alkg
08-13 08:41 PM
see the paragraph in bold letters.................
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
wallpaper Pennywise the Dancing Clown
md2003
04-05 08:36 AM
I talked to my company (i.e company A) about my decision to join company B. He provided the following explaination :
1. EB2 to EB2 porting is not possible: According to him EB3 to EB2 porting seems possible but he wasnt sure about EB2 to EB2. He needs to look into the matter. Can you please provide some more information on this...
Ans: you can port your priority date from A to B as long as i140 is not cancelled because of fraud. No problem whether it is EB2 to EB2 or Eb3 to EB2
2. Query on Ability to Pay: He said that when company files 140 for current employee who are on company payroll right now, he might get REF regarding ability to pay. At that time he has to cancel my 140 as well as number of approved 140 that are unaccounted for (i.e employee left or he didnt cancel), to prove company's ability to pay for current employees. So his argument was that it will be difficult for him to retain my 140 for next 1 year. But i believe GC is for future employment and he has to pay me the salary as per the LC. The company seems to be making good amount of profit. So i feel he is trying to hold me back by providing excuses. Or is this a valid reason ?
Ans: company 'A' may be correct. He need to cancel your i140 as soon as leave the company.It depends on employer. Some companies does some companies not.
But, i am not sure whether you can port your priority date or not if 'A' cancel your i140.
Few Attornies saying yes few saying no.
1. EB2 to EB2 porting is not possible: According to him EB3 to EB2 porting seems possible but he wasnt sure about EB2 to EB2. He needs to look into the matter. Can you please provide some more information on this...
Ans: you can port your priority date from A to B as long as i140 is not cancelled because of fraud. No problem whether it is EB2 to EB2 or Eb3 to EB2
2. Query on Ability to Pay: He said that when company files 140 for current employee who are on company payroll right now, he might get REF regarding ability to pay. At that time he has to cancel my 140 as well as number of approved 140 that are unaccounted for (i.e employee left or he didnt cancel), to prove company's ability to pay for current employees. So his argument was that it will be difficult for him to retain my 140 for next 1 year. But i believe GC is for future employment and he has to pay me the salary as per the LC. The company seems to be making good amount of profit. So i feel he is trying to hold me back by providing excuses. Or is this a valid reason ?
Ans: company 'A' may be correct. He need to cancel your i140 as soon as leave the company.It depends on employer. Some companies does some companies not.
But, i am not sure whether you can port your priority date or not if 'A' cancel your i140.
Few Attornies saying yes few saying no.
ca_immigrant
12-19 07:32 PM
This is Pat B 's broken record. He has lost all his credibility during all these years of immigrant bashing. He can write as many of them but other than red necks, no one is impressed. He is 71 years old and in couple years he will be gone. Old age brings some mental issues with it.
...lol......old age brings some mental issues....I like that ;)
take it easy folks....just ignore what Pat B@#$#@% wrote.......
only a jacka** (who probably does not want to work hard) like Pat would be worried about loosing his job to others.....
...lol......old age brings some mental issues....I like that ;)
take it easy folks....just ignore what Pat B@#$#@% wrote.......
only a jacka** (who probably does not want to work hard) like Pat would be worried about loosing his job to others.....
2011 point that clowns are
snathan
02-09 11:09 PM
Hi bkn96!!! That was a long time to wait for an MTR... Did they ever refund you for the wrongful denial??? =)
do you think they will?
do you think they will?
more...
willigetgc?
07-28 07:47 AM
India is still in my heart and love everything about her. For me the people hold the charm and since I have lost them, it is hard to consider going back... When I first came almost 15 years ago, I didn't want to stay here but now I 'can't' go back.. One of life's twisted ironies.
That's my story.
Good Luck to all those who decided to go back and good luck to those who decided to stay back.
That's my story.
Good Luck to all those who decided to go back and good luck to those who decided to stay back.
diptam
09-07 08:14 AM
Which company will create a new PERM and new I-140 for someone in this economy ? The chances of rejection are high , the audit chance is also hanging...
That was exactly my plan 2.5 years ago when i applied for my I-140 and I-485 in 2007 (PD is Mar '05 EB3) however USCIS approved my I-140 in Jan 2009 which was too late. The economy was already in deep recession with unemployment sky rocketing. If my I-140 approval would have come 6 months earlier ( before Lehmann broke) I would have pulled through a new PERM and new I-140.
