They may or may not, depending on their domestic status with regards to the country of operation.
Foreign corporations, for- or non-profit can operate in the USA. But they need to register in their state of operation in the U.S. as a foreign corporation. And unless they get a determination of tax-exempt status from the IRS, they would be subject to U.S. corporate income tax with respect to their U.S. operations.
Even U.S. corporations have to register as foreign corporations to operate outside of their state of incorporation.
Ha that's a good point ;) but once you factor in opportunity cost for developers, especially ones experienced enough to write a book, it's definitely not a great choice (likely negative.)
Multiple petitions with multiple legitimate sponsors is not actually disallowed. That being said, there are few situations where a legitimate sponsor would be on-board with an applicant simultaneously filing another petition. I'm not sure if an applicant is legally (as opposed to morally) required to disclose this to sponsors. It is certainly abused all the time.
It's a tragedy of the commons. In order to have a chance against 233k other petitions, if people can get multiple petitions filed on their behalf, they would be stupid not to. Which then inflates the overall number even further.
The people it really hurts are highly qualified individuals sponsored by a single well known tech company ... like I was two years ago. Luckily I got my H1-B then and am now well on the way to a green card.
Filing multiple applications is legitimate as long as it is all the sponsors who pay the application fees. But a lot of these sponsors (ICC) do not actually pay these fees, instead they get paid by the applicants to apply H1B for them.
I fail to see the problem here under this proposal. Small companies can buy the same talent at the same price, whether it's domestically or abroad.
You seem to be arguing that small companies should have special dispensation versus large companies to circumvent immigration laws in order to lower their labor costs.
If you think small companies have a thumb on the scale, then give them a thumb on the scale. e.g. special tax incentives for hiring. And in fact small businesses do get thumbs on the scale from the government all the time. e.g. government solicitations favoring (by mandate) small and minority or female-owned businesses, SBA loans, etc. If you think they should get more, by all means argue that, but why at the expense of the US labor force?
Where do you see me arguing that smaller companies should be allowed to circumvent any immigration laws?
I simply argued that OP's proposal - which is a not a law - would put companies with scarcer funds in disadvantage against bigger companies with more money to burn. I'm all for a free market, but what the OP is proposing is a market distortion since there are a limited number of visas.
Anyhow, you do realize that H1B filling requires a certified LCA, don't you?
Hey armchair lawyer, you're wrong. You can apply for adjustment of status immediately after exchanging vows. This gives you an independent legal immigration status while the application is adjudicated; "pending adjustment." Unless you are already in removal, you're good to go. Even if you are already in removal, if you haven't actually been deported, then you can make the same application for adjustment directly to the immigration judge.
And as long as you entered the country legally (e.g. not without inspection or fraudulently), simply having being out of status is forgiven when sponsored by a US spouse, so long as there are no other bars to the application.
That said, going out of status is never a good idea. But as long as you apply while you have a valid immigration status, there is no out-of-status time period.
Anyway, OP would be advised to consult with a qualified immigration attorney rather than HN commenters.
> If you are in the United States with an expired visa, then you most likely are not eligible to apply for adjustment of status.
But the whole article, start to end, almost mirrors the above comment and contradicts most of what you said. Key question: Are you a lawyer? You implied you are but are giving legal advice which contradicts a proven law firm specialising in immigration law. You also criticised someone else for being an "armchair lawyer" (implying you're not).
> You can apply for adjustment of status immediately after exchanging vows.
"Applying" sounds great, but you are in no way granted anything while the process is on-going. In fact they very specifically recommend you avoid travelling to the US while your visa in processes, as that could result in a "misunderstanding" and them junking your visa because they believe you're living in the US already.
That's the advice I was given in person by someone at the US embassy in London. She said "make sure if you travel you, you have a return ticket, and don't take too much luggage or it could cause your application to be rejected."
> simply having being out of status is forgiven when sponsored by a US spouse, so long as there are no other bars to the application
Even though they tell you many MANY times when applying that applying from within the US without legal status will automatically get you rejected? This is the NVS and the US embassy. Where are you getting your information? Can you cite a source which proves that they forgive fiancee visa applicants for visa violations?
> That said, going out of status is never a good idea.
Why? They forgive it according to you. Kind of contradicts what you said before...
> But as long as you apply while you have a valid immigration status, there is no out-of-status time period.
Unless you apply for an extension on your OLD visa, you almost certainly will be out-of-status given how long fiancee visas take under normal circumstances.
> Anyway, OP would be advised to consult with a qualified immigration attorney rather than HN commenters.
I agree. Your comment here is full of misinformation and dangerous misinformation at that. At least the above comment is suggesting they follow the documented visa process (leaving, apply, then re-enter when it is accepted). You're proposing they ignore visa law because of some "magical" clemency you claim that fiancee visa applicants are granted.
Your advice is just dangerously terrible and wrong.
from your own link, here's the part that cplease is referring to (SPOUSES)
> Despite the general rule that people whose authorized stays have expired cannot use the adjustment of status procedure to get their green card, the following types of people may be able to stay in the United States and adjust status:
> Immediate relatives of U.S. citizens, namely their spouses, parents, and unmarried minor children (under age 21). Immediate relatives may adjust status even with an expired visa – but not if they entered the United States illegally, without a visa or other authorized form of entry.
once Synroc marries, he becomes a spouse and _should_ become eligible for adjustment of status
Having to support a panoply of marshaling standards would suck battery more, not less. I doubt XML vs. JSON vs. YAML per se makes any substantial difference in CPU usage. You might get a little mileage in going to a compact binary format and reducing data transmission, but is that worth it?
Foreign corporations, for- or non-profit can operate in the USA. But they need to register in their state of operation in the U.S. as a foreign corporation. And unless they get a determination of tax-exempt status from the IRS, they would be subject to U.S. corporate income tax with respect to their U.S. operations.
Even U.S. corporations have to register as foreign corporations to operate outside of their state of incorporation.