raysaikat
05-07 11:10 AM
Thank you so much Raysaikat ! The below is the explanation for 22 C.F.R. � 62.42. Do you think it's applicable for my case ? Thanks again.
� 62.42 Transfer of program .
62.42(a)
(a) Program sponsors may, pursuant to the provisions set forth in this section, permit an exchange visitor to transfer from one designated program to another designated program.
62.42(b)
(b) The responsible officer of the program to which the exchange visitor is transferring:
(1) Shall verify the exchange visitor's visa status and program eligibility;
(2) Execute the Form DS-2019; and
(3) Secure the written release of the current sponsor.
62.42(c)
(c) Upon return of the completed Form DS-2019, the responsible officer of the program to which the exchange visitor has transferred shall provide:
(1) The exchange visitor his or her copy of the Form DS-2019; and
(2) A notification copy of such form to the Department of State.
I did read the CFR before posting my previous reply. The passage above does not define what may be construed as a transfer; it merely describes the process.
How did you move from U. of colorado to VCU?
It may be the case that defining your proposed change as "transfer" or a "new program" is up to the discretion of the international advisor at VCU, and the first time s/he considered the move as a "transfer" and s/he is considering the new/proposed change as a "new program". It may also be the case that since you are not changing the school, s/he is not defining it as a "transfer". You need to speak with the advisor at VCU and ask to explain the reason s/he is considering the new/proposed change as a "new program" instead of a "transfer", and ask him/her to refer you to the applicable legal definition language (e.g., section number in CFR).
In any case, it is the international advisor at VCU who has to approve your paperwork; so you cannot get around him/her.
� 62.42 Transfer of program .
62.42(a)
(a) Program sponsors may, pursuant to the provisions set forth in this section, permit an exchange visitor to transfer from one designated program to another designated program.
62.42(b)
(b) The responsible officer of the program to which the exchange visitor is transferring:
(1) Shall verify the exchange visitor's visa status and program eligibility;
(2) Execute the Form DS-2019; and
(3) Secure the written release of the current sponsor.
62.42(c)
(c) Upon return of the completed Form DS-2019, the responsible officer of the program to which the exchange visitor has transferred shall provide:
(1) The exchange visitor his or her copy of the Form DS-2019; and
(2) A notification copy of such form to the Department of State.
I did read the CFR before posting my previous reply. The passage above does not define what may be construed as a transfer; it merely describes the process.
How did you move from U. of colorado to VCU?
It may be the case that defining your proposed change as "transfer" or a "new program" is up to the discretion of the international advisor at VCU, and the first time s/he considered the move as a "transfer" and s/he is considering the new/proposed change as a "new program". It may also be the case that since you are not changing the school, s/he is not defining it as a "transfer". You need to speak with the advisor at VCU and ask to explain the reason s/he is considering the new/proposed change as a "new program" instead of a "transfer", and ask him/her to refer you to the applicable legal definition language (e.g., section number in CFR).
In any case, it is the international advisor at VCU who has to approve your paperwork; so you cannot get around him/her.
wallpaper Family man Will Smith and
hmehta
05-30 05:18 PM
As such there is no fix rule on who should get the visa and who shouldn't! It all depends on the Consular officer's Judjement of the case.
Can you list the documents that you sent and reason why the visa was denied?
Recently I sponsored my sister and her family to visit us in Summer of 2006. I had sent all the papers as required for applying for visitors visa. But the application was denied as consular was not satisfied.
Please suggest any ideas that could have helped in getting the visa. Since I was sponsoring her and taking full charge of her stay related expenses then why was it denied? What else is needed?
Thanks
Can you list the documents that you sent and reason why the visa was denied?
Recently I sponsored my sister and her family to visit us in Summer of 2006. I had sent all the papers as required for applying for visitors visa. But the application was denied as consular was not satisfied.
Please suggest any ideas that could have helped in getting the visa. Since I was sponsoring her and taking full charge of her stay related expenses then why was it denied? What else is needed?
Thanks
gcisadawg
09-25 02:45 PM
http://www.reason.com/images/07cf533ddb1d06350cf1ddb5942ef5ad.jpg
Enjoy
The slide is very informative and catchy. But the title could have been better. I thought of sending this to my colleagues at work. But the title
"What part of legal immigration don't you understand?" stopped me.
It could have been "Legal immigration 101" or something to that effect.