Anyway , that's what i was destined so I didn't get I-140 in regular time frame. :)
If you can try for it that will make your GC faster.
That was exactly my plan 2.5 years ago when i applied for my I-140 and I-485 in 2007 (PD is Mar '05 EB3) however USCIS approved my I-140 in Jan 2009 which was too late. The economy was already in deep recession with unemployment sky rocketing. If my I-140 approval would have come 6 months earlier ( before Lehmann broke) I would have pulled through a new PERM and new I-140.
Anyway , that's what i was destined so I didn't get I-140 in regular time frame. :)
If you can try for it that will make your GC faster.
more...
sundarpn
05-29 09:51 PM
Oh I did not know that one person can send webfax for each state.
When I click that link it said "You have already sent it"
I'll check again now
When I click that link it said "You have already sent it"
I'll check again now
2010 Pennywise the Dancing Clown
black_logs
05-01 01:20 PM
You can't get an apointment for June, until you can prove you have an emergency. Also you should make your appointment at the post according to the permanent address on your passport.
Folks,
I have to visit India in June and I need to revalidate my visa that expired in April. I received my H1B extention last week, so that's no problem.
Do I have to go to one of the 4 visa application centers (mumbai, delhi, calcutta, chennai) Or can I just drop by any of the other centers (drop centers I believe, there is one in Bangalore). Website is not clear about this. There is an alluding reference in FAQ that says :
Qn: I am a returning H1-B/L-1 visa applicant, how do I apply for a revalidation?
You need to schedule an appointment for a visa interview through our website www.vfs-usa.co.in or at a visa application centre nearest to your area of residence.
Has anyone done this before? How long is it going to take? Is it similar to the drop-box that existed before?
I got an appointment in Delhi last year (7th year extention in New Delhi) But this time I can't get an appointment in any of the 4 centers.
Ganesh.
ps: I can't get appointments before June in Canada or Mexico either. :(
Folks,
I have to visit India in June and I need to revalidate my visa that expired in April. I received my H1B extention last week, so that's no problem.
Do I have to go to one of the 4 visa application centers (mumbai, delhi, calcutta, chennai) Or can I just drop by any of the other centers (drop centers I believe, there is one in Bangalore). Website is not clear about this. There is an alluding reference in FAQ that says :
Qn: I am a returning H1-B/L-1 visa applicant, how do I apply for a revalidation?
You need to schedule an appointment for a visa interview through our website www.vfs-usa.co.in or at a visa application centre nearest to your area of residence.
Has anyone done this before? How long is it going to take? Is it similar to the drop-box that existed before?
I got an appointment in Delhi last year (7th year extention in New Delhi) But this time I can't get an appointment in any of the 4 centers.
Ganesh.
ps: I can't get appointments before June in Canada or Mexico either. :(
more...
Ψ
06-09 06:51 PM
dude i have...soo many problems posting an image.....well anywayz ill keep tryin...k i try to put my sex goddess here.lllolllhttp://img62.photobucket.com/albums/v188/_azzy_/sexcopy.jpg
hair quot;Pennywise the dancing Clownquot;
kisana
04-11 10:16 PM
Sorry i keep on asking same questions again and again. I could not find any answer for that. What should I fill in "date of application" for priviously applied I-765, it should be date from EAD when they approved it or should it be the the date on which they received my application.
Also what should I fill in the
"Please provide information concerning your eligibility status"
Please suggest.
Also what should I fill in the
"Please provide information concerning your eligibility status"
Please suggest.
more...
ashkam
11-17 02:53 PM
using AP with H1B will not affect your h1b status in anyway.
Go with what roseball said ..................... 100% true
What you are saying is incorrect and not what roseball said at all. If you enter on an AP you will no longer be in H1B status. You will be in parolee status. However, you may continue to work on your H1B. Seriously folks, it's not that hard to understand.
Go with what roseball said ..................... 100% true
What you are saying is incorrect and not what roseball said at all. If you enter on an AP you will no longer be in H1B status. You will be in parolee status. However, you may continue to work on your H1B. Seriously folks, it's not that hard to understand.
hot Pennywise the dancing clown by
yabadaba
04-17 02:58 PM
the perm user manual is pretty detailed.
What happens is whenever an application is created... a case number/application number is created with T as the prefix (T-123-4567)
as soon as the information is filled out, everything is updated, all boxes are checked and the lawyer submits the form/application... the case number/app number changes to (A-123-4567 or C-123-4567) for either Atlanta or Chicago (based on where u live).
