. E-2, L-1, and O-1) and additional options if they are from certain countries (E-3, H-1B1, and TN) so they should consult with an immigration to determine the best path forward.
Individual L-1s (as opposed to blanket L-1s) have always been challenging and I don't feel that they're harder to get than they've been. I know that we're doing more L-1s and E-2s than before but I don't know if that's an industry trend.
If a married couple on L1 visas both comes in to work in the US and one loses their job - can that person switch to the dependent visa, then back to the L1 visa when they find a job? Would the green card wait be reset then?
The spouse could definitely switch to L-2 but then might lose eligibility for L-1 since the spouse still would need to meet the qualifying foreign employment requirement and the three-year lookback period for qualifying employment abroad would start now, not when they initially transferred to the U.S.
Just to be clear, the H-1B is a nonimmigrant visa and the EB-3 is a green card category so they're no comparable. The costs will depend on the legal fees (which run anywhere from $2,500 to $5,000 with most lawyers charging something in between), the size of the company, and whether premium processing is used. For an H-1B, expect total costs of anywhere from about $5,000 to $10,000.
The main changes are that U.S. employers could sponsor those who were outside the U.S. or ineligible to change status or change employers in the U.S. without incurring this fee.
What are the chances of getting back a green card after being out of the country for 4 years? My partner left with the intention to come back soon after, bought a house there as well just before leaving, but then couldn't come back more than a couple of weeks a year for 3 years, and then not at all for the past 4 years.
We're thinking to move back to the US at some point, so having a green card would be the royal road.
It's likely that USCIS will consider her to have abandoned her green card. There are exceptions when the absence was outside the person's control (like during COVID when travel was restricted and risky). It's probably worth it for her to consult with someone about this. The formal path to find out if she's abandoned her green card is by applying for a returning resident visa at a U.S. Consulate in her home country.
The only downsides that I'm aware of are ongoing U.S. tax liability if you move abroad but still want to keep your green card and a potential tax penalty if you give up your green card after having it for at least 7/8 years.
If a green card holder received his green card at, say, age 35 and did not register (as I understand it, only men aged 18-25 are required to register), would that in any way affect his chances for later naturalization?
It's purely based on appointment availability at the particular U.S. Consulate but typically it's very quick to get an L-2 appointment. As an admitted L-2S spouse, you would be work-authorized and wouldn't need an EAD.
Is there a guideline how much time can one take for moving after getting a green card? Should one count days during the first year to not run into problems or is this more second year and onwards?
There does not seem to be much information about this besides very vague statements.
I mean after the initial entry when they stamp the immigrant visa and send you a green card. Is it alright to take 6 to 9 months to getting everything in order in your origin country and getting settled in the US? At some point they will probably start asking questions about why the long absence or are you actually living here etc. Any guidance on how long this actually is or how to mitigate these risks would be helpful.
Yes, that would be fine but you probably would want to apply for a reentry permit when you are in the U.S. to protect your green card in the event you are outside the U.S. longer than expected.
Do you get the impression this is a cause for concern for qualified applicants? Rephrased: what sort of applications are now getting denied/RFE'd that would have been fine say a couple years ago?
Anecdotes would suggest that a lot of people were able to get these visas because there was some fairly loose interpretation of the criteria.
EB1As are extremely difficult to get right now. This is particularly true for non-scientific/research/academic employees who are not very highly compensated.
While U.S. companies continue to hire lots of foreign nationals and while foreign national founders in large numbers continue to try to build businesses in the U.S., the numbers appear to be down. The recent H-1B lottery seems to confirm this. Regarding cancellations/rejections, I would say it's getting harder to get cases approved but our success rate is still high.
The time varies significantly depending on the type of case. I am constantly on the phone with existing clients and potential clients. And we handle a lot of small and mid-sized companies so it's rarely turn-key.
My partner is a refugee due to her former homeland making her a political prisoner for advocating for democracy on the internet. Her green card was approved in 2023 and she’s been here since 2017. She works full time and has no criminal record (and doesn’t engage in activities to cause a change there).
We are not married, though that could change eif it offers meaningful protection for her. I’m a white guy born in USA. How paranoid is “reasonable” for a guy who predicted that the USA would become a fascist state in my lifetime two years ago and yet has been surprised how rapidly it’s coming true? Any advice? Thank you.
> We are not married, though that could change eif it offers meaningful protection for her.
The immigration rules for decades try detecting that transition for that purpose, as i recall. might want to look into that in case you're seriously thinking of such as a strategy.
Around 2014-2020 I feel like there were lots of companies hiring worldwide online remote.
In the last couple years it seems like the tides moved way back out, and companies are terrified of hiring remote contractors. My impression is that it seems mostly about misclassification risks, but maybe there's another part I haven't seen.
1. Is this a real risk? I've looked it up in a few areas but AFAICT misclassification is strictly about same country relations. I know there's some edge cases (like if a foreign worker isn't actually residing outside the country...) but IIUC the laws are mostly to protect the employees and government from bad companies, so as long as the company doesn't try to do that it's not an issue. The bindings of international contracts are limited and both sides know about that.
2. Is this a real trend? Do you have any idea where it comes from? My gut feeling is that Remote.io and Deel who are in this business are spreading FUD because they're in the business of selling protection. I've heard of multiple companies rejecting candidates with like "Oh Deel doesn't have a contract for your country so we can't hire you" etc. But maybe there was some big case that put everyone on their toes?
This is outside my area. All I can say is that anecdotally I still see our clients hiring remotely although often at the same time they are looking for ways to employ their remote contractors in the U.S.
You can hire whoever you want - in their nation of residence.
But domiciling them in your own country implies something else entirely, and it involves social considerations far beyond the capricious nature the contract you've offered them.
In which case, those social and civic considerations become paramount.
To help answer the question, because it's not an irresponsible argument at face value, assuming good faith:
Tech companies generally hire 'talent' not 'labour'. The people they need have specific skills and abilities, which are in short supply.
'Average Joes' are by definition not in the running for these mostly competitive opportunities.
If these companies could just hire average Joes they absolutely would.
That's not always the case - as local workers are sometimes displaced, and that could conceivably be seen an unfair. H1B for Tata etc. does overlap in this area.
By and large, if we move issues of 'culture and identity' aside, the US benefits enormously from immigrants.
Not in all aspects, but mostly.
Elon Musk, Google founders, Jensen at Nvidia, 1/2 involved in Frontier AI are 'born outside of the US'.
Those companies would probably not exist without them.
Maybe another way to think about it that the Bay Area is a 'Special International Economic Zone' hosted by the US, which is where Global HQ of many International tech companies are domiciled.
Apart from their staff, usually well over > 50% of revenues come from abroad as well, making these truly international companies.
The US gets the great benefit of hosting these mostly international organizations.
Were this an issue of regular employment, there's be a stronger case, but this is a more specific thing.
Because the numbers are small enough, there is almost zero downside for US citizens, and the companies that are created end up employing more Americans than they would otherwise. That said - locals can be priced out of these economic centres like the Bay and NYC, and that is arguably unfair.
> By and large, if we move issues of 'culture and identity' aside, the US benefits enormously from immigrants.
Yeah, but issues of culture and identity are extremely important, so important that it's farcical to exclude them when evaluating to what degree the US benefits from immigrants or deciding what immigration policy ought to be.
> Because the numbers are small enough, there is almost zero downside for US citizens, and the companies that are created end up employing more Americans than they would otherwise. That said - locals can be priced out of these economic centres like the Bay and NYC, and that is arguably unfair.
I'm from the bay area as is my entire family; and locals getting priced out by immigrants who work for tech companies basically characterizes the demographic trajectory of my hometown.
It's not 'farcical' to move issues of identity aside because most people don't think there is anything whatsoever wrong with some degree of migration from other countries, and its pragmatically 'non issue'.
It only really becomes an uncomfortable issue around 'large scale undocumented migration' - but that's a whole other separate concern, it's not within the bounds of the law, and it's not related to tech at all.
If we remove that from the equation there is only a very, very narrow scope of 'Settler Nationalists' who could claim there's an issue if 'identity' - I'm being polite by allowing an escape valve there. Rates of regular immigration to the US are 'relatively' low on the aggregate.
But more crucially - the 'identity' issue is irrelevant at least from an economic perspective.
