RAISE Act Effects on EB-5 Visa

On August 1, 2017, an immigration bill was introduced which would significantly cut legal immigration. The bill is called the RAISE Act and it stands for Reforming American Immigration for a Strong Economy Act. Although the bill has President Trump’s support, it does not have the support of all the Republicans and so is not likely to move forward. Interestingly, the Bill would have pretty impactful consequences on the investor visa, EB-5, as well as other employment based visas.

The new system would involve a point system that would require applicants to have 30 points or higher in order to immigrate to the U.S. Investors such as the ones that were previously interested in the EB-5 program would still receive points for their investments, but the significance of those investments would now be greatly reduced. Investors would get 6 points if they invest $1.35 million in a US new commercial enterprise, and 12 points if they invest $1.8 million in a US new commercial enterprise. The difference here, besides the significant increase in investment amount, is that investors would now need to “actively manage the commercial enterprise as their primary occupation.” This means that all previously relied upon “Regional Centers” would now become more or less obsolete, as the investors would now need to be directly involved in the investment opportunity. One of the key factors contributing to the EB-5 program’s growth as a significant source of development capital is the minimal management requirement. Investors were not required to have an active management role within any of the regional centers with whom they invested in. As such, an active management requirement would significantly restrict the EB-5 program’s usefulness by limiting the program strictly to entrepreneurs as opposed to primary investors.

Again, the bill is not likely to move forward, but if it were to be successful, total immigration would likely be reduced, but illegal immigration would probably rise, likely making the economy suffer once more. If you have any questions about this newly proposed immigration bill and how it might affect you, or any other immigration related questions, please feel free to call Buda Law Group any time.

John B. Buda, Esq.

www.budalawgroup.net

office: 626-714-9472

john.buda@budalawgroup.net

1201 W. Huntington Dr. Suite 209

Arcadia, CA 91007

Trump Administration in Talks about Immigration Reduction Bill

Recent reports point to an Immigration Reduction Bill being introduced by Trump’s lawyers with GOP lawmakers. The consensus is that the Trump Administration would like to legitimately “halve” the number of legal immigrants allowed to enter the U.S. each year. If approved, the bill would reduce the number of legal immigrants allowed into the country each year from about 1 million to 500,000 by 2027. The expected push for this reform is likely to come under steep opposition from Democrats and pro-immigration Republicans who argue that immigrants add economic value.

The bill is said to be a “revised and expanded” version of the RAISE Act that Republican Senators Tom Cotton and David Perdue presented in February and discussed with the President Trump in March. The purpose of the bill stems from the arguments that allowing lower-skilled immigrants into the country hurts job prospects and greatly diminishes wages for American-born workers. In addition to wanting to restrict the overall number of legal immigrants, the bill wants to switch to a “merit-based” system in which foreigners who are granted entry either hold some form of advanced degree or can demonstrate “extraordinary ability” in their given field, similar to the requirements of the EB-1 and EB-2 visa programs.

An example of the kind of opposition this bill will face has already commenced, with research constructed by over 1,470 economists that explained that the economy benefits from immigration, describing it as “not just a good thing” but “a necessity.” Experts have warned that a crackdown on immigration could, for example, destroy the U.S. agriculture industry, whose workforce is disproportionally made up of foreigners.

If this bill affects your immigration prospects or if you have any questions, please feel free to call Buda Law Group.

Thank You,

John B. Buda, Esq.

www.budalawgroup.net

office: 626-714-7492

john.buda@budalawgroup.net

1201 W. Huntington Dr. Suite 209

Arcadia, CA 91007

Newly Revived Travel Ban and Who It Affects

Earlier last week the Supreme Court decided to partially revive the “travel ban” with one slight exception to the previous bill – individuals with “bona fide” ties to the U.S. are allowed to enter. The Supreme Court justices stated that the government could not apply this ban to people who already had well-established connections to the United States. These “connections” include employment, university admission and invitations to lecture at a College or University. Obviously this has left thousands of immigrant groups in a flurry over who can bypass the restrictions and who will be permanently barred from entering the United States. The ban will cover the following countries: Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. Further, refugees from any country in the world are prevented from entering the United States for 4 months.

The departments of State and Homeland Security issued a statement announcing that people with green cards and visas that were valid before the ban went into effect won’t be affected, and that individuals granted asylum. One of the main issues that the Trump Administration is now facing is detailing what circumstances fall under the exception announced in the travel ban. For instance, spouses (and fiancés), parents, in-laws and siblings all fall under the “close” umbrella, whereas grandparents and other family members are not.

