月底回国，北京-胡志明-上海。两个星期比较短。。。每次回国都能让我兴奋不已（我想我老了，不然为什么老想着落叶归根呢）。每次出差其实都打算做一个小Clip，把遇见的人和事记录下来。这个博客的名字是冠以移民，选择和其他。了解我的朋友都知道我除了职业的关系外呢，其实更加有兴趣是了解。。。和人生许多重大的选择一样，移民任何一个国家，对于地缘性强的中国人来说，都是一个重大的决定，关乎自己，生意，家人，儿女。好像很少有外国人理解中国家长为什么会砸锅卖铁的也要把孩子送到美国了，给他们铺好路，甚至不惜50/100的投资移民。。。。有时候我们遇见客人也总是着重项目啊，申请啊这些，很少有时间和他们聊聊为什么要移民，外国有什么打动他们想要移民。相反的，在美国也总有朋友讨论关于海归还是归海的问题，好像围城，进去的人想出来，在外面的人想进去。的确这好像是个纠结不去的问题。
一边是美好的蓝天，悠闲的空气，和蔼的邻居，舒适的房子。一边是毒牛奶，高房价，呼朋唤友，小酌两盅；一边是带血的牛扒，苦涩的咖啡，黄头发蓝眼睛，一边是楼下的包子豆脑，黑麻麻的人群，拥挤的地铁，一边是民主的天空，自由的空气，一边是母亲的呼喊，隔夜的乡愁。。。
朋友们有的“百人”归了，也有没找到合适工作的，归了，有工作没办到绿卡的，忍不了，归了。各种各样的理由，各种各样的经历。论坛上对于归还是不归，吵的不可开交。也有人默默的，收拾了行李，醒来就是 - 家乡。
也有更多的人，在问：是EB5好，还是魁北克好。牛奶金是多少钱？401K是什么概念。在美国有川菜吗？我孩子能上哈佛吗？是洛杉矶好还是芝加哥好？
中国人与生俱来的地缘性决定了去到除非家乡的哪里，都是异乡。
是海归，还是归海，是个选择，如果这个选择，是让自己及身边的人，选择更多，视野更开阔，有更多的option或者有更多的机会知道这个世界还有更多的option。那么，结果到底是怎样，过程到底是怎样，是海归了，还是归海了，有那么重要吗？
聊多了。回国见！！
Showing posts with label immigration. Show all posts
Showing posts with label immigration. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
EB5 I-526 批准的新数字
就移民局新的统计来说，2012年前三个月来的526 移民签证已经批准了2364个。而去年整年的批准数额为3463个。另外可能很少有人注意到但是EB5移民签证也是有定额的（每年1万个）。是不是会有一天也会用完呢？。。。。就像07年的H-1B签证一样第一天就用完了，呵呵呵。。。
当然了，H1B每年6.5万名额。而且不用投资50/100万。
当然了，H1B每年6.5万名额。而且不用投资50/100万。
Thursday, January 19, 2012
移民局上诉办公室对于申请新区域中心“买房模式”的否决
最近移民局又公布了一个AAO（移民上诉办公室）的对于一个新区域中心申请否决的案例，全篇在这里。
这个否决再次明确了移民局对于用EB5投资买房产（不论是自住，投资还是度假房）形式的生意模式都不是满足EB5法律要求的模式（Eb5投资要“At-Risk”！老生常谈了已经)的立场。 这也不是移民局第一次否决此类区域中心申请。
否决书相关语言摘引如下：
“ the AAO affirms the director’s determination that such a real estate purchase of a private residence, even if still under construction, is not an at-risk investment of capital that can be credited with direct or indirect job creation under the employment creation program set forth at section 203(b)(5) of the Act and the implementing regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.6. The purchase of individual residential suites by alien “investors,” even if concentrated in one resort complex, is also not the type of “pooled investment” concept Congress envisioned for the regional center program. In addition, the offer in the record indicates an alien “investor’s” funds would be returned should the residence not be completed on time, even if the alien has already adjusted to conditional permanent resident status. Thus, the alien’s funds would not be at risk if the project failed or construction was delayed. ”
这个否决再次明确了移民局对于用EB5投资买房产（不论是自住，投资还是度假房）形式的生意模式都不是满足EB5法律要求的模式（Eb5投资要“At-Risk”！老生常谈了已经)的立场。 这也不是移民局第一次否决此类区域中心申请。
否决书相关语言摘引如下：
“ the AAO affirms the director’s determination that such a real estate purchase of a private residence, even if still under construction, is not an at-risk investment of capital that can be credited with direct or indirect job creation under the employment creation program set forth at section 203(b)(5) of the Act and the implementing regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.6. The purchase of individual residential suites by alien “investors,” even if concentrated in one resort complex, is also not the type of “pooled investment” concept Congress envisioned for the regional center program. In addition, the offer in the record indicates an alien “investor’s” funds would be returned should the residence not be completed on time, even if the alien has already adjusted to conditional permanent resident status. Thus, the alien’s funds would not be at risk if the project failed or construction was delayed. ”
Sunday, December 11, 2011
Top misunderstood EB-5 concepts 1: Job created by WHO - EB5 investor OR "new enterprise"??