"I'm from the bay area as is my entire family; and locals getting priced out by immigrants" - yes, this is a reasonable and fair concern, but, on the aggregate it's 'next to nothing'.
So - yes, immigration will be felt acutely by some for sure - and that's unfair and it's a moral dilemma - but on the aggregate - 'High Tech Migrants' have zero effect on the landscape of US overall. It's a small cohort.
If we want to talk 'ludicrous' - it's this ridiculously ignorant idea that somehow tech is an American phenom - it's not. It's international.
Bay Area + Tech is nothing without immigrants.
Would not exist a hugely notable tech hub.
Immigrants are a critical ingredient in everything important from founders to capital, to research, to 'filling out the ranks'.
It's not just jobs - it's entire classes of 'essential ingredients' without which - the recipe cannot work.
And without that level of inernationalism, there is no >2/3 revenues from outside US either. It's a slightly separate, but related issue.
Without immigrants the Bay would be about like the 'Research Triangle' in N Carolina, not an gigantic powerhouse.
>and locals getting priced out by immigrants who work for tech companies basically characterizes the demographic trajectory of my hometown.
That's on the locals. They are being priced out because they don't want to build any housing (NIMBYism) nor do they want to pay taxes on property (Prop 13). Don't blame immigrants for the policy failures of the bay area. These failures extend to all of CA and predate tech immigrants.
All I can say is that I have seen a marked reduction in legal business immigration because it's just getting harder to get work visas or because the U.S. is viewed as inhospitable to foreign nationals.
Please don't waste community time and space by posting unsubstantive comments.
Edit: Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait generally? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly, and we've already asked you more than once not to.
> Please don't waste community time and space by posting unsubstantive comments.
It's a very genuine question for how an attorney deals with these businesses? There are countless examples of startups breaking the law at mass scale (Uber, etc) and getting away with it. Sorry that asking difficult questions is wasting "community space". Your own profile cites conflict as essential, is asking difficult questions not part of that?
Part of the guidelines you asked me to review is "Assume good faith." Did you assume good faith from my comment?
Other examples include Airbnb building a bot poaching listings from Craigslist, Stripe not developing appropriate internal rules to enable fraud and drug transactions, pretty much all crypto exchanges and KYC, etc.
Obviously, payment processors like Stripe do not spring into existence fully formed with mature controls. My question relates partially to how attorneys in this domain handle the risks associated with undeveloped compliance, compliance failures, as well as business models that are diametrically opposing the law.
There is an area that many startups believe is "grey" where they operate outside of legal norms, whether it's to enable growth, lack of appropriate risk controls, etc.
Here, startups may knowingly, or unknowingly break the law related to immigration in order to further their business. That's what my question relates to.
While you'd have a point if you were asking in-house counsel at one of the companies in question, you're asking an immigration attorney who works with many different companies. The few times I've tried asking independent attorneys hypotheticals about how to break the law the least, or how to skate through min-maxing the rules the way hackers want to, I've generally gotten a pretty simple answer: "Don't".
I never really understood about PERM. Suppose I am a manager on a team and one of my employees is going through the PERM process.
I'm supposed to put out a job advertisement (but the job isn't real) for my employer. If an applicant passes the interview process, I don't have to hire that person (I probably can't - I don't have budget or permission from the organization). But I do have to honestly say if they have all the required skills -- I'm not permitted to say "wouldn't be a culture fit."
Nor do I have to fire my employee. But maybe my employee won't get a green card six years down the road.
1) Do I have any details wrong here? The one time I talked to a law firm about this they more-or-less refused to state the above outright, but answered all questions in this direction. 2) Doesn't this seem disrespectful to, among others, the applicants to the fake job?
I think everyone would agree that the PERM process is an awful process for both applicants and for employers. The job is supposed to be treated as an open position and the recruitment is supposed to be done in good faith. So, if a qualified, willing, able, and available U.S. worker applies for a PERM job, the employer either must hire this person or terminate the PERM process and wait at least 6 months before restarting it. Now, where there are multiple openings for the position, then it's possible for an employer to hire a U.S. worker without terminating the PERM process for the foreign national employee.
> The job is supposed to be treated as an open position and the recruitment is supposed to be done in good faith. So, if a qualified, willing, able, and available U.S. worker applies for a PERM job, the employer either must hire this person or terminate the PERM process and wait at least 6 months before restarting it.
The "or" part in the last sentence is worth noting. At the place I've worked, the employer invokes the second clause (i.e. PERM process is canceled/suspended, and they try again 6-12 months later).
The way it worked there was: Employer publishes an open req. We get lots of resumes. Manager calls the few people who may be a match. Then the manager has to justify why the person doesn't have the skills and the process continues.
Sometimes (and this is likely a bit random), the government does an audit, where they get the details of all who applied. Then they call the manager and start grilling him on why a particular candidate was rejected. If the manager can convince them, the PERM process continues. If not, they fail the Department of Labor Certification and the PERM process is canceled.
The person doesn't lose his job. They're just ineligible and need to apply again after a certain window.
I do know folks applying for PERM who were rejected twice because of this. The insane thing was that their roles (EE with specific specialty) were legitimately hard to fill, whereas other people in the team doing trivial scripting easily got through PERM.
The process is messed up in many ways.
Generally lawyers need to be involved to make sure any rejections are compliant. There's a whole cottage industry around this.
Personally, given the state of unemployment in the tech sector right now, I think it should be virtually impossible to fill a PERM right now because pretty much any position could be filled with a US LPR or citizen and the only reason it isn't is because the whole process is deliberately obfuscated or artificial barriers are put up purposefully to disqualify candidates.
I also think that doing layoffs in the US should disqualify you from doing any PERM or sponsoring any visa for 2-3 years.
> I also think that doing layoffs in the US should disqualify you from doing any PERM or sponsoring any visa for 2-3 years.
This is a very SW mindset, and makes no sense in other circumstances.
If my company canceled a large SW project, and laid off a lot of SW folks, why should that prevent them from sponsoring someone to work on nanoelectronics?
In this day and age where every company is playing _very_ fast and loose with their LPR/citizen employees' lives and livelihoods, yes, I think PERM should be a very strict and easily lost privilege across the board for the whole company, not a right. If we had sane employee protections in this country maybe my opinion would be different.
> why should that prevent them from sponsoring someone to work on nanoelectronics?
Because companies should be held accountable when they make mistakes in hiring. The employees shouldn’t have to bear the burden of their employers mistakes.
Since we are doing wishes and grievances, why have PERM at all?
The specificied purpose of PERM is to to fill a position that otherwiswe can't be filled by a US LPR or citizen..
If you need to hide your job postings on an internal physical caulk board in a basement and post them in only physical copies of The Columbus Dispatch then it should be pretty clear you're not following the spirit of the program. If, even after doing that, you then disqualify candidates for pretty fake reasons and you somehow still have qualified candidates so you pull the position and try again in 6-12 months then you should absolutely fail a USCIS audit and you should lose your privileges for hiring foreign workers and sponsoring people for residency, at least for a time.
Legitimate employers and jobs can't get a visa in the H1B lottery because of widespread visa abuse. People from certain countries (particularly India) have to wait 10-15+ years because of abuse of the system. Fake employers with H1B schemes, bodyshops that really pay below prevailing wage and can keep Indian-born people as effectively indentured servants, spamming the system with H1B applications because they don't really care how many they get.
We're in permanent layoff culture now where pretty much every sufficiently-sized employer will probably fire 5-10% of their staff every year while still hiring people. This is to suppress wages and make people do more work for free. There should be a cost to this.
If you're an immigrant, a completely arbitrary layoff can be devastating. You have a short period to find a new job and if you don't, you have to leave the country. Employers who will do that to immigrants shouldn't be alloweed to hire immigrants.
You can be both pro-immigration and anti-immigration abuse.
You are conflating several unrelated issues. In your previous post, you expressed how you wish PERM worked ("I also think that doing layoffs in the US should disqualify you from doing any PERM or sponsoring any visa for 2-3 years."), to which my response was why have PERM at all. You are still talking about how you wish the world worked. There are a lot of shoulds in your reply. PERM, H-1B, etc. all exist as a carefully brokered compromise bw different factions that want different things. It is the correct amount of broken by design. Posting in a Sunday newspaper is a requirement in the regulations. Everyone is in the right amount of compliance to maintain equilibrium. There are any number of things that could be or should be, but aren't.
