usirit
09-16 04:28 PM
I am an H1B holder.... my wife holds an H4. Her DL expired and it has been impossible to get her a renewal. On our last discussion it was brought to our attention that their could be a discrepancy between DHS data (my wife's birthday) even it shows correct in all documents printed by them and the Indiana's BMV database. Meanwhile she is holding 'Temporarily Driving Permits' (piece of paper) that expires every 30 days....
Any thoughts...
Any thoughts...
indio0617
03-09 11:09 AM
Talking about Employer hiring illegal aliens, reasonable steps for employment verification, I-9 etc..
prasadn
07-14 11:42 PM
Thanks for all the hardwork IV. I just contributed $25. Online billpay indicates it will be delivered on 07/21/2008. Confirmation no. 7YCC1-W6GYZ
Thanks,
Prasad
Thanks,
Prasad
JunRN
09-28 07:34 PM
In , it was mentioned that three weeks ago, there were still 26,000 visas available as per official reply from USCIS to an inquiry. I cannot imagine how USCIS can use up all those in just three weeks. For this reason, I believe that there will be "wild" approvals this weekend.
What makes us mad is by end-June, DOS and USCIS said that no more visas are available and made July VB unavailable. Good that there was reversal of this VB and we're able to apply.
What more can we do but "sigh". Atleast for my case, I will get the interim benefits which I badly need.
What makes us mad is by end-June, DOS and USCIS said that no more visas are available and made July VB unavailable. Good that there was reversal of this VB and we're able to apply.
What more can we do but "sigh". Atleast for my case, I will get the interim benefits which I badly need.
more...
sajidmd
07-14 02:32 PM
Immigration Voice
$ 10.00 07/18/2008 7YB4Y-4Z9FV
$ 10.00 07/18/2008 7YB4Y-4Z9FV
gg10004
03-17 11:38 PM
Just a question. Why would you file jointly if your wife doesn't work (i.e. doesn't have SSN)?
--- if you really meant to ask---
Simple answer - More standard deduction with one more dependant as wife
IRS made it mandatory to use SSN because illegal immigrants use ITIN to file taxes. This affected the legal immigrants also where ITIN is used in case of dependants who dont have work visa. If you are not legally eligible to work, you dont get SSN.
The two options left for legal immigrants are -
File separate returns one for self with ssn and another for wife using ITIN and calim one stimulus rebate for 600$
but then you get single standard deduction and your AGI is more that affects your federal and state tax.
If you do the math, its better to file a joint return and forego the stimulus rebate.
There is a catch too, if wife later gets EAD and thus SSN, you can ammend your tax return and claim the stimuls rebate
--- if you really meant to ask---
Simple answer - More standard deduction with one more dependant as wife
IRS made it mandatory to use SSN because illegal immigrants use ITIN to file taxes. This affected the legal immigrants also where ITIN is used in case of dependants who dont have work visa. If you are not legally eligible to work, you dont get SSN.
The two options left for legal immigrants are -
File separate returns one for self with ssn and another for wife using ITIN and calim one stimulus rebate for 600$
but then you get single standard deduction and your AGI is more that affects your federal and state tax.
If you do the math, its better to file a joint return and forego the stimulus rebate.
There is a catch too, if wife later gets EAD and thus SSN, you can ammend your tax return and claim the stimuls rebate
more...
ItIsNotFunny
03-05 01:23 PM
Same here my friend.
2005 & 2006, not to undermine your situation but to be honest, you guys are way behind in queue. Your cases will be touched soon but let 2001, 2002, 2003 & 2004 get some consolation first :)
2005 & 2006, not to undermine your situation but to be honest, you guys are way behind in queue. Your cases will be touched soon but let 2001, 2002, 2003 & 2004 get some consolation first :)
Lollerskater
05-01 01:58 PM
For all those who are upset with the House hearing, please take it easy. Please do not expect the hearing to discuss the details of each and every GC applicant's case. The objective of the hearing was to bring the folks involved in visa bulletins and GC processing, and make them all publically say and agree that Lofgren-Sensenbrenner bill will not flood the country with new people on the borders but at the same time since the federal agencies did not do their job properly, so it would make sense to recapture the visa numbers, and that's it.
I think that this objective was achieved pretty handsomely without much opposition. So everybody was on the same page, other than Ranking member King, whose job in such meetings is to oppose whatever the committee chair is proposing. Rep. King did not have much to say as Rep. Sensenbrenner has co-sponsored the bill. Noticeably, Rep. Gutierrez supported the bill, which means Hispanic Caucus may not oppose it either, hopefully. So it was all good.
The meeting really saddens me though. That is the extent of anyone's power to get USCIS moving? Just hinting to King that the congress is displeased?
I mean I'm pretty sure King is gonna just shrug it off. Listen to how deluded the man sounds. He thinks USCIS is doing a great job, what with all that bragging about efficiency. Obviously he doesn't realize he's standing there, in that meeting. because the efficiency he's bragging about is clearly NOT ENOUGH. In fact, it's pretty much shitty.
