nousername
07-22 07:44 PM
No, not at all.. It is just a safety net, which one can use if they switch to EAD i.e. use AC21.
wallpaper Curly Hair Styles
shekhar10c
08-06 09:24 AM
on 2nd july itself, USCIS received 55k applications(including family) and by 27th july the no rose to 75k.
can you post a link please? I read through their press releases on their website and did not see this, must have missed it.
thanks for clarifying that.
can you post a link please? I read through their press releases on their website and did not see this, must have missed it.
thanks for clarifying that.
gc_check
06-26 03:23 PM
trying go get an answer if any one can give some insight?
Consult with you Attorney first, as this is a very rare scenario for any one to answer in the forum. Also see if you can get this addresses when you go for the actual FP, Try to carry all the documents, Passport, Driver's License, etc and the copy of the I-485/ I-765 etc where you have the correct names.
Attorney is the best source of information in this scenario. Also call USCIS and request them what needs to be done in this case. Also you can get a InfoPASS appointment and get this corrected.
Consult with you Attorney first, as this is a very rare scenario for any one to answer in the forum. Also see if you can get this addresses when you go for the actual FP, Try to carry all the documents, Passport, Driver's License, etc and the copy of the I-485/ I-765 etc where you have the correct names.
Attorney is the best source of information in this scenario. Also call USCIS and request them what needs to be done in this case. Also you can get a InfoPASS appointment and get this corrected.
2011 Medium Prom Hairstyles
ewana
02-02 11:57 PM
Hi all,
I'm currently on H1B. My wife is on a L1 visa and her company just applied for her I140/I765/I485 concurrent (under EB1). Based on the previous post, it seems that if my wife gets approved for her GC, I can piggy back anytime since we were married before she got her GC.
My question is with regards to the PD if she got approved, do I get the Priority Date for EB1 (meaning little wait) or so I need to wait months/years of delay ? Should I just instead apply for I485 after her I140 is approved so that we get our GC together. What would be the risk in case something wrong happen to her application ? would I lose my H1b? I would like to hold on to my H1B unless I'm sure I can get my GC. My H1b is not IT related so I'm not that confident to find another one in case I lose my H1b. My company is willing to sponsor my greencard, but we thought of trying the EB1 first as it is much much faster.
Thanks for all your insights.
I'm currently on H1B. My wife is on a L1 visa and her company just applied for her I140/I765/I485 concurrent (under EB1). Based on the previous post, it seems that if my wife gets approved for her GC, I can piggy back anytime since we were married before she got her GC.
My question is with regards to the PD if she got approved, do I get the Priority Date for EB1 (meaning little wait) or so I need to wait months/years of delay ? Should I just instead apply for I485 after her I140 is approved so that we get our GC together. What would be the risk in case something wrong happen to her application ? would I lose my H1b? I would like to hold on to my H1B unless I'm sure I can get my GC. My H1b is not IT related so I'm not that confident to find another one in case I lose my H1b. My company is willing to sponsor my greencard, but we thought of trying the EB1 first as it is much much faster.
Thanks for all your insights.
more...
jonty_11
08-01 01:25 PM
They dont have to process squat...in 1 month after Oct ...they dont care...
They will enjoy Xmas holidays any which way.....we r the ones who will suffer.
Sorry ...just a pessimist today.
They will enjoy Xmas holidays any which way.....we r the ones who will suffer.
Sorry ...just a pessimist today.
Ramg
11-19 06:54 PM
Is is it ok if you receive just 2 AP papers?
WHat is the difference between 2/ 3 AP papers?
Thank you.
I got only one AP paper. Is it ok to travel to India?
WHat is the difference between 2/ 3 AP papers?
Thank you.
I got only one AP paper. Is it ok to travel to India?
more...