> People from certain countries (particularly India) have to wait 10-15+ years because of abuse of the system.
Well, the abuse is mostly happening for the benefit of people from India.
But yes, it sucks that the "good" people from India have to wait a long time because of the system being abused to get the "not-so-good" Indians.
Keep in mind, though, that you're conflating H1-B with PERM. There isn't a 10-15 year wait for H1-B.
isnit right to call it abuse?
certain employers can use h1bs to fill specific employment needs really well, and have a ton of experience with both sourcing foreign labour and matching it to work that needs doing in the US.
its doing exactly what the program is looking for, filling a labour quantity at the price employers are looking for.
The US government is optimizing for being able to do some volume of technical work, and the the h1 is intended to make sure that the industry isnt limited by labour availability. its not particularly abusive to do that in an efficient way where the same h1b can serve many businesses
the alternative thats coming is going to be moving a lot of the work to india and instead having the local engineers be liasons for where the real work is happening
people in india havw to wait long periods because the green card system of country limits has no per capita normalization, not because of h1 visa abuse. its sheer volume of good people working for american companies in america, wanting to stay in america. Your anti-abuse metrics will bring it down from 15 years to 13 or 14. not a meaningful difference
Nothing will convince me that the likes of Tata and Infosys are a good use of H1Bs. And because they flood the system with H1B applications, other actually valuable positions go unfilled.
If the customers for these bodyshops could save money by outsourcing directly to India, they would've already.
And beyond those big bodyshops you have any number of smaller H1B fraud schemes eg [1][2][3][4].
If you're Indian-born and are waiting 10-15+ years for your green card then you should be mad about these companies because they're making your life more difficult.
> The US government is optimizing for being able to do some volume of technical work, and the the h1 is intended to make sure that the industry isnt limited by labour availability
First, I disagree with this claim. The US government is optimizing to suppress wages.
Second, when there's significant unemployment in the sector then there is by definition availability. It further goes to my argument that the main purpose is to suppress wages.
[1]: https://www.justice.gov/usao-edca/pr/east-bay-men-plead-guil...
[2]: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/h-1b-visa-fraud...
[3]: https://www.justice.gov/usao-nj/pr/executives-staffing-compa...
[4]: https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/sunnyvale-man-to-serve-1...
>when there's significant unemployment in the sector then there is by definition availability
Humans aren't fungible.
I'm convinced people who say this:
> given the state of unemployment in the tech sector right now, I think it should be virtually impossible to fill a PERM right now because pretty much any position could be filled with a US LPR or citizen
are crazy deluded about the quality of the average US citizen software engineering job applicant vs the quality of the person doing that job. Or you haven't ever actually done hiring for a big tech company (who use most of the H1B and perm processes).
I'm not saying Americans are dumb. But the average CS graduate from an average or low tier college in the US (of which there are many many many) is not as good of a hire as the average int'l MSCS degree holder. There's obvious statistical reasons for this: namely the int'l is likely richer in his/her country than the average US citizen is here bc that person can afford to pay for a degree here and move here and get in here.
But this perspective treats these jobs as if they are factory jobs that as long as the position is filled, money can be made and that's not true in software engineering. The quality matters and it's one of many things the PERM process wasn't built to handle and which also many people don't understand who haven't done this hiring process
It is well known at the companies that I've worked for that there is no good faith at all in the process and it's basically ritual to justify the application.
Since they are clearly violating the law, how can I report this?
If they've complied with the DOL regulations and requirements, what makes you think they're violating the law?
Explicitly and openly not acting in good faith.
That is your contention though. The government needs to prove that in a court of law that they are violating the statute or the regulations.
Oh come on, are we seriously acting like jobs building out react components or java endpoints are remotely complicated and not a skill that could be trained within 3 months?
It's a fairly well-founded contention eg [1][2][3].
Here's a problem I often see when technical people, particular engineers, try to analyze legal issues: they tend to look for technical compliance (or noncompliance) or use standards like absolute proof but the law simply doesn't work that way.
Legal decisions tend to come down to things like witness credibility, a holistic view of the facts and whatever evidence standard is being used (eg preponderence of the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, clear and convincing evidence).
An example I like to use is back when prosecutions for downloading something illegal were more in the news. A technical person might argue "an IP address doens't mean anything. It could've been anybody". But the law will look at the totality of the evidence (eg browser history, time when it happened, were you home at the time, whether such media was found on your PC, etc. And the way the Rules of Evidence work, you might not even be able to suggest certain alternative theories (eg "my Wifi was hacked") without evidence.
Another good example is sponsoring someone for a marriage-based green card. You need to be in a bona fide marriage and you'll get people who will look for technical compliance. Is having a joint bank account enough? Photos? A joint lease? Filing a joint tax return? Those are some of the factors USCIS uses but no single factor is sufficient. USCIS will look at the totality of the evidence in determining if a marriage is bona fide.
so back to PERM abuse, arguments like "we made an error with the email address" or "we accidentally lost some US citizen applications" or even "we complied with the technical requirements for advertising a position" may not carry the day because the totality of the evidence may still amount to immigration fraud.
Lastly, it should be noted that a lack of a prosecution (yet?) is not proof of legality or compliance either.
[1]: https://www.theregister.com/2026/04/28/cloudera_doj_employme...
[2]: https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-labor-depart...
[3]: https://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/employee-rights-labour-r...
>it should be noted that a lack of a prosecution (yet?) is not proof of legality or compliance either.
Prosecution or lack of prosecution in this area are both political. The previous DOJ also sued SpaceX for not hiring asylees. I am not aware of an actual court victory. These tend to settle out of court and both sides get to claim victory and make headlines.
>they tend to look for technical compliance
I'm taking a more holistic view here, which is that the whole thing is so farcical that enforcing compliance here does more harm than good. Look at the operation that chained Hyundai workers and deported them for a photo op. What did it achieve? It created a diplomatic incident, the battery plant stopped producing batteries, and the state lost tax revenue.
>Those are some of the factors USCIS uses but no single factor is sufficient.
That's a whole different can of worms. There is endless litigation over things that USCIS does in its infinite wisdom. Fortunately, we have the APA and Loper Bright overturned Chevron, so it should restore some sanity to it.
Aside: >prosecutions for downloading something
There is no real prosecution for downloading. It's only uploading. The technical definition is the same as the legal one. The way DMCA prosecution works is that if you are in a torrent swarm and are uploading, you are distributing content, which is easier to prove under copyright law.
This is a wild claim. It is very difficult in US law to prove this claim.
The government agencies involved are the DOL and USCIS so you would report abuses/violations to them.
When you have an IR-1 in the process, but we decided to move to Europe is it then better to cancel that application or is it better to just let it go through the system and sort of cancel it at the point when we're invited for an interview?
Does H1-B really carry that 100k per-case fee? I remember hearing of it, but afterwards also individual stories of people getting H1-B. I don't know them personally unfortunately; not sure whether it was sponsored by not-for-profit research institutes or for-profit companies. I can't imagine this rule being economically feasible for most, though. And if the answer is actually a yes, would the company want to make sure that here's a repayment clause in the contract, e.g. if the worker leaves within X years, he/she will have to refund the company for Y% of this visa fee? Is that even legal?
Related, iirc H1-B has a 6-year limit. Under the current policy what's the path forward if the holder is not ready to adjust their status to PR within the timeframe or not qualified to EB category? O1? But there were a wave of news stories about O1 being abused and I wouldn't be surprised if that was a prelude to major changes to the category.
Just curious. Thanks for making this thread.
Yes, the $100K fee exists and applies under certain circumstances, essentially if the beneficiary is outside the U.S. or ineligible for a change of status or change of employer. Most companies are simply not pursuing H-1B petitions where the $100K fee would apply but there are exceptions.
It's possible to extend H-1B status beyond the 6-year max-out period if the beneficiary is in the green card process. But if the beneficiary isn't in the green card process, then the most common option is the O-1 and while it's getting harder to get an O-1, it's still within reach of many talented professionals and founders.
Also that the fee exists as a proclamation but is being litigated. It is on appeal in the DC circuit and there is a separate case in ND CA as well. In light of learning resources, my money is on it being overruled.
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72095497/chamber-of-com...