The Department of State has said refugees who arrive in the country through July 6 will be admitted whether they can claim a connection to the U.S. or not. The department expects a 50,000 cap on refugees to be reached for the fiscal year, which ends in October.  Data from 2015 shows that there were 49,412 tourist and business visits to the U.S. by the citizens of the six countries from the travel ban. Employment and student visas that year accounted for 13,000 visits. Further, Green cards were given to 31,258 people from the nations.

If you have any questions about the newly issued travel ban and if you are affected by it, or any other immigration related questions, please feel free to call Buda Law Group any time.

John B. Buda, Esq.

www.budalawgroup.net

office: 626-714-9472

john.buda@budalawgroup.net

1201 W. Huntington Dr. Suite 209

Arcadia, CA 91007

Upcoming U.S. Congress Immigration Bills

Next week, the House will be voting on a set of immigration bills that will crack down on illegal immigration in one of the first serious attempts to carry out President Donald Trump’s promise of tougher enforcement on immigration. One of the bills promises to significantly increase penalties for immigrants who try to re-enter the United States after being deported. The bill is named after Kate Steinle, a young woman who was shot and killed in San Francisco by an immigrant who had been deported repeatedly yet returned, ultimately committing the heinous crime. Trump frequently discussed the killing on the campaign trail last year.

The next bill that the House will be voting on targets “sanctuary cities”, which are cities that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities, including the refusal to hold an immigrant in jail longer for the purpose of deportation. One of Trump’s campaign promises was to crack down on these sanctuary cities, so this is the first step being taken towards that end. The bill would toughen penalties for sanctuary cities in multiple ways, including barring grants for Homeland Security and the Justice Department for sanctuary cities that do not comply.

If you have any questions, please feel free to call Buda Law Group.

Thank You,

John B. Buda, Esq.

www.budalawgroup.net

office: 626-714-7492

john.buda@budalawgroup.net

1201 W. Huntington Dr. Suite 209

Arcadia, CA 91007

Trump Keeps DACA, Cancels DAPA

Recently the Trump administration announced that it would be continuing the Obama administration’s policy allowing Dreamers, undocumented immigrants who came to country as young children, to remain in the United States. More specifically, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which protects nearly 1 million individuals who came to the United States as children from deportation and allows them to legally work. While DACA doesn’t offer a legal immigration status, a path to citizenship and or any permanent protections, it does provide approved immigrants with a valuable work permit good for two years at a time. The protections are revocable at any time if an immigrant commits a felony or becomes a threat to public safety or national security. However, the very same day that this announcement was made, the Trump administration canceled a long-standing policy that would protect undocumented parents of U.S. citizens from deportation.

Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly revoked the ‘Deferred Action for Parents of Americans’ (DAPA) program, ensuring the policy will not be enacted in the near-future. This was one of the campaign pledges of Trump, however it contradicts the promise to also eliminate DACA. Trump called DACA unconstitutional and said he would “immediately terminate” it during the campaign. Since taking office, however, Trump has softened his tone on younger undocumented immigrants, with a larger focus on deporting individuals with criminal records. It is important to note that since the program was created by an executive order, Trump retains the power to reverse it, and DHS also announced that it “should not be interpreted as bearing any relevance on the long-term future of that program.”

If you have any questions, please feel free to call Buda Law Group.

Thank You,

John B. Buda, Esq.

www.budalawgroup.net

office: 626-714-7492

john.buda@budalawgroup.net

1201 W. Huntington Dr. Suite 209

Arcadia, CA 91007

Will the H1B Lottery System Finally Be Removed?

Very recently, Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner, Chairman of the House Judiciary Sub-committee on Immigration and Border Security and a top Republican lawmaker, wrote an article in Forbes Magazine demanding the removal of the lottery system that allocates H-1B visas, and to restore it to the original purpose of the program to bring the “best and the brightest” to the United States.  He states, “In the current system, 85,000 H-1B visas are allotted by lottery annually. If there is competition to come to the US, we should ensure we get the best and brightest, not just roll the dice and accept the results,” He further argued, “Applicants with specialized skills should be selected for specific positions, the way the program intends”, arguing that by shuffling foreign applicants through a lottery system, they empower businesses to replace qualified American workers with cheaper labor. He continues to say, “Eighty per cent of H-1B workers receive less than the median wage – this is not only a violation of the spirit of the program, but it also disadvantages American-born job seekers.”