到底是EB5投资在制造就业还是“新企业”在制造就业？？？
According to USCIS Policy Memo DRAFT (attached) (although this is currently draft under final scrutiny), it can represent USCIS’s adjudication policy and reflection the correct interpretation of law.
Under Part III. C for “the creation of jobs” of the draft memo, USCIS spelled clearly that “it is important to recognize that while the immigrant’s investment must result in the creation of jobs for qualifying employees, it is the new commercial enterprise that creates jobs” USCIS goes on and made a example of a hotel deal using bridge financing, and acknowledges that the EB5 investment can go to pay “part or all of any of these expenses”, and be credited for jobs that are created by the new hotel (which is the job creation enterprise) .
Also, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 204.6(j) where the exact language states that it is the new commercial enterprise that will create the ten jobs.
In addition, USCIS clarifies that , in line with the law and precedent case of Matter of Izummi, the EB5 investment must be made “available to the business most closely responsible for creating the jobs upon which EB5 eligibility is based”. Therefore, in the regional center context, the new commercial EB5 fund receiving enterprise does NOT have to be the job-creation entity. If this happens, then “the full amount of the capital must be first invested in the new commercial enterprise and then placed into the job creation entity”, as long as the two entities are closely related.
“when there are multiple investors in a new commercial enterprise, the total number of full-time positions created for qualifying employees will be allocated only to those immigration investors who have used the establishment of the new commercial enterprise as the basis of their entry in the EB5 Program. An allocation does not need to be made among persons not seeking classification in the EB5 program, nor an allocation need to be made among non-natural persons (such as among investing corporations)”
根据移民法律 8 C.F.R. 204.6(j) - "alien entrepreneur must be accompanied by evidence that the alien has invested or is actively in the process of investing lawfully obtained capital in a new commercial enterprise in the United States which will create full-time positions for not fewer than 10 qualifying employees....”
所以，Eb5所满足的就业是“新企业”制造的，而不仅仅是EB5的投资制造的。而这个新企业有可能接受了其他非Eb5的投资，而这些投资都可以被算作此新企业创造的就业（也就是可以全部算在EB5投资人头上）， 另外移民局也承认所有投资（EB5+非EB5）制造的就业不需要做特别区分来“allocate”那些是算在EB5投资人头上，哪些不算。。。8 C.F.R. 204.6(g)(2)
建议大家仔细研究一下USCIS最近出的Draft Memo. 在我下面的帖子里有链接
所以，Eb5所满足的就业是“新企业”制造的，而不仅仅是EB5的投资制造的。而这个新企业有可能接受了其他非Eb5的投资，而这些投资都可以被算作此新企业创造的就业（也就是可以全部算在EB5投资人头上）， 另外移民局也承认所有投资（EB5+非EB5）制造的就业不需要做特别区分来“allocate”那些是算在EB5投资人头上，哪些不算。。。8 C.F.R. 204.6(g)(2)
建议大家仔细研究一下USCIS最近出的Draft Memo. 在我下面的帖子里有链接
According to USCIS Policy Memo DRAFT (attached) (although this is currently draft under final scrutiny), it can represent USCIS’s adjudication policy and reflection the correct interpretation of law.
Under Part III. C for “the creation of jobs” of the draft memo, USCIS spelled clearly that “it is important to recognize that while the immigrant’s investment must result in the creation of jobs for qualifying employees, it is the new commercial enterprise that creates jobs” USCIS goes on and made a example of a hotel deal using bridge financing, and acknowledges that the EB5 investment can go to pay “part or all of any of these expenses”, and be credited for jobs that are created by the new hotel (which is the job creation enterprise) .