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71541425/global-nurse-f...
How has AI affected your job and what tools are you using?
What's an ask you'd make to startups in the legal AI space?
Not selling something, but have heard primarily negative sentiments from other lawyers due to hallucination risk.
We're not using AI much at all. We're using it a bit to search and organize documents but not much beyond that. It's almost always a little wrong when responding to immigration-related questions/providing immigration legal advice and a little wrong makes it completely unreliable except as a first step in trying to get answers.
What systems are you actively using? And what systems have you tried? It seems like law, generally, may be hitting a tipping point on LLM use...
What's the best path from zero to a fully legal status (visa first I imagine, but eventually citizenship) in the US for someone coming over from the Western Balkans (non-EU), with a bachelors degree in EE or CS and no prior work experience? Thanks for doing this.
The options are limited: an H-1B for employment (which involves an annual lottery), an F-1 for schooling, or a J-1 for internship/training (which requires a "host" company/employer).
OP didn't state their exact country, but E-2 visa may be applicable. It's not just for investors/business starters. Companies that are privately owned by people from E-2 countries can transfer/hire citizens from other E-2 countries. Probably the most realistic option for a junior/mid-level developer IMO. See if your country is an E-2 country and apply to companies that qualify. E-2 is a non-immigrant visa so moving onto green card is more difficult but not impossible.
There's also the L1B Company transfer, if you work for a company with offices in the US and they would be able to transfer you after a year. Bit of a gamble to find a company that would be willing to do this though, and you gotta work for probably years to find out.
H-1B, if you're not already in the US has a 100k fee attached to it. Though AFAIK that was a proclamation that expires at some point, but probably won't. So it's really not an option for 99% of people.
I'm not a lawyer, so definitely verify what i say, but i'm pretty sure these are also valid options.
I'm sorry, Serbia. According to [0], it seems like E-2 would be applicable, too.
Thank you.
[0]: https://www.usimmigrationadvisor.com/active-e-2-treaty-count...
Thanks! Very good points. The E-2 is also a great option for founders (with their own funding or with funding from citizens/VCs from their own country).
Another idea: Get a master's degree in the US. Expensive, but will give you a very good chance to get a job offer in US. PhD is even better, but will take 4-5 years.
Also: Try the green card lottery. You can Google to find info.
Thanks for doing this.
- How difficult has it become to get O1 for founders compared to say 5 years ago?
-What advice would you have for founders who think they should be able to get O1 once they have a bit of seed money (say YC, 500k) and press coverage?
It's definitely more difficult but well within reach of founders (particularly founders with funding and organic press coverage) and talented professionals. That is, until very recently. It's too early to say whether this is a trend or an aberration but the past few weeks we've seen USCIS apply a different standard, one similar to the EB1A standard. If this is a trend, then I suspect that the RFE and denial rates for O-1s will skyrocket.
Is it just aligning to EB1A standards, or more rigorous and picky process in general?
There are suggestions[0] that the crooks running the country atm are trying to use the EB1 visa quotas for the golden visas instead.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zA3qrg2Kpbo
What are you seeing with the new $100k H1B fee? Is it being applied only to people currently outside the US? Do you have any estimates on whether it's likely to be renewed in September and/or struck down?
It's being applied to those outside the U.S. or those in the U.S. who are ineligible for a U.S.-based change of status or change of employer. This fee primarily has impacted employers seeking to hire people who are outside the U.S. and also limited when people can travel,
What's the climate like around TN visas nowadays? Specifically, from Canada to the US. (Thinking of Waterloo grad-types but also humanities types coming to join in non-eng roles)
Since a Canadian TN can be applied for when traveling to the U.S. from Canada, it's a very fast process and still generally easy for Canadians with engineering degrees.
Our small company offers a remote paid mentorship for students anywhere in the world - often times, international students in the US want to apply but then there’s substantial confusion on whether they can be paid without jeopardizing their status. The stipends we pay are all 1099 and it’s mostly self-directed work so we’re a bit at a loss in regards to the CPT/OPT qualifications. Many end up forgoing their stipend which sucks for students in an expensive place.
Any thoughts there?
Maybe Peter can comment further, but my impression was that the definition of "work" is normally unrelated to whether it's paid or not, for F/J?
If those students are actually concerned about staying in status, simply saying they're volunteering might not be sufficient.
That's right. Working without pay in jobs that normally are paid could still be considered unauthorized employment.
The students should speak with their DSOs (Designated School Officials) because they must have work authorization to get paid whether they're paid by a U.S. or foreign source or paid as a 1099 contractor or W-2 employee. But I don't see why both CPT and pre-completion OPT wouldn't work.
Thank you for all the great questions and comments. I will be taking a brief break.
Are you able to comment on J-1 visa limitations around duration of international travel?
I'm a postdoc at a US university. My school's international office suggested there was no limit on how long I could travel outside of the US, but most sources online suggest there is a limit of 30 days before the SEVIS record goes inactive. It seems this can be avoided if the university sponsor records the travel in SEVIS. I think I've finally convinced them that this is a real limitation, but some actual expert knowledge would still be very appreciated! I am Canadian, in case that affects the answer.
Thanks for doing this!
My understanding is that time outside the U.S. of more than 30 days while in J-1 status is permissible but triggers a SEVIS alert and requires the ISSO to verify in the SEVIS system that you are continuing with your J-1 work while outside. So, you would want to advise the ISSO before you leave the U.S. and get his or her okay.
Not an attorney so I don’t know the details but it is definitely possible to leave the US several months in a row on a J1. When I did it (also as postdoc), it was an involved process that escalated to the (vice?)president’s office to get permission so there are clearly questions the university needed to address... I didn’t have any visibility into it all but what I was told about regarded taxes mainly (since getting paid abroad).
So technically possible but also a tall ask (I didn’t know at the time of asking and my PI went with it).
I then came back and carried on without any immigration issues.
Hi Peter, thank you for your time
I have been living and working Estonia for around 2 years now, I have mostly US clients for a saas that I direct, this saas brings me around steady income of around 200k euros per year, at least 130k come from east coast companies.
Can I apply for the E1 treaty trader visa? Even if my company is not incorporated in Greece?
The place of incorporation doesn't matter. We should talk because assessment of E-1 and E-2 visa options requires careful analysis.
Thanks for doing this Peter! I am an Indian national on H1-B with an active, non-withdrawn I-140 and a Priority Date of August 2016 from a previous employer. My current employer has an approved PERM, but their I-140 is still pending.
If the Dates for Filing (DFF) chart reaches my priority date, what is the latest viable timeline to return to my previous employer to file an I-485 based on their approved petition? Additionally, are there legal risks to joining after the date has already become current?
As long as your PD is current per the DFF chart in effect, then there's no date by which you must file your I-485. It's different if the Final Action chart were current. In that case, assuming it remained current, you would need to take I-485 or IV steps within one year. Of course, if you return to your current employer, it would need to be a bona fide job in the same/similar position.
It sounds great in theory, but is returning to the USA on an AP nearly as stress free in reality?
I am considering a concurrently filed EB-5 petition and am curious as to what you are noticing of late.
Thank you for doing this AMA, Peter!
It's definitely more stressful and challenging traveling back to the U.S. using an AP but for the most part it's still fine and we are advising clients to continue to travel on their APs but to consult with us/an immigration attorney before their first international trip so they understand what questions they might be asked by CBP when they return.
I switched from e3 (NOT eb3) to h1b and then they did the $100k eo, so it doesn't feel like a good idea to remain on h1b.
Now, my us citizen spouse and I are filing a spouse based green card application. (of course, we also filed for EA and AP)
Anything you can tell us about how long it might take, how many requests for extra documents they might ask for? (I understand you haven't seen our application, to our minds it's very thorough, like 400 pages, but yeah, in all generality)
Thank you Peter!
Even now, marriage-based green card applications are quick and easy. Because almost always they end in an interview at a local USCIS field office, the timing depends in part on the volume and efficiency of that local office but we are seeing most marriage-based green card applications approved within 6 months, regardless of the location. Requests for additional evidence in the marriage-based green card context are rare and when they happen are usually easy to address.
How about marraige based green cards when residing outside the US? Any indication how long this takes and how complicated the process is? My wife and daughter are both US citizens and we live in Germany. I am a German citizen and have no type of visa in the US.