To make things worse, those people in there are controlling the fates of thousands of waiting applicants. And they don't even seem to know the difference btw H1 and 485.
I don't want to just go on feeding this negative train of thought. I just wish something more effective can be done. Isn't there a better solution?
I think that this objective was achieved pretty handsomely without much opposition. So everybody was on the same page, other than Ranking member King, whose job in such meetings is to oppose whatever the committee chair is proposing. Rep. King did not have much to say as Rep. Sensenbrenner has co-sponsored the bill. Noticeably, Rep. Gutierrez supported the bill, which means Hispanic Caucus may not oppose it either, hopefully. So it was all good.
The meeting really saddens me though. That is the extent of anyone's power to get USCIS moving? Just hinting to King that the congress is displeased?
I mean I'm pretty sure King is gonna just shrug it off. Listen to how deluded the man sounds. He thinks USCIS is doing a great job, what with all that bragging about efficiency. Obviously he doesn't realize he's standing there, in that meeting. because the efficiency he's bragging about is clearly NOT ENOUGH. In fact, it's pretty much shitty.
To make things worse, those people in there are controlling the fates of thousands of waiting applicants. And they don't even seem to know the difference btw H1 and 485.
I don't want to just go on feeding this negative train of thought. I just wish something more effective can be done. Isn't there a better solution?
more...
eb3_nepa
07-14 01:30 PM
Conf Number: 7YB0F-K01XZ
Thanks kevinkris
Thanks kevinkris
gk_2000
08-24 01:38 PM
I dont have any opinions on the main topic here - just wanted to chime in on this one...
Many CEOs work for $1 a year - thats just the salary component and only one side of the story. There is another side to it - stocks and options. No one gives up the stocks that they keep getting every year..infact, for many of these guys, the salary is just a drop in the bucket. Their real cash cow is the hundreds of thousands in stocks that they receive each year. Nobody gives those up. The $1 per year is mostly a publicity thing...
So this actually supports my point. There is no "loophole" to close.
I recommend my friends snathan and swissgear to avoid actions based on jealousy over people just like yourself. But hurting them you hurt yourself
Giving reds - is that the only thing you can do? Do you want more "helpful" posts from me? I wish to avoid the specifics of your arguments or rebukes, as they are not important here, so if my replies are not "helpful" then perhaps your arguments are irrelevant to begin with
Many CEOs work for $1 a year - thats just the salary component and only one side of the story. There is another side to it - stocks and options. No one gives up the stocks that they keep getting every year..infact, for many of these guys, the salary is just a drop in the bucket. Their real cash cow is the hundreds of thousands in stocks that they receive each year. Nobody gives those up. The $1 per year is mostly a publicity thing...
So this actually supports my point. There is no "loophole" to close.
I recommend my friends snathan and swissgear to avoid actions based on jealousy over people just like yourself. But hurting them you hurt yourself
Giving reds - is that the only thing you can do? Do you want more "helpful" posts from me? I wish to avoid the specifics of your arguments or rebukes, as they are not important here, so if my replies are not "helpful" then perhaps your arguments are irrelevant to begin with
more...
Struggle
09-12 07:53 PM
I was at SJ rally and it was an awesome feeling to participate and hear all the honks.
Unfortunately cannot make it to the DC rally, but have been spreading the word through emails and diggs.
Milind i have contributed $100 now.
paypal transaction id: 88886835PG920640K
Thanks for your support.
Unfortunately cannot make it to the DC rally, but have been spreading the word through emails and diggs.
Milind i have contributed $100 now.
paypal transaction id: 88886835PG920640K
Thanks for your support.
mirage
04-01 12:10 PM
It is time now we ask USCIS about this information. More than DOS or DOL it is the USCIS who has all this information in their bags like how many applications they have from high chargeability countries, of which year and which categories. So we stop predicting and be ready for the real....
With all the revenue and system they have, do you think this is so tough to streamline? I doubt.
They can, at the minimum, have the cases in sequence, process per FIFO, control PD movements logically. The minimum they can do, easily.
With all the revenue and system they have, do you think this is so tough to streamline? I doubt.
They can, at the minimum, have the cases in sequence, process per FIFO, control PD movements logically. The minimum they can do, easily.
more...
McLuvin
12-10 04:16 PM
Nothing new at all in this bulletin....
we have company !!!! - They are Projecting and we use to Predict :)
We need not start threads like... Predict Jan 2010 Bulletin and win 50$... these guys are doing the prediction/projection for us...
I thought we were the only bunch of loosers... :D
BR
we have company !!!! - They are Projecting and we use to Predict :)
We need not start threads like... Predict Jan 2010 Bulletin and win 50$... these guys are doing the prediction/projection for us...
I thought we were the only bunch of loosers... :D
BR
gjoe
10-03 04:47 PM
We have to first fight to get all visa number allocated. How?
1) Assign visa numbers to all I485 cases based on PD at the begining of each year
2) After assigning the visa number they can do the rest of the processing
3) If application is denied they can transfer the visa number to the next application in queue as per the PD
I think this is a good start and fair system which would slove some of the problem we have today.