NikNikon
May 23rd, 2005, 08:43 PM
Gary, I'm just thinking of mine which is a circular polarizer. You rotate the polarizer to achieve the desired amount of polarization. So I can rotate it one way and either darken or lighten the sky. All but your last pic looked as if it was darker on the right side which lead me to the assumption it was a circular type. There's a linear type too which I have never used so I'm not sure how it works, but I imagine it doesn't rotate (anyone?).
2010 curly prom hairstyles for
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
more...
pappu
07-14 01:50 PM
This link didn't work for me either.
try
photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7644/2582/1600/chart_alert7.11.2006.gif
try
photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7644/2582/1600/chart_alert7.11.2006.gif
hair prom hairstyles for medium
123456mg
07-29 04:16 AM
Hi there,
IV seems to be a terrific service to the immigration community. Kudos to the people who work hard to make it work.
Has anyone heard of cases where immigration lawyers have successfully petitioned on behalf of parents of a US baby (way before the age of 18) to become GC holders or citizens?
Hmmm..... good idea! Looks like you have a baby......
I do not think in any country there are such laws in place. Why don't you write it to US congress and see if it gets passed!! You will find yourself at the end of few million illegal latinos.
Good luck buddy!!
IV seems to be a terrific service to the immigration community. Kudos to the people who work hard to make it work.
Has anyone heard of cases where immigration lawyers have successfully petitioned on behalf of parents of a US baby (way before the age of 18) to become GC holders or citizens?
Hmmm..... good idea! Looks like you have a baby......
I do not think in any country there are such laws in place. Why don't you write it to US congress and see if it gets passed!! You will find yourself at the end of few million illegal latinos.
Good luck buddy!!
more...
fromnaija
07-20 04:43 PM
If your friend maintains H status, she could bring her baby back on H4 visa.
Same question. My friend is pregnant and wants to deliver the baby in India. They have filed for AoS now. Howevr they are not sure how to bring ther baby in if they deliver in India.
Same question. My friend is pregnant and wants to deliver the baby in India. They have filed for AoS now. Howevr they are not sure how to bring ther baby in if they deliver in India.
hot 2010 Short Prom Hairstyles
cox
November 25th, 2005, 03:26 PM
Thanks for the feedback, guys. Yeah, the DoF was insufficient, and that also made focusing difficult. The flower movement was irritating, and I need to learn to deal with that. I'm just getting started here. It seems that the reaction to the dark/light treatment is pretty split, maybe a little in favor of the light. I had two very different days lighting-wise, and got these contrasing shots. I kind of lean to the dark one, but they each have a different personality.
Gary, thanks for the tips. I was having a terrible time with the flower movement. I was on a tripod, remote shutter, 2.5x eyepiece and couldn't get the image crisp at smaller aperture. I finally figured out that it was small flower movements that were killing me. I moved to shallower DoF to get a faster shutter. Do you have any tips for holding the plant steady? You have some incredible shots, and must have come up with some techniques for immobilizing the flower without it showing up in the photo. I'd be grateful if you could share...
Gary, thanks for the tips. I was having a terrible time with the flower movement. I was on a tripod, remote shutter, 2.5x eyepiece and couldn't get the image crisp at smaller aperture. I finally figured out that it was small flower movements that were killing me. I moved to shallower DoF to get a faster shutter. Do you have any tips for holding the plant steady? You have some incredible shots, and must have come up with some techniques for immobilizing the flower without it showing up in the photo. I'd be grateful if you could share...
more...
house Prom hairstyle 2010.
iwantmygreen
04-22 08:29 PM
Has anybody got any experience where an approved 140 was revoked by employer. The 485 is pending.
tattoo Hairstyles for Curly Hair
sheela
08-13 04:37 PM
Go to https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/index.jsp and register as a customer from the left panel. Once you register you can enter your receipt numbers and track your case. If there is a case status update they will send you an email.
Yes, it is possible to file everything the same day.
How to get LUD without RN. Please elaborate. Also, did you get e-mail through your attorney or directly from uscis. Looking at my I-485 only e-mail address given is by law firm.