That 6 months is considered “quick and easy” says a lot.
If you compare that to other countries it’s fast and easy.
Mind you, this is for obtaining citizenship. Citizenship is a very big deal as it's permanent unless you do something outrageous
This is not for citizenship, but for the permanent residency ("green card"). And yes, 6 months is a dream for most applicants.
I had to wait 2 years for my uncomplicated GC case.
What made you switch from E-3 to H-1B?
Probably the desire to apply for a green card. Technically you are not supposed to do this in an E3 because it demonstrates immigrant intent, and the E3 doesn’t allow this. I know people who have done it successfully but I also chose to get an H1B before putting in a green card application years ago, and I would be even more cautious in today’s atmosphere.
A random lawyer web site that looks like a good explanation: https://peterchu.com/blogs/medium-feed/can-an-e-3-visa-holde...
My family and I all have green cards, but for the last 3 years, we have been living outside the US (in India) with re-entry permits. I work for a large tech company and have technically been "on assignment" for that time, but honestly, we've more or less shifted base entirely to India at this point.
Our re-entry permits are coming up for renewal soon. We're considering giving up my wife's and kids' green cards, and keeping only mine. The reason for keeping mine is twofold: (1) most of my assets are in the US, and I want to take my time shifting to non-US-domiciled assets to avoid the non-resident estate tax; and (2) I still travel frequently to the US -- 3 or 4 times a year -- for work.
Do you foresee any problems with my family giving up their green cards now, and me holding on to it?
As a green card holder living outside the US, are you subject to US federal taxes, e.g., global taxation?
Thank you kindly, Peter.
My partner is a H1B tech worker employed by Meta; not working on AI/ML.
Given the Chinese government opposition to the Manus acquisition, is there any risk they could encounter for their upcoming H1B visa stamp in China?
There's some information online that says if you get an employment-based green card, you must stay at your employer for 6 months after receiving it or else it will cause problems in the future. And others say there's no such rule. Can you clarify if there's any restriction like that and where it comes from?
There's no such rule. The requirement is that the green card applicant must have the intent to work for the sponsoring employer and the sponsoring employer must have the intent to employ the sponsored employee after the employee becomes a green card holder but this isn't inconsistent with finding a great job after getting a green card. This concern typically arises when a green card holder applies to become a citizen but I've never seen this actually be an issue. The concern is even less now with green card portability, which allows green card applicants to change jobs before they receive their green card without jeopardizing their green card applications. The short answer is that it's fine to change jobs soon after getting a green card but still I'd recommend having a quick consultation with an immigration beforehand.
I am looking for some legal advise as a F1-OPT student, how to register and incorporate the company in Delaware, c-corp with SAFEs ? any contacts will appreciate.
I have had an RFE for my Eb5 I -829 petition and my attorney submitted my RFE 3+ months ago but haven't heard anything back. Is it true that USCIS responds to RFE within 3 months or have you seen delays in RFE processing in Eb5 cases?
We've definitely seen a slowing down of USCIS adjudications particularly when an RFE is involved so this delay isn't unheard-of.
For someone starting law school in Canada who hopes to eventually work as in-house counsel for US-based tech companies or startups, what career paths tend to work best?
Is the common route something like BigLaw (possibly New York) first, then transitioning in-house later, or are there better alternatives?
I took a non-traditional path so I'm not a good person to ask but the TN makes it possible - pretty easy in fact - for Canadian-trained attorneys to work in the U.S.
thank you!
As a co-founder (Australian citizen) of a Series A funded software startup, is there an easy decision matrix on whether to apply for an E3 or O1 visa? It seems like I don't fully fit into either category.
E-3s are super quick and easy so this is definitely the first option to explore. But it requires a bachelor's degree or its equivalent in a field related to the job. And being a founder/owner can complicate the process but doesn't automatically mean an E-3 isn't an option. There's no helpful decision matrix. If you'd like, send me your resume and schedule a call and I can tell you which option to pursue.
Suppose you could wave a magic wand and change US immigration law in any way you like. What changes would you make?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46164104
On the business side, two broad changes come to mind: I would make it easier for entrepreneurs/founders to start businesses and also make it easier for the super skilled/talented (in both the arts and business) to get visas without needing employer sponsorship. I also would like to see the U.S. government come up with a list every few years of occupations (both skilled and semi/unskilled) that are considered critical or in short supply in the U.S. and make it easier for foreign nationals to get visas or even green cards for those occupations.
If someone on H-1B in California gets (ostensibly) terminated via email with the reason being given as money, but the company does not send over final pay stubs and instead wires a lump sum, but not for the full amount (no 401k payments deposited into retirement account and I think at least one paycheck) then asks the person to sign a document agreeing they are not owed any money, what steps should that person take? It seems like the issues are 1) change of visa status needs documentation but also importantly 2) they can't get their spouses insurance without final pay stubs. The company said there were problems with ADP and has been delaying on responses.
Unfortunately, although the person is in H-1B status, this is really an employment law question, not an immigration one, so I'm not in a position to respond.
Can a employee sponsored greencard holder move jobs within 3 months after getting greencard approved granted the new role is pretty similar to one before? will there be any issues in terms of naturalization/reapproval.?
The short answer is yes, the employee can move, and while the employee should be aware of this when applying for citizenship, in reality, it's never an issue.
How exactly would this come up when applying for citizenship?
The naturalization application form requires the applicant to list out his or her employment history and this would show that the applicant left his or her sponsored employment soon after getting a green card.
Hi Peter, have you noticed either increased processing times or denial rates of N400 applications? I know about several people waiting to have a citizenship interview scheduled for 12 months or even longer, this seems out of the ordinary. Thank you!
This is just anecdotal but I haven't seen an increase in denial rates although processing seems to have slowed. Under the previous administration, there was a stated commitment and policy to process N-400s within 6 months. Now, depending on the local USCIS field office, we're seeing processing taking 9-12 months and even longer.
The current administration has made it very hard for tech workers to get perm status. Many larger companies are no longer sponsoring perm applications for workers on h1-bs because it is so difficult to meet the new requirements. Which of the new requirements is the most difficult for companies to meet and have you seen any creative solutions, especially for smaller companies and startups trying to get their H1-B folks on greencard track.
PERM died as a viable option through two things:
1) constant layoffs which each time pause PERM authorization
2) some (but not all) major tech companies having to settle with the DoL or other similar entity about how they were making applications public for the labor market test. These settlements did not happen during this admin. And the higher exposure to average job seekers means defending the PERM is harder (partly bc you cannot claim that your employee is a higher quality employee, only that the on paper requirements like a degree and knowledge of various things, is met or not met)
The challenges I see with green card applications now are not with PERM applications (yet) but with EB1A and NIW applications. The primary stumbling blocks for PERM applications are layoffs, which require companies to suspend and pause the PERM process. This is a big issue with big tech because of the constant downsizing over the past couple of years.
What challenges are you seeing around EB1A. Context: I have an approved EB1A but waiting for i485, so curious to learn about the challenges.
Since you have an approved EB1A petition, you shouldn't have any issues finishing the process and getting a green card. But it's becoming harder and harder to get an approved EB1A.
I beg to differ. The companies have made it difficult by doing constant rounds of layoffs. The state of unemployment in the sector is such that pretty much any vanilla position could be filled by a US LPR or citizen and the process is designed to obfuscate it so those people never see the job (eg internal job posting boards, advertising in physical newspapers).
PERM isn't meant to be an automatic process. I get that the employee wants permanent status but the employer can't have it both ways. You can't constantly need to be doing layoffs AND be unable to fill what is probably a pretty generic position (like "software engineer").
Not sure if this is too high level, but do you have a "dashboard" of sorts for very high level US immigration stats for tech you could share? Perhaps you have access to a series of charts that show overall visa applications, then broken down by type, the change over time (by year, for instance) and then the approval/denial rates and the change in those rates over time?
You obviously have a front-row seat to how current US immigration policy is impacting tech and so would love to see some high level stats showing the actual change.
The State Department publishes some of that data, although there's nothing specific to tech of course.
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal/visa-law0/v...
I should have that but I don't but I'd be happy to try to answer specific questions about specific visa/green card types.
What is the current status of the DV program? What will happen with last year's quotas?