Last month, US President Donald Trump signed an executive order for tightening the rules of the H-1B visa program to stop “visa abuses”. Trump said his administration is going to enforce ‘Hire American’ rules that are designed to protect jobs and wages of workers in the U.S., though the specifics of how this enforcement will be implemented by the Trump administration is still unclear. The executive order also calls upon the Departments of Labor, Justice, Homeland Security, and State to take action against fraud and abuse of other visa programs, including the “EB5” investment visa program. While this executive order applies broadly to all US visa programs, it only specifically addresses the problems within the H-1B visa program and demands reforms that ensure that H1-B visas are only awarded to companies that actually require highly skilled foreign workers.

There have been few major changes or strides in immigration law and reform ever since President Donald Trump has taken office, but perhaps within his first term, we will see a major change in the H-1B Visa Program and as Congressman Sensenbrenner states, the “original purpose” of the program finally fulfilled.

The Buda Law Group handles a very large volume of H1B cases annually, and is prepared for any major immigration reform to this program and others that may arise.

Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions or concerns regarding the H1B Visa Program, or any immigration issue and they will be gladly answered.

Thank You,

John B. Buda, Esq.

www.budalawgroup.net

office: 626-714-7492

john.buda@budalawgroup.net

New Department of Labor Filing Fees for Employers under New Budget Proposition

Very recently, President Trump has requested the authority to establish fees for the adjudication of labor certifications and prevailing wage requests. This request comes from a suspicion that employers seeking to hire foreign workers are not acting in the best interests of American workers. These new fees would be retained by the DOL.  By doing this, the Office of Foreign Labor Certification (OFLC), which handles PERM labor certification, LCAs for H-1B and H-1B1 and E-3 applications, H-2A and H-2B labor certifications and prevailing wage determinations, would eventually become self-funded (like the USCIS). The President’s budget proposal states that such fees would “ensure that employers proposing to bring in immigrant workers have checked to ensure that American workers cannot meet their needs and that immigrant workers are being compensated appropriately and not disadvantaging American workers.”  The underlying assumption here is that adding fees will protect American workers from displacement by foreign labor.

Regarding immigration cases that require Labor Certification, It is interesting to note that 37,000 fewer Cap H-1B cases were filed this year – down to 199,000 from 236,000 last year. In fact, this is the first time in the past five years that the number of applications has decreased rather than increase.  Also this year, the filing fee for H-1B petitions was increased by $135 from $325 to $460, and beginning last year H-1B dependent employers were obliged to pay an additional $4,000 fee.  It is possible that the fee increases have been a factor to the decrease in applications and, if so, additional Department of Labor fees may be part of the Trump administration’s general plan to attempt to reduce abuse in the H-1B and green card process. Adding DOL fees may achieve this goal, but consulting firms may simply adapt their business models and move more jobs off-shore. Since the proposed fee amounts are not yet known, there is no way to predict a negative or positive effect in the near future. The expectation is that the fees would be set by regulation.  On the plus side for employers, expedited processing fees might become available, like the “premium processing” option that I-129 and other petitions allow.

Buda Law Group is very experienced in all PERM, H1B, and E cases, and is ready to adapt to these incoming changes for your immigration petition as soon as they are announced. Feel free to contact us for more information or any questions you might have.

John B. Buda, Esq.

www.budalawgroup.net

office: 626-714-9472

john.buda@budalawgroup.net

1201 W. Huntington Dr. Suite 209

Arcadia, CA 91007

Possible Changes to the H-1B Program Create Some Uncertainty

The H-1B visa program is the popular route through which many companies sponsor highly skilled foreign workers for temporary, non-immigrant residency. The program is especially popular with technology companies, and the H-1B issue was no doubt raised during the highly publicized meeting in mid-December between President Trump and a group of tech luminaries that included the heads of Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Tesla, and Microsoft.

The inauguration of a president who is openly hostile to immigration, as well as accusations by some lawmakers that the program is being abused, suggests modifications that may reduce the quota or make approval more difficult may be in store. Concerns of this have prompted a flood of new applications, compelling the USCIS to suspend its premium service early this month, which guaranteed a decision within 15 days, although its expedited service to qualified candidates remains in effect.

President Trump has yet to reveal his plans, other than to say his administration is evaluating the H-1B program, but two members of the House of Representatives that had been working on the issue together have introduced competing legislation. Rep. Darrell Issa (R, Cal.) introduced a bill that would eliminate the masters or higher degree requirement and raise the annual salary threshold. If a company’s staff consists of more than 15% H-1B holders, it currently must attest that it was unable to hire a worker for any job that pays less than $60,000, far below the average tech salary. Representative Issa’s bill would raise that figure to $100,000 per sum, which would likely discourage some firms from sponsoring workers under the H-1B program, although critics of the bill argue companies already know how to game the attestation process.