Enjoy
The slide is very informative and catchy. But the title could have been better. I thought of sending this to my colleagues at work. But the title
"What part of legal immigration don't you understand?" stopped me.
It could have been "Legal immigration 101" or something to that effect.
2011 Will Smith#39;s Just the Two of
whiteStallion
10-17 11:52 PM
If you open a company on EAD, you are eligible for any positions that pay by W2 right?
If you have an EAD, you can take up any job which pays by W2... Opening a company has nothing to do with it.
If you are opening a company and you do Corp to Corp with any other vendor or Consultancy, then they will pay your corporation...and you get paid. From your side that is business income and you can deduct your expenses.
If you have an EAD, you can take up any job which pays by W2... Opening a company has nothing to do with it.
If you are opening a company and you do Corp to Corp with any other vendor or Consultancy, then they will pay your corporation...and you get paid. From your side that is business income and you can deduct your expenses.
more...
h1b_professional
07-12 02:34 PM
I dont see any problem trying. The worst that cna happen is she doesnot help.
If anybody has contacts, please try to contact as many people in goverment as possible
If anybody has contacts, please try to contact as many people in goverment as possible
gccovet
05-16 04:15 PM
All,
Did not want to create any sensational news, but this is what I gathered from speaking to an IO. I had applied for my EAD on Jan 25th and havent received any updates. So, I called the NSC customer service and an IO informed me that I need to check back with them in another 60 days if no decision is made by that time. When I said that it would be 6 months by that time, the IO said that "that's right. Each IO has about 500 applications on their desk and it will take some time to clear these off"
Just wanted to update everyone so that all the June/July filers can file appropriately.
Again, mine could be an isolated case. So, please dont panic::))
This is going to get worse as July 07 filers (i am one of them) starts filing renewals.
Question is: Can a person currently working on EAD continue to work on EAD (renewal request filed) eventhough EAD expires? what would be the status if he/she cannot work?
GCCovet.
Did not want to create any sensational news, but this is what I gathered from speaking to an IO. I had applied for my EAD on Jan 25th and havent received any updates. So, I called the NSC customer service and an IO informed me that I need to check back with them in another 60 days if no decision is made by that time. When I said that it would be 6 months by that time, the IO said that "that's right. Each IO has about 500 applications on their desk and it will take some time to clear these off"
Just wanted to update everyone so that all the June/July filers can file appropriately.
Again, mine could be an isolated case. So, please dont panic::))
This is going to get worse as July 07 filers (i am one of them) starts filing renewals.
Question is: Can a person currently working on EAD continue to work on EAD (renewal request filed) eventhough EAD expires? what would be the status if he/she cannot work?
GCCovet.
more...
Dhundhun
11-21 04:57 PM
While going out staple all of them together and give it it Airlines.
Airline has no problem in taking any of one (valid dates or expired dates), but the moment they see more than one, they will take all and staple it together. It is sent back for records (I am not sure where/how that is maintained and what is impact of giving in bits and pieces or loosing it, while having multiples).
But my lawyer as well as airline told me clearly to give all of the I94 together.
If you lost one (even to airlines), it may be worth informing USCIS, to avoid any inconveniences later. (Note: I am not legal expert and this is not a legal advise)
Airline has no problem in taking any of one (valid dates or expired dates), but the moment they see more than one, they will take all and staple it together. It is sent back for records (I am not sure where/how that is maintained and what is impact of giving in bits and pieces or loosing it, while having multiples).
But my lawyer as well as airline told me clearly to give all of the I94 together.
If you lost one (even to airlines), it may be worth informing USCIS, to avoid any inconveniences later. (Note: I am not legal expert and this is not a legal advise)
2010 The Smith Family- Jada
rajeshalex
07-09 09:48 AM
1. check if ur H1 sal =Sal Received (considering 8k)
If sal received - 8K > H1 Sal , then its difficult for you to claim unless he has given you some hike
2 Does any of the pay checks mention any advance ?
3 If you have to return 8k, you can ask him to reduce the tax which u have paid which will be 30% So you might return 5.5K
Rajesh
If sal received - 8K > H1 Sal , then its difficult for you to claim unless he has given you some hike
2 Does any of the pay checks mention any advance ?
3 If you have to return 8k, you can ask him to reduce the tax which u have paid which will be 30% So you might return 5.5K
Rajesh
more...
a_yaja
09-13 03:14 PM
Hi pd052009,
Thank you for your help. I am just confused about one issue. I thought by porting my PD from and old EB2+ perm case to a new EB2+perm will save me time in waiting for the PD. Now you mentioned that if I port my PD from an old EB2 to a new EB2 (same category), I will not save any time. Please clarify.