Also, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 204.6(j) where the exact language states that it is the new commercial enterprise that will create the ten jobs.
In addition, USCIS clarifies that , in line with the law and precedent case of Matter of Izummi, the EB5 investment must be made “available to the business most closely responsible for creating the jobs upon which EB5 eligibility is based”. Therefore, in the regional center context, the new commercial EB5 fund receiving enterprise does NOT have to be the job-creation entity. If this happens, then “the full amount of the capital must be first invested in the new commercial enterprise and then placed into the job creation entity”, as long as the two entities are closely related.
“when there are multiple investors in a new commercial enterprise, the total number of full-time positions created for qualifying employees will be allocated only to those immigration investors who have used the establishment of the new commercial enterprise as the basis of their entry in the EB5 Program. An allocation does not need to be made among persons not seeking classification in the EB5 program, nor an allocation need to be made among non-natural persons (such as among investing corporations)”
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Form I-924A Question and Answers posted
USCIS has developed and posted a series of Questions and Answers regarding completion of the form I-924A. The I-924A Questions and Answers can be found by clicking on Form I-924A under the Forms tab of the USCIS Web site.
Friday, December 2, 2011
关于EB5案件的批准率
在移民局公布的数据中第九页显示，2011年前三个季度的I526批准率为82%。总体收到的526申请是2608个。批准案件999个，否决案件为224个。移民局审理的案件为1223个（注意其中有一些案件是去年递交的）。因此批准率为82%。基于目前526 的审批时间为6-12个月，很多交上去的申请还没有到审理人员的桌子上，所以一些读者将999/2608得出526批准率40%的结论是不科学的。
有一些朋友和我交流说他的案件已经12个月了还一点动静也没有。我建议他可以去咨询一下项目是不是收到移民局关于项目本身的补件通知，因此申请批准进度也延长了。也有一些项目，因为移民局对项目本身还有疑问在通过补件递交更多材料后移民局更加清楚项目内容及就业计算假设和商业计划等从而得到了批准，只是时间上因为项目补件的原因使得投资人526申请批准时间延长。
有一些朋友和我交流说他的案件已经12个月了还一点动静也没有。我建议他可以去咨询一下项目是不是收到移民局关于项目本身的补件通知，因此申请批准进度也延长了。也有一些项目，因为移民局对项目本身还有疑问在通过补件递交更多材料后移民局更加清楚项目内容及就业计算假设和商业计划等从而得到了批准，只是时间上因为项目补件的原因使得投资人526申请批准时间延长。
Thursday, November 17, 2011
USCIS seeking public input on EB5 adjudication policy/美国移民局公开向公众寻求EB5审理意见
USCIS Draft Policy Memo EB5
I invite my friends who are interested please take a look of the above link and email USCIS Headquarters office to provide feedback on this engagement, areas of concern that are not currently being addressed by USCIS, or requests for additional information. Email: public.engagement@dhs.gov
我建议感兴趣的朋友们在看过移民局的意见稿后（请点击意见稿链接）积极向移民局反馈（这个草案多半是以往移民局的备忘录及案例示范，是EB5审理的红宝书），让EB5项目及审理向更健康的方向发展。移民局专供EB5公共意见信箱为public.engagement@dhs.gov
I invite my friends who are interested please take a look of the above link and email USCIS Headquarters office to provide feedback on this engagement, areas of concern that are not currently being addressed by USCIS, or requests for additional information. Email: public.engagement@dhs.gov
我建议感兴趣的朋友们在看过移民局的意见稿后（请点击意见稿链接）积极向移民局反馈（这个草案多半是以往移民局的备忘录及案例示范，是EB5审理的红宝书），让EB5项目及审理向更健康的方向发展。移民局专供EB5公共意见信箱为public.engagement@dhs.gov
Monday, November 14, 2011
买房子，能办绿卡吗？
前阵子总有朋友问我这个问题，当听到我否定的答案时他们满脸的困惑好像我瞬时间毁灭了他们的美国梦。 我只需要简单的列几条原因供各位看官自己定夺：