Yes, it is possible to file everything the same day.
How to get LUD without RN. Please elaborate. Also, did you get e-mail through your attorney or directly from uscis. Looking at my I-485 only e-mail address given is by law firm.
more...
pictures Curly Medium Prom Hairstyle
a_tyagi26
11-20 02:47 PM
Generally secretaries follow laws. They do not frame any regulations or have any role in it. It will be in hand of Obama's immigration appointees to push immigration.
Secretary will be responsible for DHS which involves security, FEMA etc too. I am not sure if she will be able to change a whole lot.
Secretary will be responsible for DHS which involves security, FEMA etc too. I am not sure if she will be able to change a whole lot.
dresses Fall Hairstyles with Curls
pd_recapturing
08-22 04:16 PM
i sent u a PM. Please respond, if u can.
more...
makeup prom hairstyles for curly hair
praveenuppaluri
04-08 06:29 PM
U asked 2 basic questions and we already told you ,(1) you can find the members list yourself.. and (2) why do you need the list? what are you going to do with it??
if you think your time is so precious that you don't want to answer the above.. sorry boss, be prepared to be disappointed.. again.. (may VB is just out).
This is unreal !!.
I just asked 2 basic questions AND i get reply completely irrelevant of those questions and i am the one who is being accused.
if you think your time is so precious that you don't want to answer the above.. sorry boss, be prepared to be disappointed.. again.. (may VB is just out).
This is unreal !!.
I just asked 2 basic questions AND i get reply completely irrelevant of those questions and i am the one who is being accused.
girlfriend prom hairstyles for medium
hopefulgc
09-02 11:57 AM
If this is not like a "third world" goverrnment/municipality office, then what is?
I think we all might just have to form groups of 10 people each and file group WOMs replete with reimbursement of attorney expenses.
Edit. Latest ..on my case.(with a little history) and this is hilarious.
8/21/2008 : Talk with the California Service Center (hopefully)
Me: My case has been transferred all of a sudden to California with the PD became current (on july 21, 2008), why ?
Answer: Your case has been sent back to TSC on Aug. 15th. We do not have the case any more. You can call TSC to confirm.
8/22/2008: Talk with Customer Service
Customer Service: Your case is still in California.
9/2/2008 : Info pass appointment. Talk with IO
IO: Your case is still in TSC but will be transferred to CSC soon.
I cannot believe such an organization exists in the world.
************************************************** *********************************
I think we all might just have to form groups of 10 people each and file group WOMs replete with reimbursement of attorney expenses.
Edit. Latest ..on my case.(with a little history) and this is hilarious.
8/21/2008 : Talk with the California Service Center (hopefully)
Me: My case has been transferred all of a sudden to California with the PD became current (on july 21, 2008), why ?
Answer: Your case has been sent back to TSC on Aug. 15th. We do not have the case any more. You can call TSC to confirm.
8/22/2008: Talk with Customer Service
Customer Service: Your case is still in California.
9/2/2008 : Info pass appointment. Talk with IO
IO: Your case is still in TSC but will be transferred to CSC soon.
I cannot believe such an organization exists in the world.
************************************************** *********************************
hairstyles Long Curly Prom Hairstyles
JazzByTheBay
09-08 11:49 AM
Given the demographics of the greater Seattle area in general, and Redmond in particular - I'm surprised "softies" haven't taken over the WA chapter completely... :)
Hope to see all of you in DC..
cheers!
jazz
My wife and me have joined the yahoogroups for WA chapter, We are going for the rally, how can we encourage more friends in WA state to go? I know there are people willing to sponsor, provide part of funds, help with accommodation and so on and if anyone in WA has any of these limitations, people are willing to coordinate. How do we get the point across to all Washingtonian GC sufferers or people who just filed for 485 and don't see the bleak tomorrow. How do we wake them up all up? We have so many employers here, is there something we can do to wake them up from the slumber and mirage of filing 485? I must admit, I was sleeping too until yesterday when we booked our tickets.