Thanks.
To give you an example, consider the following:
1. From employer A, your EB2 Priority Date is July 7th, 2006 and your country of chargeability is India. Per the Oct. 2010 visa bulletin, your date is not current.
2. You change employer to employer B who files your PERM on July 17th, 2010 and you get it approved followed by I-140 approval as well (premium processing)
3. PD from second employer's EB2 GC process is July 17th, 2010 - but due to earlier approved I-140 you are able to port your PD and hence the PD on your second I-140 approval is July 7th, 2006 (assuming that the attorney asked for porting of PD).
4. From both your approved I-140 - your priority date is still July 7th, 2006. However, from Oct. 2010 visa bulletin, cut off date is May 8th, 2006. So your date is still not current. For your date to be current, the cut-off date has to be July 8th, 2010 or later.
Hope this helps.
Thank you for your help. I am just confused about one issue. I thought by porting my PD from and old EB2+ perm case to a new EB2+perm will save me time in waiting for the PD. Now you mentioned that if I port my PD from an old EB2 to a new EB2 (same category), I will not save any time. Please clarify.
Thanks.
To give you an example, consider the following:
1. From employer A, your EB2 Priority Date is July 7th, 2006 and your country of chargeability is India. Per the Oct. 2010 visa bulletin, your date is not current.
2. You change employer to employer B who files your PERM on July 17th, 2010 and you get it approved followed by I-140 approval as well (premium processing)
3. PD from second employer's EB2 GC process is July 17th, 2010 - but due to earlier approved I-140 you are able to port your PD and hence the PD on your second I-140 approval is July 7th, 2006 (assuming that the attorney asked for porting of PD).
4. From both your approved I-140 - your priority date is still July 7th, 2006. However, from Oct. 2010 visa bulletin, cut off date is May 8th, 2006. So your date is still not current. For your date to be current, the cut-off date has to be July 8th, 2010 or later.
Hope this helps.
hair will smith family photo. will
Bpositive
12-08 10:19 PM
by the way, I forgot to mention that I was in India when my GC was adjudicated on Oct 22.
At the immigration POE, I told the officer that my GC was granted while I was away. They took me to a room, I waited for 10 minutes, they checked on their system and later told me that I'm good to enter on GC. I looked at my passport where they had canceled my H1 visa and stamped LPR on the immigration stamp which stands for Legal Permanent Resident.
So, no probs returning to the U.S. I even took the liberty to stand in the GC/ citizen Q at the airport :D
That's very useful feedback....appreciate it.
At the immigration POE, I told the officer that my GC was granted while I was away. They took me to a room, I waited for 10 minutes, they checked on their system and later told me that I'm good to enter on GC. I looked at my passport where they had canceled my H1 visa and stamped LPR on the immigration stamp which stands for Legal Permanent Resident.
So, no probs returning to the U.S. I even took the liberty to stand in the GC/ citizen Q at the airport :D
That's very useful feedback....appreciate it.
more...
vicky007
05-10 12:16 PM
Sorry, the link is not working anymore.
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
hot of actor Will Smith and
marlon2006
09-14 12:30 PM
Growth could high, but economy is so small that would not necessarily make a lot of absolute difference. That said, sorry to tell you I heard that type of stories years ago when I landed in Canada in 1998. That's my personal opinion.
Good luck though.
http://www.cbc.ca/story/money/national/2006/09/14/imf-useconomy.html
Canadian economic growth to be best in G7 in 2007: IMF
Last Updated Thu, 14 Sep 2006 07:59:50 EDT
CBC News
Canada's economy is poised to grow by 3.0 per cent next year, giving it the fastest growth among the G7 countries, the International Monetary Fund said Thursday in its semi-annual World Economic Outlook.
Canada's status as a major net exporter of energy will likely be enough to insulate it from the slowdowns that the IMF is forecasting for the U.S. and Europe.
The biggest risks to the Canadian growth story next year include a "substantial" further rise in the Canadian dollar or a "sharper-than-expected" slowing of the U.S. economy, as more than 80 per cent of Canada's exports are to the U.S.
