If we want the U.S. to continue to foster global innovation and investment, we must keep the International Entrepreneur Rule. The administration is trying to cancel it.
Comment now to fight to keep the International Entrepreneur Rule alive. You don’t need to be a policy or immigration expert. We need your real-world story by June 28th.
One of the reasons DHS cited for removing the entrepreneur parole program is that other visa and green card options exist for startup founders. Among the options mentioned: the E-2 visa, E-2 National Interest Waiver green card, and EB-5 green card. However, many startup founders fail to qualify for these options.
Below you can read the comments I submitted in defense of IER. I am a Board Certified Specialist in United States Immigration and Nationality Law by the State Bar of California, Board of Legal Specialization.
Contact Us
The Alcorn Immigration Law team knows that immigration leads to innovation. Our team can help determine the best strategy that enables international entrepreneurs to achieve their personal and professional goals. Contact us to set up a strategy session.
Contact Us
The Alcorn Immigration Law team knows that immigration leads to innovation. Our team can help determine the best strategy that enables international entrepreneurs to achieve their personal and professional goals. Contact us to set up a strategy session.
***
June 20, 2018
Samantha Deshommes
Chief, Regulatory Coordination Division
Office of Policy and Strategy
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Department of Homeland Security
20 Massachusetts Ave. NW
Washington, D.C. 20529
RE: Comments in Support of International Entrepreneur Parole Program
Proposed Rule Docket No. USCIS_2015-0006
Dear Chief Deshommes,
International Entrepreneur Parole is necessary to fuel our corporate and societal growth, allow Americans to help the world reach our human and economic potential, and retain the future of global innovation within the United States now and into the future.
Background
I submit the following comments in response to the Proposed Rule Docket No. USCIS_2015-0006, issued by the Department of Homeland Security in the May 29, 2018, Federal Register, concerning Removal of International Entrepreneur Parole Program.
I am Board Certified as a Specialist in United States Immigration and Nationality Law by the State Bar of California, Board of Legal Specialization. As an immigration attorney practicing in Silicon Valley, I witness first-hand how crucial this program is to America’s future, and how we are losing out without it. I implore you to retain the International Entrepreneur Parole Program.
From my experience assisting thousands of international entrepreneurs living and working legally in the United States, I know first-hand how the odds are stacked against them. Although there are unparalleled and crucial advantages to founding a startup in Silicon Valley, such as access to capital and talent, many international founders are so fed up with our immigration system that they leave our inhospitable immigration climate to go to the welcoming arms of Canada, the UK, Australia or China to launch their companies. We are losing out on innovation, jobs for Americans, and valuable human capital due to our failing immigration policy.
Why Existing Options Fail
Entrepreneur Parole is necessary because there is a huge gap in our antiquated visa scheme. The vast majority of the time, startup founders fail to qualify for the existing immigration options, which are based on investment, talent, intracompany transferees, and employment.
Investment: Most startup founders do not qualify for an E-2 investor visa because they lack the roughly $60,000 – $200,000 of personal funds to invest their enterprise. Or, they are from India or China, which do not have E-2 treaties with the U.S.
They also fail to qualify for an EB-5 green card because they usually lack the requisite $500,000 to $1,000,000 investment. If they somehow can personally invest this capital, it is usually not enough to meet the EB-5 employment requirement of hiring ten full-time employees due to the high cost of living in Silicon Valley. Even if the founder qualifies for EB-5, the process is prohibitive, taking 2-3 years. Startup founders cannot afford to wait that long.
Talent: In my experience, startup founders are usually brilliant and educated. However, they typically have not had enough time to build the credentials to qualify for an O-1 visa or EB-1A green card for extraordinary ability. And, they cannot afford to file for patents. The EB-2 National Interest Waiver green card is also a poor fit because it lacks premium processing, takes too long, and has no nonimmigrant corollary.
Intracompany Transferee: Founders want to start their very first company in Silicon Valley and do not want to waste their precious time and energy incorporating a subsidiary in their home country. U.S. investors do not want to invest in companies abroad. Therefore, the L-1 visa for intracompany transferees does not usually make sense.
However, some founders are so desperate to eventually have a company in the U.S. that they leave here as a student to start companies abroad, and after a year of foreign employment, attempt to come back. This is a risky, last-ditch effort because many tech companies often fail to meet USCIS’ antiquated requirements for what a company should look like, so they are denied at the L-1 petition renewal stage.
Employment: If a startup founder is not employed by the startup, the founder is not eligible for an H-1B specialty occupation visa or a J-1 internship or training visa. Plus, J-1 holders are often forced to return to their home country for two years at the end of the short program.
The existing immigration schemes sorely lack options for startup founders. As a result, the U.S. misses out on new opportunities for innovation and job creation for Americans every day.
Why We Need Entrepreneur Parole
Since his first State of the Union, President Trump has emphasized the need for merit-based immigration. The International Entrepreneur Parole Program is a merit-based program: It allows foreign entrepreneurs who have already formed companies, secured investments from U.S. venture capitalists, and created jobs for American workers, to continue innovating and contributing to the U.S. economy.
Of course, there is room for improvement. Ideally, there should be increased deference to the opinions of investors on the merits of the startup because these investors have skin in the game. We also need a visa for startup founders to travel internationally, and a path to a green card. However, the Department of Homeland Security should retain entrepreneur parole until Congress has created a startup visa program.
The U.S. should welcome brilliant founders. I hear complaints about our broken system from venture capitalists, angel investors, and startup founders all the time. Recently a founder told me, “Look, if I’m finding a way to create an amazing new technology, for which I’m going to raise five to ten million dollars. I don’t want it to be immigration that gets in my way.”
Foreign entrepreneurs create some of the fastest growing, highest valuation companies in the world. In doing so, they generate the most direct and indirect jobs in the U.S. Each company founded by an immigrant created an average of 760 jobs, according to a 2016 report by the National Foundation for American Policy. That report also found that immigrants started more than half of America’s privately-held startups valued at $1 billion or more.
We want the U.S. to continue to lead in global innovation and investment. Therefore, we must retain the International Entrepreneur Parole.
Sincerely,
Sophie M. Alcorn
Attorney at Law
Board Certified Specialist
United States Immigration and Nationality Law
State Bar of California, Board of Legal Specialization
Founding Attorney
Alcorn Immigration Law