Hope to see all of you in DC..
cheers!
jazz
My wife and me have joined the yahoogroups for WA chapter, We are going for the rally, how can we encourage more friends in WA state to go? I know there are people willing to sponsor, provide part of funds, help with accommodation and so on and if anyone in WA has any of these limitations, people are willing to coordinate. How do we get the point across to all Washingtonian GC sufferers or people who just filed for 485 and don't see the bleak tomorrow. How do we wake them up all up? We have so many employers here, is there something we can do to wake them up from the slumber and mirage of filing 485? I must admit, I was sleeping too until yesterday when we booked our tickets.
matreen
09-05 05:40 PM
Please don't give incorrect answers.
All three corporation types (C-Corp, S-Corp, and LLC) have limited liability to its shareholders.
The main difference in these corp types are
1. How much record keeping is done
2. The way taxes are computed and filed with IRS
3. The kind of expenses allowed to deduct
4. C-Corp and LLC can carryover profits to next year(s), but S-Corp has to pass on profit (or loss) to the shareholders at the end of every calendar year.
For S-Corp, the shareholders must be Permanent Resident or US Citizen.
I have corporation of my own and this is C-Corp (due to kind of expenses I can deduct and/or write-off). I did all the incorporation work myself without any help from CPA. Incorporation is pretty straight forward and very easy. There are good books in Nolo Press on Corporate Incorporation.
____________________________________
Proud Indian American and Legal Immigrant
Thanks, nice reply.
Question: I am on EAD and inovked AC21 and working with new employer. I am planning to register a company confused which one to go with LLC or C Corp., by the way I live in California, San Jose. I heard that if you register a LLC in California every year you have to around $800 tax fee, weather you do a business or not, is it true?
If I go with C-Corp, shall I liable to $800 as well, any ideas??
What is the deference between LLC and C-Corp? I know every state has deferent laws but I would appreciate if someone can answer my questions from California state.
Thanks in advance.
All three corporation types (C-Corp, S-Corp, and LLC) have limited liability to its shareholders.
The main difference in these corp types are
1. How much record keeping is done
2. The way taxes are computed and filed with IRS
3. The kind of expenses allowed to deduct
4. C-Corp and LLC can carryover profits to next year(s), but S-Corp has to pass on profit (or loss) to the shareholders at the end of every calendar year.
For S-Corp, the shareholders must be Permanent Resident or US Citizen.
I have corporation of my own and this is C-Corp (due to kind of expenses I can deduct and/or write-off). I did all the incorporation work myself without any help from CPA. Incorporation is pretty straight forward and very easy. There are good books in Nolo Press on Corporate Incorporation.
____________________________________
Proud Indian American and Legal Immigrant
Thanks, nice reply.
Question: I am on EAD and inovked AC21 and working with new employer. I am planning to register a company confused which one to go with LLC or C Corp., by the way I live in California, San Jose. I heard that if you register a LLC in California every year you have to around $800 tax fee, weather you do a business or not, is it true?
If I go with C-Corp, shall I liable to $800 as well, any ideas??
What is the deference between LLC and C-Corp? I know every state has deferent laws but I would appreciate if someone can answer my questions from California state.
Thanks in advance.
Hermione
10-02 12:34 PM
My wife has a non-working SSN. Will she need to convert it (or apply for a new SSN) to working SSN once she starts working persuant to EAD?
Do you mean ITIN or an SSN with a statement underneath? If it is ITIN, then she would need to apply for the real SSN. If it has the statement 'Not valid for employement' then she may get one, too, it would read 'Valid for employment with USCIS authorization'.
Do you mean ITIN or an SSN with a statement underneath? If it is ITIN, then she would need to apply for the real SSN. If it has the statement 'Not valid for employement' then she may get one, too, it would read 'Valid for employment with USCIS authorization'.
No comments:
Post a Comment