"The Canadian economy continues to perform robustly, benefiting from its strong macroeconomic policy framework and the boom in global commodity prices,'' the IMF said.
A cooling housing market is likely to trigger the slowdown in the U.S. economy next year and could weigh on the global economy as well, it said.
Growth in the United States, which was particularly strong in the first half of this year, is expected to slow from 3.4 per cent this year to 2.9 per cent in 2007, the IMF said. In April, it had projected U.S. growth next year would reach 3.3 per cent.
"The concern remains that a sharp adjustment in the housing sector would generate strong headwinds for the U.S. economy," it said.
IMF pegs China's economic growth at 10%
Citing strong growth in China, the IMF raised its global growth forecast a quarter of a percentage point to 5.1 per cent this year and 4.9 per cent in 2007. But it warned that inflationary pressures, high oil prices and a possible abrupt slowdown in the U.S. could undermine global growth.
"The balance of risks to the global outlook is slanted to the downside," said the report, released in Singapore, where the IMF and World Bank will be holding their annual meetings next week.
The Washington-based fund also suggested that further U.S. interest rate hikes might be necessary.
The U.S. Federal Reserve "faces a difficult situation of rising inflation in a slowing economy, but given the importance of keeping inflation expectations in check, some further policy tightening may still be needed," it said.
In August, the Fed decided to keep its key short-term lending rate at 5.25 per cent after 17 straight hikes back to June 2004.
The IMF said "there will be a premium on the Federal Reserve clearly communicating its policy intentions" and suggested that it state more explicitly its medium-term inflation targets.
It also said the U.S. could help reduce global imbalances by setting a more ambitious deficit reduction path and put the budget in a stronger position to respond to future economic downturns.
Japan, the world's second-largest economy, will likely grow 2.7 per cent this year on the back of solid domestic demand, but should ease next year to 2.1 per cent, the IMF said.
It also said Japan should be careful to raise interest rates gradually to avoid a "costly" re-emergence of deflation, or falling prices.
In the euro area, stronger corporate balance sheets have helped bring about increased investment, rising employment and a more balanced expansion to the 12 countries that use the common currency, the report said.
Growth would rise to 2.4 per cent in 2006 before moderating to two per cent in 2007 largely due to scheduled tax increases in Germany, the report said.
China's sizzling economy will probably steam ahead with 10 per cent growth this year and next, propelled by surging exports, but the region could be hurt if China's investment boom sours, it warned.
The IMF also urged Beijing to raise the value of its currency, the yuan, saying that would help to cut its huge global trade gap � on pace this year to surpass last year's $102 billion US � and bolster households' purchasing power.
Growth in India, emerging as Asia's other major engine, would moderate to a still robust 8.3 per cent this year and 7.3 per cent next year.
Latin American economies would continue to lag behind other emerging economies, although growth prospects have increased in the region, with expansion expected at 4.75 per cent this year and 4.25 per cent in 2007.
Inflation in advanced economies was likely to increase modestly to 2.6 per cent in 2006 but start to decline next year as the upward impetus from oil price increases eases. Emerging markets would probably also be able to contain inflation pressures, it said.
The IMF was established in 1945 to help promote the health of the world economy. It works to foster economic and financial stability, prevent crises and can aid countries in trouble.
With files from the Associated Press
Good luck though.
http://www.cbc.ca/story/money/national/2006/09/14/imf-useconomy.html
Canadian economic growth to be best in G7 in 2007: IMF
Last Updated Thu, 14 Sep 2006 07:59:50 EDT
CBC News
Canada's economy is poised to grow by 3.0 per cent next year, giving it the fastest growth among the G7 countries, the International Monetary Fund said Thursday in its semi-annual World Economic Outlook.
Canada's status as a major net exporter of energy will likely be enough to insulate it from the slowdowns that the IMF is forecasting for the U.S. and Europe.
The biggest risks to the Canadian growth story next year include a "substantial" further rise in the Canadian dollar or a "sharper-than-expected" slowing of the U.S. economy, as more than 80 per cent of Canada's exports are to the U.S.
"The Canadian economy continues to perform robustly, benefiting from its strong macroeconomic policy framework and the boom in global commodity prices,'' the IMF said.