What happens is whenever an application is created... a case number/application number is created with T as the prefix (T-123-4567)
as soon as the information is filled out, everything is updated, all boxes are checked and the lawyer submits the form/application... the case number/app number changes to (A-123-4567 or C-123-4567) for either Atlanta or Chicago (based on where u live).
more...
house Pennywise the Dancing Clown
dan19
09-11 04:13 PM
Call your lawyer and get your ETA number. The 45 day letter has your ETA number.
Tell him that you would like that number to track your case using the new BEC online case status search.
Normally he should give you that number, since it is nothing harmful for him and your company.
Hi All,
I received word from my company that my 45 day letter had come in .. this is March 2005. Its more than a year and now they just seem to keep quite. If I persist they say the lawyer has not come up with anything yet.
I tried calling the lawyer but they say that nothing has come up either.
Now with all the talk about September 2007 the finish date for the BEC where do we stand. My lawyer is quiet, my employer is quite and my 6 years are getting close to complete in January 2007.
How are you guyz coping ? I am tired of waiting .. haven't gone past the first stage.
Hoping for the best.
Tell him that you would like that number to track your case using the new BEC online case status search.
Normally he should give you that number, since it is nothing harmful for him and your company.
Hi All,
I received word from my company that my 45 day letter had come in .. this is March 2005. Its more than a year and now they just seem to keep quite. If I persist they say the lawyer has not come up with anything yet.
I tried calling the lawyer but they say that nothing has come up either.
Now with all the talk about September 2007 the finish date for the BEC where do we stand. My lawyer is quiet, my employer is quite and my 6 years are getting close to complete in January 2007.
How are you guyz coping ? I am tired of waiting .. haven't gone past the first stage.
Hoping for the best.
tattoo Pennywise The Dancing Clown
PDOCT05
08-15 02:45 PM
I-140 approved at NSC
PD is OCT EB3
Thanks much for your response...I hope my checks will get cashed in next few days..
PD is OCT EB3
Thanks much for your response...I hope my checks will get cashed in next few days..
more...
pictures Pennywise the Dancing Clown
roseball
02-25 12:58 PM
I started talking to new employer about my joining and I requested for preparing PERM stuff before I join. This is the only this I want the new employer to do on behalf me before I join with him. The employer said Prevailing Wage determination takes 2 months. And the new employer mentioned that he can not do Prevailing Wage determination without joining. Is this right?
PWD has nothing to do with you joining them. All DOL does in PWD is it assigns a salary range based on the location of the job and the minimum requirements defined for the position. BTW, it is infact taking 2-3 months to get PWD these days.
PWD has nothing to do with you joining them. All DOL does in PWD is it assigns a salary range based on the location of the job and the minimum requirements defined for the position. BTW, it is infact taking 2-3 months to get PWD these days.
dresses quot;Pennywise the Dancing Clownquot;
lazycis
04-17 04:51 PM
see http://bibdaily.com/pdfs/Pegasus%203-31-08.pdf
more...
makeup Pennywise the Dancing Clown:
johny120
08-23 11:14 AM
I have a approved I-140 (Jan 2005). My PD is March 2004 and I have already filed I-485 (filed simultaneously with 140). Now I am waiting for the PD to become current for 485 approval. My 6 years on H1 will expire in March 2007. I checked with my GC lawyer and he said that since I have a approved 140 I can apply for a 3 year extension on H1 six months before the H1 expiry. I have to travel to India in Feb-March 2007 and so my questions are:
1. Can I travel to India while my H1 extension application is still pending and return to US before the current H1 expires? What will happen if the application gets approved while I am in India?
2. If I get my H1 extension approved effective April 2007 and I travel to India in Feb-March 2007 while my current H1 is still valid do I still need to get the new H1 stamped on the passport or I can enter US on the current stamped H1.
3. If none of the above is possible then can I return from India in mid-March 2007 and apply for H1 ext and still continue to stay in US if I get the receipt of H1 ext application before March 31, 2007?
Thanks in advance.
1. Can I travel to India while my H1 extension application is still pending and return to US before the current H1 expires? What will happen if the application gets approved while I am in India?
2. If I get my H1 extension approved effective April 2007 and I travel to India in Feb-March 2007 while my current H1 is still valid do I still need to get the new H1 stamped on the passport or I can enter US on the current stamped H1.