And another question: has 100k$ requirement on H1Bs make any meaningful impact on applications count (e. g. to remove the lottery)?
We don't handle DV applications (we just advise our clients to handle on their own because the application process is easy) but my understanding is that the current 2027 DV process has been paused. Although the government hasn't published statistics yet, by all accounts the selection rate this year in the H-1B lottery was much higher than last year and in years past and I believe that this is in part the result of the $100K fee.
Hi Peter - thanks for another of these.
What travel restrictions are applied to applicants/spouses going through the PERM labor cert green card process? I am on an L1-B (wife is L2) and we are currently at the step before the I-485 submission and travel lots to see family
I certainly travelled during the PERM phase, and my lawyer didn’t even suggest I think about it. I did not travel after submitting the application while waiting for the EAD.
Not a lawyer. PERM is a DOL process. Travel is governed by visas (or parole in some cases). The two are unrelated.
I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: years ago, Peter helped me secure authorization to become employee #1 at one of the most successful AI companies to come out of YC. Without his advice, I honestly don’t think I’d have the career I have today.
Since then, he has guided me and many friends through complex immigration processes, always flawlessly and on time. I’d strongly recommend listening to his advice and considering his services.
Thanks. That's very kind of you. I hope that all is well.
I've had a B1/B2 for almost 10 years and went to the US many times for conferences, interviews and company get-togethers. I've never had issues at the airport. I might have to travel again for another company meetup. I'm hesitant to do so out of fear of being imprisoned in a random concentration camp with no explanation. What are the chances of that nightmare scenario happening and have you dealt with clients in that situation?
As long as the purpose falls within permissible B-1/B-2 activities and it's clear that you will be returning home after the completion of this purpose, then the risk is very low. That being said, if you have traveled a lot to the U.S., then I'd recommend consulting with an immigration attorney before traveling.
With all the turbulence around visas, how does the TN visa situation look these days? Is it relatively easy to get a role in the US from Canada? Cheers king!
While there's been some tightening, the TN is still a very good and workable option for Canadian and Mexican citizens, particularly those clearly coming to work in one of the TN occupations and with a clearly related degree.
Would having prior valid TNs reduce risk or is there any such notion as having too many TNs? I have heard of this anecdotally but it might have been speculation on their part.
Having prior TNs neither helps nor hurts in any significant way.
What’s the situation for tech workers from Europe who want to go to the US solely for touristic purposes? There have been plenty of horror stories about people who were accused of plotting to work in the US from their laptop on false pretence of being on vacation.
https://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/deportationen-unter-trump-sie-h...
Google Translate: https://www-tagesanzeiger-ch.translate.goog/deportationen-un...
I'm currently on an F-1 STEM OPT got the H1B Lottery. I need to travel in August. If my H1B is approved before my travel date in August, would I be able to keep my 'Change of Status' status if I come back using my F-1 visa? I do not want to trigger the $100k H1B fee if it switches to Consular Processing. Is it risky? Should I stay in the U.S from approval until October 1st?
Historically, travel while in F-1 STEM OPT status after the approval of an H-1B change of status petition and return prior to October 1st would not impact the change of status request. It's not clear how USCIS is going to view this now so given the uncertainty and the repercussions if wrong, we are advising our clients to remain in the U.S. from the time of filing the H-1B petition until October 1st (or even later if the petition isn't approved by then).
Thank you!
Hi Peter, thanks for doing this AMA. I'm an F-1 CS student starting Post- Completion OPT 07/15/2026 as a solo founder of my CA single-member LLC (disregarded entity), building a real-time AI lecture translation product. A few areas where I've found USCIS guidance / online sources contradictory or silent — would love your take on any of these:
1. STEM OPT + self-employment: I've seen the E-Verify employer requirement, but conflicting takes on whether a solo founder's own LLC enrolling in E-Verify and W-2'ing the owner is acceptable to USCIS in practice. Is this a viable path, or has USCIS effectively foreclosed it?
2. The structural conflict: a single-member LLC is a disregarded entity (IRS doesn't allow owner W-2). But STEM OPT effectively requires W-2. Should solo founders convert to S-Corp or C-Corp before STEM OPT? When in the timeline?
3. SEVP Portal reporting for self-employed: what do you actually put for "Employer Name" — the LLC, or your own name? Any common mistakes here that trigger DSO/USCIS scrutiny?
4. The "20 hours/week" and "directly related to major" bars for solo founders pre-revenue: how does USCIS actually evaluate product-building time vs. business-side time during audits? Any compliance pitfalls you've seen?
5. International travel during OPT for self-employed: the "employer letter" requirement when self-employed — do you write it to yourself? Any real re-entry risks for solo founders, especially F-1 visa renewal abroad?
6. Pre-OPT business activity: I formed the LLC and have been doing product development before OPT starts (no revenue). Where's the line between permissible "preparation" vs. unauthorized employment for F-1?
7. Long-term path post-OPT for a solo technical founder (early-stage, no funding/revenue yet): realistic timelines and success rates for O-1A vs. EB-2 NIW (Matter of Dhanasar) vs. cap-subject H-1B? When should I start building the case?
Even partial answers on any of these would be hugely helpful. Thank you!
Not Peter. All your domestic stuff can probably be resolved by a skilled attorney, but travel definitely has risks. You can't do anything if you are denied entry or if your visa renewal is denied. There is virtually no legal recourse.
Has the chance of being denied entry to the country with an advance parole document increased? Or is that still fairly low risk?
It has increased but the risk is still very low (assuming the AP holder has no issues, such as a criminal record).
Pending Green Card applications are going through "extended vetting", which I understand means resubmitting biometrics against an FBI database which now contains more nationwide data. Do you know anything about this process?
Nothing has been announced yet. USCIS indicated that these expanded background checks shouldn't delay the process by much but of course no one knows. Right now, it's just wait and see,
They've always had nationwide data. The database is NCIC. It's an imperfect database that has hits for any interaction with law enforcement. USCIS/DHS/State routinely use this database. So there's not much that's new there.
So they're submitting data to the same database again? Sounds like a lot of hot air by the administration...
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-administration-mandates-e...
How do you see the increase in robotics and AI on your work over the next couple of years? Will demand drop in general or will we continue to see an influx of people with a diminishing amount of jobs?
That's a good question. I've thought various changes over the years would slow the influx of people to the U.S. but they never have and in fact the interest in living and working in the U.S. only continues to grow.
My wife is a US citizen now. I'm not that worried, but of course I see the reports on TV about the Trump admin abducting and imprisoning lawful residents and citizens.
To be clear, we were completely honest on every form required to do this and my wife isn't part of any political groups and doesn't do much interesting stuff in that regard, so I don't think they would have much room to strip her citizenship.
On the off chance that this abduction happens from ICE, what is the best thing for us to do? Just call a lawyer?
The reports have scared a lot of people but you and your wife should be fine. That being said, if she were detained by ICE, then yes, immediately call an immigration or criminal defense lawyer.
Thank you. I have my immigration attorney's number directly available if the worst happens.
As I said, I'm not that worried; the only concern I have is that we are traveling internationally at the end of the year and while I have no doubt that they are outlier cases, I have heard of a lot of scary stuff happening during customs upon reentry.
Anyway, thanks for the advice!
A bit general but can you talk about immigration law regarding ITAR regulated industries?
If someone is a a EU citizen and wanted to work in aerospace in the US, would that be possible in general?
What kind of visa or green card would they need?
Would they be able to work on everything like a US citizen or are there areas that are restricted?
The short answer is yes but the EU citizen might be restricted in what he or she can do or where he or she can go. We have many clients in ITAR-regulated industries and they routinely hire foreign nationals.
Have there been any meaningful changes in denial rates, processing times, or petitioning processes for L1 visas?
There's a major difference between individual L-1 petitions filed with USCIS and blanket L-1 petitions/visa applications filed with U.S. Consulates abroad, with the former much more challenging than the latter. This is the case now and has been the case for many years. The main change with blanket L-1 petitions/visa applications now is the result of a policy change (put in place about 6 months ago) limiting where an applicant can apply for a visa, essentially, limiting visa applications to the applicant's country of citizenship or legal permanent residence.
Can a person be eligible to purchase a ACA health plan in CA if they're on a B2 visa considering they have been in the USA for several years on prior work visas?