A cooling housing market is likely to trigger the slowdown in the U.S. economy next year and could weigh on the global economy as well, it said.
Growth in the United States, which was particularly strong in the first half of this year, is expected to slow from 3.4 per cent this year to 2.9 per cent in 2007, the IMF said. In April, it had projected U.S. growth next year would reach 3.3 per cent.
"The concern remains that a sharp adjustment in the housing sector would generate strong headwinds for the U.S. economy," it said.
IMF pegs China's economic growth at 10%
Citing strong growth in China, the IMF raised its global growth forecast a quarter of a percentage point to 5.1 per cent this year and 4.9 per cent in 2007. But it warned that inflationary pressures, high oil prices and a possible abrupt slowdown in the U.S. could undermine global growth.
"The balance of risks to the global outlook is slanted to the downside," said the report, released in Singapore, where the IMF and World Bank will be holding their annual meetings next week.
The Washington-based fund also suggested that further U.S. interest rate hikes might be necessary.
The U.S. Federal Reserve "faces a difficult situation of rising inflation in a slowing economy, but given the importance of keeping inflation expectations in check, some further policy tightening may still be needed," it said.
In August, the Fed decided to keep its key short-term lending rate at 5.25 per cent after 17 straight hikes back to June 2004.
The IMF said "there will be a premium on the Federal Reserve clearly communicating its policy intentions" and suggested that it state more explicitly its medium-term inflation targets.
It also said the U.S. could help reduce global imbalances by setting a more ambitious deficit reduction path and put the budget in a stronger position to respond to future economic downturns.
Japan, the world's second-largest economy, will likely grow 2.7 per cent this year on the back of solid domestic demand, but should ease next year to 2.1 per cent, the IMF said.
It also said Japan should be careful to raise interest rates gradually to avoid a "costly" re-emergence of deflation, or falling prices.
In the euro area, stronger corporate balance sheets have helped bring about increased investment, rising employment and a more balanced expansion to the 12 countries that use the common currency, the report said.
Growth would rise to 2.4 per cent in 2006 before moderating to two per cent in 2007 largely due to scheduled tax increases in Germany, the report said.
China's sizzling economy will probably steam ahead with 10 per cent growth this year and next, propelled by surging exports, but the region could be hurt if China's investment boom sours, it warned.
The IMF also urged Beijing to raise the value of its currency, the yuan, saying that would help to cut its huge global trade gap � on pace this year to surpass last year's $102 billion US � and bolster households' purchasing power.
Growth in India, emerging as Asia's other major engine, would moderate to a still robust 8.3 per cent this year and 7.3 per cent next year.
Latin American economies would continue to lag behind other emerging economies, although growth prospects have increased in the region, with expansion expected at 4.75 per cent this year and 4.25 per cent in 2007.
Inflation in advanced economies was likely to increase modestly to 2.6 per cent in 2006 but start to decline next year as the upward impetus from oil price increases eases. Emerging markets would probably also be able to contain inflation pressures, it said.
The IMF was established in 1945 to help promote the health of the world economy. It works to foster economic and financial stability, prevent crises and can aid countries in trouble.
With files from the Associated Press
more...
house Will Smith#39;s Acting Academy
deecha
08-06 11:15 AM
My i-140 premium processing application was filed on the 22nd of June,2007 as indicated in the information below. The package & check were returned in the first week of July. A letter indicating the reason for remittance and return was that the labor cert. attached was a photocopy and not the original.
Now what does not make sense here is that the original labor was sent along with the original i140 application filed last year(in june 2006).
I called the USCIS info line and the rep. suggested that i could resend it with an explanation.
What concerns me is if i do resend it, would it be considered only after suspension of i140 premium is lifted or would it be considered as a case from last month and processed under premium.
I think you should resend the packet in with proof of prior mailing.
Now what does not make sense here is that the original labor was sent along with the original i140 application filed last year(in june 2006).
I called the USCIS info line and the rep. suggested that i could resend it with an explanation.
What concerns me is if i do resend it, would it be considered only after suspension of i140 premium is lifted or would it be considered as a case from last month and processed under premium.
I think you should resend the packet in with proof of prior mailing.
tattoo will smith family members.
m306m
06-09 11:02 AM
Transit visa is only required if you are planning to return to the US. If you are planning to go back to the country of citizenship, no trasit visa is required through Germany, London etc..