3. If none of the above is possible then can I return from India in mid-March 2007 and apply for H1 ext and still continue to stay in US if I get the receipt of H1 ext application before March 31, 2007?
Thanks in advance.
girlfriend Pennywise The Dancing Clown
NH123
10-20 05:41 PM
Its illegal to work on H4 with ITIN, you need to have SSN, why did you even mention that on the tax papers. Try to hire a good lawyer to handle your case.
Sorry for asking this here. Can somebody please tell me how can i start a new thread in this forum.Thanks
Sorry for asking this here. Can somebody please tell me how can i start a new thread in this forum.Thanks
hairstyles hot Pennywise Dancing Clown
snathan
02-23 08:13 PM
Hi,
Im from India and joined the company 4 years back as Programmer/Analyst. I have an Bachelors in Computer Science (3 Yrs) + MCA (3 Yrs) and experience of 4 years & 8 months before joining the company. The company field for GC under EB3, priority date: November 2008 and I-140 approved date: November 2009.
With nearing 9 years of experience company promoted me to Sr. Programmer/Analyst consultant and is ready to file the case in EB2.
My question:
1. My priority date from EB3 is November 6, 2008. So after approval of fresh labor for EB2, can the new I-140 for EB2 be filed with the old priority date of EB3 ?
2. Can the same company hold two I-140 for the same employee? That is keep the EB3 I-140 active and apply for EB2 I-140 till the EB2 clears/approves ?
3. The designation & job duties can be the same as that of EB3 or need to be changed.
Thanks in advance!
1. You cannot use the experience gained from the current employer...
2. You need to have MS+2 or Bachlor+5 years progressive experience before joining your current employer. You are short of 4 months for 5 years progressive experience and definitely USCIS will not appcept.
3. Also you will have tough time, if you PERM requires bachlor and you do not have four years single source degree. So its importent what the requirement on the PERM is.
So I am seeing you are going to have tough time to get EB2. But you will get the PERM approved and will face issues during I-140.
Im from India and joined the company 4 years back as Programmer/Analyst. I have an Bachelors in Computer Science (3 Yrs) + MCA (3 Yrs) and experience of 4 years & 8 months before joining the company. The company field for GC under EB3, priority date: November 2008 and I-140 approved date: November 2009.
With nearing 9 years of experience company promoted me to Sr. Programmer/Analyst consultant and is ready to file the case in EB2.
My question:
1. My priority date from EB3 is November 6, 2008. So after approval of fresh labor for EB2, can the new I-140 for EB2 be filed with the old priority date of EB3 ?
2. Can the same company hold two I-140 for the same employee? That is keep the EB3 I-140 active and apply for EB2 I-140 till the EB2 clears/approves ?
3. The designation & job duties can be the same as that of EB3 or need to be changed.
Thanks in advance!
1. You cannot use the experience gained from the current employer...
2. You need to have MS+2 or Bachlor+5 years progressive experience before joining your current employer. You are short of 4 months for 5 years progressive experience and definitely USCIS will not appcept.
3. Also you will have tough time, if you PERM requires bachlor and you do not have four years single source degree. So its importent what the requirement on the PERM is.
So I am seeing you are going to have tough time to get EB2. But you will get the PERM approved and will face issues during I-140.
frostrated
08-10 10:09 AM
frostrated & smuggymba
Thanks for ur replies....
As I am EB3 - MAY 2009....No question of I 485 soon....
thats the reason for the F1....
U said to show the intent that we leave US back....but my I 140 is approved which makes the letter of intent very contradictory (unless they dont see my papers when processing my wife's F1).
And also, see the pattern She was on B1 - H4 - F1 (all COS), this is the main concern.
Whether is the letter of intent makes them believable!!!
Regarding funds availability, We have funds equivalent to 80% of 1st year fee (which shown on I 20), AND ALSO I AM SUBMITTING AN AFFIDAVIT THAT I AM SPONSORING MY WIFE.
Frostrated: College is only giving I 20 rest of the things we have to do ourselves.
140 is on your name and not your wife's. You do not have to show that you are trying to apply for GC. Your sponsorship for your wife is coming from your status as a H1B. IT does not matter how many times you do COS. What matters is the last status you hold, which is H4. B1 to F1 might be an issue, but you dont have to worry about it as your are H4 to F1.