Meanwhile, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D, Cal.) has introduced far more comprehensive legislation designed to give priority to companies that pay higher wages. The bill also sets aside a percentage of the annually allocated visas to smaller companies, raises the salary threshold discussed earlier to $132,000, and removes the cap that limits the number of allocations from a specific country, among other things.

A third bipartisan bill sponsored by Senators Chuck Grassley (R, Iowa) and Dick Durbin (D, Ill.) would eliminate the lottery system currently employed and create a system intended to give priority to foreign students educated in the United States, those with post-baccalaureate degrees, those being paid higher salaries, and those with especially valued skills. Among its many other provisions, the bill also expands the Department of Labor’s investigative powers.

One feature in common with all three bills is that they are likely to discourage some companies from sponsoring foreign workers under the H-1B program. Once the president weighs in on the issue we will have a better idea of what to expect, since Congress may well not act on the proposed bills beforehand.

John B. Buda, Esq.

www.budalawgroup.net

office: 626-714-9472

john.buda@budalawgroup.net

1201 W. Huntington Dr. Suite 209

Arcadia, CA 91007

A Change in the Law May Make it Easier to Obtain a National Interest Waiver

Ordinarily, an individual must have a job offer and then receive certification from the Department of Labor to qualify for permanent residency under the EB-2 program. The labor certification process involves an often arduous process in which the employer must demonstrate there are no qualified and available applicants to fill the position and that employing the foreign national would not adversely affect pay or working conditions for existing workers here.

An exception is made, however, if the prospective immigrant demonstrates it would be in the national interest of the United States to waive that requirement. In the past, the law followed the rather restrictive three-part test laid out in Matter of New York State Department of Transportation, requiring the person to show they are seeking employment in an area of “substantial intrinsic merit”, that the benefit of employing the individual would be “national in scope”, and that “the national interest would be adversely affected if a labor certification were required”. The ambiguous use of the term “intrinsic” and a narrow focus on geography often led to contradictory and seemingly arbitrary decisions. The third prong of the test, though, was the most problematic and difficult to overcome, resulting in many thousands of extremely talented and educated individuals being rejected when they should not have been.

A recent precedent decision from the USCIS’s Administrative Appeals Office, however, vacated the prior decision and established a much clearer test. Under the new analytical framework, the petitioner need only show their proposed endeavor has both “substantial merit and national importance”, they are “well positioned to advance the endeavor”, and “on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States” to waive the labor certification requirement. This new test is far more straightforward and should result in the USCIS granting significantly more national interest waivers.

The national interest waiver program is among our specialties at Buda Law Group. If you are a talented innovator, entrepreneur, scientist, or other exceptional individual, feel free to contact us.

John B. Buda, Esq.

www.budalawgroup.net

office: 626-714-7492

john.buda@budalawgroup.net

1201 W. Huntington Dr. Suite 209

Arcadia, CA 91007

Executive Action Denial

Obama’s Immigration Executive Action Rehearing Denied by Supreme Court

An estimated 11 million immigrants live in the United States illegally, and on the first day of its new term, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt yet another setback to the Obama Administration’s executive actions on immigration. The Court denied the Administration’s request for a rehearing on its deferred action programs for undocumented immigrants.  The denial comes months after the Supreme Court justices split 4-4 over the expansion of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and creation of the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) programs. This decision means that millions of undocumented immigrants will continue to be without legal work authorization in the United States or protection from deportation.

Obama’s plan was designed to let roughly 4 million people – those who have lived illegally in the United States at least since 2010, have no criminal record and have children who are U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents – get into a program that shields them from deportation and supplies work permits. The administration in July asked the court to take a second look at the case once it had a full complement of nine justices. The death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February left the Court without a ninth justice.

The fate of the programs may be up to the next president. Hillary Clinton supports the Obama Administration’s executive actions, while Donald Trump does not and has said he would end all of President Obama’s executive actions on immigration. It’s unclear whether Senate Republicans might reevaluate their position regarding the blockade of Obama’s nomination of a ninth justice, following the election on Nov. 8. In any case, Buda Law Group will be closely watching and providing any updates regarding recent changes to immigration policies and more.

If you have any questions, please feel free to call Buda Law Group.

Thank You,

John B. Buda, Esq.

www.budalawgroup.net

office: 626-796-1422

john.buda@budalawgroup.net

1201 W. Huntington Dr. Suite 209

Arcadia, CA 91007