I know there are some recent changes with OBBBA that will kick in Jan 2027 but as per my understanding only affect PTCs not ACA eligibility.
Unfortunately, that's a benefits question, not an immigration one, so I'm not in a position to answer. That being said, I believe that your understanding is correct in CA.
Ah that makes sense. I appreciate your quick response!
What sorts of processing times are you seeing for I-130 green card applications? I filed for my wife in late July, and we've still not received anything but a receipt notice.
I-130 processing has always been all over the place and can be very slow sometimes, taking 9 or even 12 months.
Hi Peter, are you seeing longer wait times for N-400 and citizenship processing? Can one travel out of the country for a few weeks while the application is pending or will this impact the residency requirements?
Yes, I am seeing N-400 processing taking longer now. And yes, you can travel internationally while your N-400 is pending.
There's a been a massive jump in EB processing times in the last couple of months, specifically EB3 ROW which is my category. Do you think this quick advancement will continue over the next few months?
The general feeling is that it should continue for the foreseeable future but at some point as always happens this advancement is going to slow down or even retrogress as the volume of applicants continues to increase.
I applied for a EB1-A in October 2024 and still haven’t heard anything. I’m French with a valid O-2 until October 2027, working in corporate event planning with pharmaceutical companies. Do you think I’ll hear back this year? Is my application compromised with the actual economical and geopolitical context ? Should I plan on trying to extend my O?
Was the EB1A petition filed with premium processing?
No we only filed the O with premium processing cause my lawyer said that UsCIS is usually asking more evidence and makes it harder when you request a premium processing on a EB1A petition
What a creative way to solicit new business. These quarterly touts for work on HN in the guise of AMA leave me somewhat annoyed.
Any decent immigration attorney who works with tech companies has a virtually unlimited stream of work available. I very much doubt this is the reason for the posts.
No one is asking you to read them. Feel free to ignore it. I don’t see anything wrong with YC’c immigration attorney doing an AMA on HN which is hosted by YC.
I have a GC but it is about to expire this summer. If I apply for citizenship, can I still travel? Do I need to apply to extend my GC as well?
Yes, the processes are separate so you will need to apply for a new green card to be able to travel internationally but after you apply, you should be able to travel on your green card renewal application receipt notice (along with your expired green card).
Maybe a little broad. I have co-founders who are interested in emigrating to the USA, hoping our company could be a boon to the process. Is it?
There still are multiple visa options for founders (E-1. E-2, L-1, and O-1) and additional options if they are from certain countries (E-3, H-1B1, and TN) so they should consult with an immigration to determine the best path forward.
Have you seen an increase in usage of the L1 and is that being scrutinized by USCIS more than before?
Individual L-1s (as opposed to blanket L-1s) have always been challenging and I don't feel that they're harder to get than they've been. I know that we're doing more L-1s and E-2s than before but I don't know if that's an industry trend.
If a married couple on L1 visas both comes in to work in the US and one loses their job - can that person switch to the dependent visa, then back to the L1 visa when they find a job? Would the green card wait be reset then?
The spouse could definitely switch to L-2 but then might lose eligibility for L-1 since the spouse still would need to meet the qualifying foreign employment requirement and the three-year lookback period for qualifying employment abroad would start now, not when they initially transferred to the U.S.
What's the typical timeline and cost for sponsoring an H-1B vs. EB-3 vs. other visa categories?
Just to be clear, the H-1B is a nonimmigrant visa and the EB-3 is a green card category so they're no comparable. The costs will depend on the legal fees (which run anywhere from $2,500 to $5,000 with most lawyers charging something in between), the size of the company, and whether premium processing is used. For an H-1B, expect total costs of anywhere from about $5,000 to $10,000.
What were some notable differences between H-1B before and after the fee?
The main changes are that U.S. employers could sponsor those who were outside the U.S. or ineligible to change status or change employers in the U.S. without incurring this fee.
Did the number of applicants go down/approval rate go up as a consequence?
I believe the numbers of H-1B filings has gone down although the H-1B approval rate - so far - seems unchanged.
What are the chances of getting back a green card after being out of the country for 4 years? My partner left with the intention to come back soon after, bought a house there as well just before leaving, but then couldn't come back more than a couple of weeks a year for 3 years, and then not at all for the past 4 years.
We're thinking to move back to the US at some point, so having a green card would be the royal road.
Thanks!
It's likely that USCIS will consider her to have abandoned her green card. There are exceptions when the absence was outside the person's control (like during COVID when travel was restricted and risky). It's probably worth it for her to consult with someone about this. The formal path to find out if she's abandoned her green card is by applying for a returning resident visa at a U.S. Consulate in her home country.
What are the downsides to having a greencard?
The only downsides that I'm aware of are ongoing U.S. tax liability if you move abroad but still want to keep your green card and a potential tax penalty if you give up your green card after having it for at least 7/8 years.
Do visa holders have to register for military drafts?
See here: https://www.sss.gov/register/who-needs-to-register/#p1. Essentially, U.S. citizens and green card holders need to register but there are other groups as well.
Thanks, could someone give some clarity? The link to the details is 404. But, I found an old version on archive.org.
https://web.archive.org/web/20240516075853/https://www.sss.g...
Seems to suggest that F-1 student, H-1B temporary worker, visitor do not have to register. Is that correct?
If a green card holder received his green card at, say, age 35 and did not register (as I understand it, only men aged 18-25 are required to register), would that in any way affect his chances for later naturalization?
What is the average time for getting and L2S visa? Is it mandatory to get EAD to get a job?
It's purely based on appointment availability at the particular U.S. Consulate but typically it's very quick to get an L-2 appointment. As an admitted L-2S spouse, you would be work-authorized and wouldn't need an EAD.
How easy is it for canadians with Tn-1 visas these days?
It's still pretty easy if coming to work in one of the TN occupations with the right educational background.
Is there a guideline how much time can one take for moving after getting a green card? Should one count days during the first year to not run into problems or is this more second year and onwards?
There does not seem to be much information about this besides very vague statements.
Do you mean getting an immigrant/green card at a U.S. Consulate abroad?
I mean after the initial entry when they stamp the immigrant visa and send you a green card. Is it alright to take 6 to 9 months to getting everything in order in your origin country and getting settled in the US? At some point they will probably start asking questions about why the long absence or are you actually living here etc. Any guidance on how long this actually is or how to mitigate these risks would be helpful.
Yes, that would be fine but you probably would want to apply for a reentry permit when you are in the U.S. to protect your green card in the event you are outside the U.S. longer than expected.
Do you see a changing trend in number applications, accepted ones or visa cancellations ?
USCIS is reporting - and we're seeing - much higher RFE and denial rates for EB1A, EB1B, and NIW green card applications and O-1 applications.
Do you get the impression this is a cause for concern for qualified applicants? Rephrased: what sort of applications are now getting denied/RFE'd that would have been fine say a couple years ago?
Anecdotes would suggest that a lot of people were able to get these visas because there was some fairly loose interpretation of the criteria.
I'm particularly interested in EB1A.
EB1As are extremely difficult to get right now. This is particularly true for non-scientific/research/academic employees who are not very highly compensated.
Small clarification on wording here (non-). Do you mean academics/researchers are finding it challenging?
For context, am postdoc and I was told by a local immigration firm, within the last year, that I had a good profile for EB1A.
Sorry for the poor wording. It's tougher for those who are not in academia or research.
While U.S. companies continue to hire lots of foreign nationals and while foreign national founders in large numbers continue to try to build businesses in the U.S., the numbers appear to be down. The recent H-1B lottery seems to confirm this. Regarding cancellations/rejections, I would say it's getting harder to get cases approved but our success rate is still high.
how much time do you spend per case? do you field calls from clients or is it a pretty hands-off, turn-key process?
The time varies significantly depending on the type of case. I am constantly on the phone with existing clients and potential clients. And we handle a lot of small and mid-sized companies so it's rarely turn-key.
My partner is a refugee due to her former homeland making her a political prisoner for advocating for democracy on the internet. Her green card was approved in 2023 and she’s been here since 2017. She works full time and has no criminal record (and doesn’t engage in activities to cause a change there).
We are not married, though that could change eif it offers meaningful protection for her. I’m a white guy born in USA. How paranoid is “reasonable” for a guy who predicted that the USA would become a fascist state in my lifetime two years ago and yet has been surprised how rapidly it’s coming true? Any advice? Thank you.