1. Okay，首先，在10月20号的时候。由美国参议员Senators Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., 和Mike Lee, R-Utah 提出了这样一个法案 “Visa Improvements to Stimulate International Tourism to the United States of America Act, or VISIT-USA Act” （S.1746）法案有很多内容，最被国内读者误解的部分就是在国内买50万美元的房产就可以获得绿卡。 ??? wait a minute.... 先不说这只是一个法案，我也不想在这里给大家长篇累牍的解释在美国法案（提案）变成法律需要多么复杂的立法程序（这个可以找我的法学教授Prof. Heyman)。 先说说这个法案里指的“renewable three-year resident visas”不是大家想像的绿卡！这是一个在现行法律上没有定义的签证，即不导致公民身份，也没有工作权利。不过不得不叹服Mr.Schumer and Mr. Lee的想象力及对EB-5的联想能力（50万美金投资房地产）。
2. 美国现行投资移民法律最基本的法理及Congressional Intention 是“创造就业”，万变不离其宗。如果没有为美国经济制造就业，就没有满足现行法律的要求，是无论如何不可能符合投资移民的要求的。不论是100万的项目还是50万区域中心，偏远地区或者TEA投资，都是如此。 “就业”。。。。因此，只要是投钱就能办绿卡的这种说法，如果是正确的话，也要忽略很重要的中间推理部分----- 就业是怎么满足的。。。。
3. 目前美国的政治经济环境， 明年初的总统大选，都使得任何任何关于移民改革的法案通过付出巨大的政治代价。可能吗？如果是非法移民亲属类可能还快些，sadly speaking.....
1. Okay，首先，在10月20号的时候。由美国参议员Senators Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., 和Mike Lee, R-Utah 提出了这样一个法案 “Visa Improvements to Stimulate International Tourism to the United States of America Act, or VISIT-USA Act” （S.1746）法案有很多内容，最被国内读者误解的部分就是在国内买50万美元的房产就可以获得绿卡。 ??? wait a minute.... 先不说这只是一个法案，我也不想在这里给大家长篇累牍的解释在美国法案（提案）变成法律需要多么复杂的立法程序（这个可以找我的法学教授Prof. Heyman)。 先说说这个法案里指的“renewable three-year resident visas”不是大家想像的绿卡！这是一个在现行法律上没有定义的签证，即不导致公民身份，也没有工作权利。不过不得不叹服Mr.Schumer and Mr. Lee的想象力及对EB-5的联想能力（50万美金投资房地产）。
2. 美国现行投资移民法律最基本的法理及Congressional Intention 是“创造就业”，万变不离其宗。如果没有为美国经济制造就业，就没有满足现行法律的要求，是无论如何不可能符合投资移民的要求的。不论是100万的项目还是50万区域中心，偏远地区或者TEA投资，都是如此。 “就业”。。。。因此，只要是投钱就能办绿卡的这种说法，如果是正确的话，也要忽略很重要的中间推理部分----- 就业是怎么满足的。。。。
3. 目前美国的政治经济环境， 明年初的总统大选，都使得任何任何关于移民改革的法案通过付出巨大的政治代价。可能吗？如果是非法移民亲属类可能还快些，sadly speaking.....
Saturday, November 12, 2011
To Helen
I was recently approached by few Chinese investors expressing the same feeling of great pain in selecting EB5 projects. I couldn't help but wonder "why should the pressure/punishment are rested on our innocent investors when they whole-heartedly invest half million US dollar to a US government designated regional center hoping to change the lives/dreams for themselves and the next generation. And never felt a sense of relief that they are in good hands after investing..." how much trust they had put in with the particular project to entrust their substantial investment, energy, fear, unsettled confidence, family/business future to the point to engage....
It is so not fair...
......................
I want YOU to feel a sense of relief and comfort regardless which project you choose. I sincerely wish all the best with you and your family.
It is so not fair...
Helen,
I feel sorry to hear that you have been suffering from EB5 decisions. It must involves a lot of confusion over many disarrayed information that I can relate to myself. Many times my Chinese clients come to me with the exact complicated feeling towards EB5 and its almost a love/hate feeling at the same time. I have to say that a lot of factors contribute to this feeling with majority involves investor’s sense of uncertainty and fear of being lied to for 1. Job creation and business reliability and 2. Investment repay . Also because of the un-regulated marketing practice of certain Eb5 projects, there are A LOT of bad projects out there in China market (that sells quite well I have to say). .............................
Best,
Sharon
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)