We can work on getting the backlog eliminated seperately because this issue is going to take lot of efforts, money and politics.
1) Assign visa numbers to all I485 cases based on PD at the begining of each year
2) After assigning the visa number they can do the rest of the processing
3) If application is denied they can transfer the visa number to the next application in queue as per the PD
I think this is a good start and fair system which would slove some of the problem we have today.
We can work on getting the backlog eliminated seperately because this issue is going to take lot of efforts, money and politics.
more...
julsun
01-03 12:01 PM
I checked with NSC today regarding our AP filed on Oct 8th, 2007. I was told that they are processing September 16th right now and it would be few weeks before they get to mine.
Thanks
Thanks
eb3_nepa
07-11 10:56 AM
I am EB3-India with PD of August 2003. I am anticipating at least another 2 years. Any forward movement in any category is good news to me.
Yeah I am EB3 India June 2003 too. Not sure when our turn will come, IF at all the way things are crawling here. Sometimes I really feel there is no justice to some of the IV members on here. I wonder which is worse, the corruption in India or the bureaucracy in the USA. Atleast in India, if I would have bribed the official, I would have had the documents by now.
Yeah I am EB3 India June 2003 too. Not sure when our turn will come, IF at all the way things are crawling here. Sometimes I really feel there is no justice to some of the IV members on here. I wonder which is worse, the corruption in India or the bureaucracy in the USA. Atleast in India, if I would have bribed the official, I would have had the documents by now.
more...
lkrastogi
03-17 09:18 PM
Guys,
The H1B holder is ELIGIBLE for the stimulus package since he/she has SSN. He won't be able to claim the benefit for spouse if the spouse does not have SSN.
So just because spouse does not have SSN does not mean that the H1B holder becomes ineligible to receive the benefit. H1B will get $600 for himself/herself as long as he/she has filed IT returns.
Thanks
Not if you file a joint return
The H1B holder is ELIGIBLE for the stimulus package since he/she has SSN. He won't be able to claim the benefit for spouse if the spouse does not have SSN.
So just because spouse does not have SSN does not mean that the H1B holder becomes ineligible to receive the benefit. H1B will get $600 for himself/herself as long as he/she has filed IT returns.
Thanks
Not if you file a joint return
axp817
09-14 11:45 AM
I have to agree with SC3. PD porting from one EB category to another is a provision that falls within USCIS guidelines.
Yes, if an overwhelming number of applicants from a (more) retrogressed category port to a non (or less) retrogressed category, it 'hurts' some people.
I am EB2-I 2006 by the way, and this will hurt me as well. But I can't bash someone for utilizing to their advantage an option that is provided by the system.
And who am I kidding, if I was in their place, I would be doing the same thing.
Yes, if an overwhelming number of applicants from a (more) retrogressed category port to a non (or less) retrogressed category, it 'hurts' some people.
I am EB2-I 2006 by the way, and this will hurt me as well. But I can't bash someone for utilizing to their advantage an option that is provided by the system.
And who am I kidding, if I was in their place, I would be doing the same thing.
a1b2c3
09-10 12:39 PM
I don't know if anybody has noticed it but the dates for EB-2 for VB October 2007 was April 1, 2004 and for VB October 2008 is April 1, 2003. That is a retrogression of 1 year - not good. :mad:
And then you must have also noticed that in Dec 07, it moved to Jan 1, 02.
Jan 00 in Jan 08, U in Feb-March and then April 03 in April 07.
With due respect, I don't think what you have observed really points to anything, either way.
Eventually, EB2-I will move forward, probably next April or so. And yes, this is all good old speculation, it doesn't mean anything really.
And then you must have also noticed that in Dec 07, it moved to Jan 1, 02.
Jan 00 in Jan 08, U in Feb-March and then April 03 in April 07.
With due respect, I don't think what you have observed really points to anything, either way.
Eventually, EB2-I will move forward, probably next April or so. And yes, this is all good old speculation, it doesn't mean anything really.
perm
07-20 04:05 PM
top 20 states to MOVE IN in USA for legal immigrants
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
gsc999
03-17 09:33 PM
All tax payers are eligible(atleast mostly)
folks like Bayarea07 are plain and stupid
--
Lets not be so harsh. Bayarea07, thought he had a valid concern, although it is not true.
Did anybody notice this in the IRS communication that was sent out to taxpayers:
For taxpyers, the amount of money will be "reduced" or " completely phased out" for individuals making adjusted gross income or more than $75K ( or more than $150 if married and filing jointly).
How about that?
folks like Bayarea07 are plain and stupid
--
Lets not be so harsh. Bayarea07, thought he had a valid concern, although it is not true.
Did anybody notice this in the IRS communication that was sent out to taxpayers:
For taxpyers, the amount of money will be "reduced" or " completely phased out" for individuals making adjusted gross income or more than $75K ( or more than $150 if married and filing jointly).
How about that?
No comments:
Post a Comment