> We are not married, though that could change eif it offers meaningful protection for her.
The immigration rules for decades try detecting that transition for that purpose, as i recall. might want to look into that in case you're seriously thinking of such as a strategy.
I'm not sure what you are asking.
[dead]
Not sure if this is on topic, but:
Around 2014-2020 I feel like there were lots of companies hiring worldwide online remote.
In the last couple years it seems like the tides moved way back out, and companies are terrified of hiring remote contractors. My impression is that it seems mostly about misclassification risks, but maybe there's another part I haven't seen.
1. Is this a real risk? I've looked it up in a few areas but AFAICT misclassification is strictly about same country relations. I know there's some edge cases (like if a foreign worker isn't actually residing outside the country...) but IIUC the laws are mostly to protect the employees and government from bad companies, so as long as the company doesn't try to do that it's not an issue. The bindings of international contracts are limited and both sides know about that.
2. Is this a real trend? Do you have any idea where it comes from? My gut feeling is that Remote.io and Deel who are in this business are spreading FUD because they're in the business of selling protection. I've heard of multiple companies rejecting candidates with like "Oh Deel doesn't have a contract for your country so we can't hire you" etc. But maybe there was some big case that put everyone on their toes?
This is outside my area. All I can say is that anecdotally I still see our clients hiring remotely although often at the same time they are looking for ways to employ their remote contractors in the U.S.
[flagged]
I want to hire who I want to hire. Don't tell me who I "should" hire, that is just another form of DEI.
You can hire whoever you want - in their nation of residence.
But domiciling them in your own country implies something else entirely, and it involves social considerations far beyond the capricious nature the contract you've offered them.
In which case, those social and civic considerations become paramount.
Immigration law isn't primarily about who you can hire, it's about who will be a voting citizen of what democratic polity.
[flagged]
To help answer the question, because it's not an irresponsible argument at face value, assuming good faith:
Tech companies generally hire 'talent' not 'labour'. The people they need have specific skills and abilities, which are in short supply.
'Average Joes' are by definition not in the running for these mostly competitive opportunities.
If these companies could just hire average Joes they absolutely would.
That's not always the case - as local workers are sometimes displaced, and that could conceivably be seen an unfair. H1B for Tata etc. does overlap in this area.
By and large, if we move issues of 'culture and identity' aside, the US benefits enormously from immigrants.
Not in all aspects, but mostly.
Elon Musk, Google founders, Jensen at Nvidia, 1/2 involved in Frontier AI are 'born outside of the US'.
Those companies would probably not exist without them.
Maybe another way to think about it that the Bay Area is a 'Special International Economic Zone' hosted by the US, which is where Global HQ of many International tech companies are domiciled.
Apart from their staff, usually well over > 50% of revenues come from abroad as well, making these truly international companies.
The US gets the great benefit of hosting these mostly international organizations.
Were this an issue of regular employment, there's be a stronger case, but this is a more specific thing.
Because the numbers are small enough, there is almost zero downside for US citizens, and the companies that are created end up employing more Americans than they would otherwise. That said - locals can be priced out of these economic centres like the Bay and NYC, and that is arguably unfair.
> By and large, if we move issues of 'culture and identity' aside, the US benefits enormously from immigrants.
Yeah, but issues of culture and identity are extremely important, so important that it's farcical to exclude them when evaluating to what degree the US benefits from immigrants or deciding what immigration policy ought to be.
> Because the numbers are small enough, there is almost zero downside for US citizens, and the companies that are created end up employing more Americans than they would otherwise. That said - locals can be priced out of these economic centres like the Bay and NYC, and that is arguably unfair.
I'm from the bay area as is my entire family; and locals getting priced out by immigrants who work for tech companies basically characterizes the demographic trajectory of my hometown.
It's not 'farcical' to move issues of identity aside because most people don't think there is anything whatsoever wrong with some degree of migration from other countries, and its pragmatically 'non issue'.
It only really becomes an uncomfortable issue around 'large scale undocumented migration' - but that's a whole other separate concern, it's not within the bounds of the law, and it's not related to tech at all.
If we remove that from the equation there is only a very, very narrow scope of 'Settler Nationalists' who could claim there's an issue if 'identity' - I'm being polite by allowing an escape valve there. Rates of regular immigration to the US are 'relatively' low on the aggregate.
But more crucially - the 'identity' issue is irrelevant at least from an economic perspective.
"I'm from the bay area as is my entire family; and locals getting priced out by immigrants" - yes, this is a reasonable and fair concern, but, on the aggregate it's 'next to nothing'.
So - yes, immigration will be felt acutely by some for sure - and that's unfair and it's a moral dilemma - but on the aggregate - 'High Tech Migrants' have zero effect on the landscape of US overall. It's a small cohort.
If we want to talk 'ludicrous' - it's this ridiculously ignorant idea that somehow tech is an American phenom - it's not. It's international.
Bay Area + Tech is nothing without immigrants.
Would not exist a hugely notable tech hub.
Immigrants are a critical ingredient in everything important from founders to capital, to research, to 'filling out the ranks'.
It's not just jobs - it's entire classes of 'essential ingredients' without which - the recipe cannot work.
And without that level of inernationalism, there is no >2/3 revenues from outside US either. It's a slightly separate, but related issue.
Without immigrants the Bay would be about like the 'Research Triangle' in N Carolina, not an gigantic powerhouse.
>and locals getting priced out by immigrants who work for tech companies basically characterizes the demographic trajectory of my hometown.
That's on the locals. They are being priced out because they don't want to build any housing (NIMBYism) nor do they want to pay taxes on property (Prop 13). Don't blame immigrants for the policy failures of the bay area. These failures extend to all of CA and predate tech immigrants.
[flagged]
Sorry. Which situation?
Probably the 'current situation' which has seen a radical shift in immigration policies not seen in many decades.
All I can say is that I have seen a marked reduction in legal business immigration because it's just getting harder to get work visas or because the U.S. is viewed as inhospitable to foreign nationals.
That's a prudent and judicious take.
[dead]
[flagged]
[flagged]
[flagged]
[dead]
[flagged]
4chan is down the hall and to the left
[flagged]
[flagged]
[flagged]
[dead]
[flagged]
[flagged]
Please don't waste community time and space by posting unsubstantive comments.
Edit: Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait generally? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly, and we've already asked you more than once not to.
If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
> Please don't waste community time and space by posting unsubstantive comments.
It's a very genuine question for how an attorney deals with these businesses? There are countless examples of startups breaking the law at mass scale (Uber, etc) and getting away with it. Sorry that asking difficult questions is wasting "community space". Your own profile cites conflict as essential, is asking difficult questions not part of that?
Part of the guidelines you asked me to review is "Assume good faith." Did you assume good faith from my comment?
One of the more recent discussions here was about Medvi, which described many illegal/unethical business practices. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/02/technology/ai-billion-dol...
Other examples include Airbnb building a bot poaching listings from Craigslist, Stripe not developing appropriate internal rules to enable fraud and drug transactions, pretty much all crypto exchanges and KYC, etc.
Obviously, payment processors like Stripe do not spring into existence fully formed with mature controls. My question relates partially to how attorneys in this domain handle the risks associated with undeveloped compliance, compliance failures, as well as business models that are diametrically opposing the law.
There is an area that many startups believe is "grey" where they operate outside of legal norms, whether it's to enable growth, lack of appropriate risk controls, etc.
Here, startups may knowingly, or unknowingly break the law related to immigration in order to further their business. That's what my question relates to.
While you'd have a point if you were asking in-house counsel at one of the companies in question, you're asking an immigration attorney who works with many different companies. The few times I've tried asking independent attorneys hypotheticals about how to break the law the least, or how to skate through min-maxing the rules the way hackers want to, I've generally gotten a pretty simple answer: "Don't".
Definitely, was interested in what's been happening since the current administration's changes to immigration policy, but you're absolutely correct.
If you read the whole thread there are definitely some responses to specific questions about what's changed.
We advise them to comply with all laws.
This is a very loaded question. I’m not sure what type of answer you expect to get.
What is the most evil thing you’ve done as a lawyer? What is the most evil thing you’ve done for YC?
Do you believe skilled immigration is overall detriment or increment to the American economy?