If college is only providing I-20, no problem. Once you get the I-20, you can apply for COS yourself. You will need to provide a copy of the I-20, ability to pay for at least the first year's of study (bank statements and a letter from the bank, your salary slips as the sponsor, a letter from your employer that you are employed by them and the pay that you are getting - dont need to have skill set like in an employment verification letter), a letter from your wife requesting transfer of status to F1 and the letter should also state that she intends to return to her country of residence (India in your case) at the completion of her studies. Make sure you do not mention about any GC related info. The moment you mention that, it raises a flag and might involve the issuance of a 221(g) - intention to immigrate to the US. A student visa is a non-immigrant intent visa and not a dual-intent visa like a H1B.
If you have any questions, send me a PM and we can discuss.
Thanks for ur replies....
As I am EB3 - MAY 2009....No question of I 485 soon....
thats the reason for the F1....
U said to show the intent that we leave US back....but my I 140 is approved which makes the letter of intent very contradictory (unless they dont see my papers when processing my wife's F1).
And also, see the pattern She was on B1 - H4 - F1 (all COS), this is the main concern.
Whether is the letter of intent makes them believable!!!
Regarding funds availability, We have funds equivalent to 80% of 1st year fee (which shown on I 20), AND ALSO I AM SUBMITTING AN AFFIDAVIT THAT I AM SPONSORING MY WIFE.
Frostrated: College is only giving I 20 rest of the things we have to do ourselves.
140 is on your name and not your wife's. You do not have to show that you are trying to apply for GC. Your sponsorship for your wife is coming from your status as a H1B. IT does not matter how many times you do COS. What matters is the last status you hold, which is H4. B1 to F1 might be an issue, but you dont have to worry about it as your are H4 to F1.
If college is only providing I-20, no problem. Once you get the I-20, you can apply for COS yourself. You will need to provide a copy of the I-20, ability to pay for at least the first year's of study (bank statements and a letter from the bank, your salary slips as the sponsor, a letter from your employer that you are employed by them and the pay that you are getting - dont need to have skill set like in an employment verification letter), a letter from your wife requesting transfer of status to F1 and the letter should also state that she intends to return to her country of residence (India in your case) at the completion of her studies. Make sure you do not mention about any GC related info. The moment you mention that, it raises a flag and might involve the issuance of a 221(g) - intention to immigrate to the US. A student visa is a non-immigrant intent visa and not a dual-intent visa like a H1B.
If you have any questions, send me a PM and we can discuss.
sundevil
06-23 04:08 PM
This is not that straight forward either. Family reunification bills also linked family based immigration to this and very likely run into the same battle between pro-business and pro-family(more so of pro-any-immigration, legal or otherwise) legislators. I spoke to an official in Sen. Cornyn's office and they were of the opinion that he might not support that bill as a whole, while he has been very pro-business STEM bill architect and is ok with the recapture of unused EB visas.
Also, at that time they did not have a plan to re-introduce STEM bill or any flavor of it.
We have a huge mountain in front of us and will need a lot of work to get any of these bills to even make it to the floor for discussion let alone pass. Ultimately that is our challenge after CIR dies (or never wakes up) to make these piece meal bills a higher priority in a sea of high priority/publicized legislations.
I take this as another posiitve.
Paves the way for the smaller bills like the family reunification (visa recapture) to be passed without the chirkuts putting stops citing a CIR is required then voting against the CIR.
Agree with u guys lets push for the family reunification bill.
Also, at that time they did not have a plan to re-introduce STEM bill or any flavor of it.
We have a huge mountain in front of us and will need a lot of work to get any of these bills to even make it to the floor for discussion let alone pass. Ultimately that is our challenge after CIR dies (or never wakes up) to make these piece meal bills a higher priority in a sea of high priority/publicized legislations.
I take this as another posiitve.
Paves the way for the smaller bills like the family reunification (visa recapture) to be passed without the chirkuts putting stops citing a CIR is required then voting against the CIR.
Agree with u guys lets push for the family reunification bill.
![[Review] NYX 'Ultimate Utopia' Palette](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi6sawIG5p3j8EbDivnQ64UmV8wm90I6AvEg1DsBS-IWu3jyBIhNHtgzoGdXV6HlDPG-lHKbjCS5JpIZvon8JjTSJN8ckkuLHdufNoOnk2pcQORnBqWEKTPuq2IZekBsro0NrOFB2Sj25my/w100/IMG_3004.JPG)
0 Yorumlar