If this still a concern, there are other options. There are direct flight (Delta) from NY to Mumbai, Also you can go through Egypt (no transit visa required) or UAE, direct flight from NY to Dubai on Emirates and onward to India. Over the pacific you can fly through Japan, Indonesia, Malaysia, etc without a transit visa.
Sorry to hear about your loss. Hope things work out for you.
Some countries require transit visa like UK for even changing flight but going through Germany do not require such a visa for EAD holders, you should contact the local consulate for B-1 holders.
Hope you have filed a Police report and got the pp based on it. Very sorry for your loss, wish you recover the stolen items before leaving for India.
If this still a concern, there are other options. There are direct flight (Delta) from NY to Mumbai, Also you can go through Egypt (no transit visa required) or UAE, direct flight from NY to Dubai on Emirates and onward to India. Over the pacific you can fly through Japan, Indonesia, Malaysia, etc without a transit visa.
Sorry to hear about your loss. Hope things work out for you.
Some countries require transit visa like UK for even changing flight but going through Germany do not require such a visa for EAD holders, you should contact the local consulate for B-1 holders.
Hope you have filed a Police report and got the pp based on it. Very sorry for your loss, wish you recover the stolen items before leaving for India.
more...
pictures Pinkett Smith, Will Smith
cat555
07-09 12:20 PM
I was in a consulting field with employer taking 30% and me getting 70%.
He supposed to deduct $400 for medical insurance from my paycheck -biweekly, instead deduction was only $200. I never knew that.
My question is why not he acted immediately after knowing the error?
Why should I pay for somebody's mistake?
Am I going to get any tax benefit now?
Why not he deducted single penny in last 2 months before I left?
I didn't sign any paper to pay him back over a period neither did he come up with any plan.
All this proves that he agreed to waive off while I was working for him.
He supposed to deduct $400 for medical insurance from my paycheck -biweekly, instead deduction was only $200. I never knew that.
My question is why not he acted immediately after knowing the error?
Why should I pay for somebody's mistake?
Am I going to get any tax benefit now?
Why not he deducted single penny in last 2 months before I left?
I didn't sign any paper to pay him back over a period neither did he come up with any plan.
All this proves that he agreed to waive off while I was working for him.
dresses will smith family pictures.
aadimanav
12-20 07:08 PM
Nonsense.
...........her case got approved in mistake and doesnt want to draw attention to that fact. So she is trying to divert attention by saying "oh, we got our GC by expedite request, but I wont tell you what the expedite request was"........ problems.
If someone "doesn't want to draw attention" then why would (s)he login to and mention the Approval Date?
...........her case got approved in mistake and doesnt want to draw attention to that fact. So she is trying to divert attention by saying "oh, we got our GC by expedite request, but I wont tell you what the expedite request was"........ problems.
If someone "doesn't want to draw attention" then why would (s)he login to and mention the Approval Date?
more...
makeup will smith family pictures.
abhay
10-30 09:14 AM
Thanks Guys, I called Delhi customer support. They said not to over-write but just to go to the counter and explain the mistake to the consulate officer. Apparently even they cannot edit those fields.
girlfriend son of actor Will Smith
techbuyer77
06-20 01:13 PM
However if you also apply for EAD, then maybe you have to join the ex employer who files your 485 at least during the intial 180 days after 485 is filed, please do check with your lawyer.
Not really as GC is for future job; if 180 days have past you are ok even to change your intent even if you never worked for the first employer.
Not really as GC is for future job; if 180 days have past you are ok even to change your intent even if you never worked for the first employer.
hairstyles on Monday that Will Smith
lfadgyas
01-13 09:42 AM
Assuming (but hope not) you will be laid off:
1) If I get laid off and my employer cancels the h1b, Am i out of status?
No. First of all your employer will not cancel your H1b � i.e. as far as I know they do not have to report this. Of course as of your employment is terminated your H1B is useless since it is connected to the old employer. So in a simple way you can not use it for new employment (unless you find other employers willing to help you transfer your H1B � it is possible but probably hard to find one at this time, and I guess you need to initiate this while you are still employed�-not sure)
As far as your immigration status: since your i485 is pending you are not out of status. Unfortunately you are in an inconvenient status � if between jobs they ask for Employment verification or some other stuff and you can not proof that
i) you are working for your sponsoring company OR
ii) working for an other one (certain rules here see EAD/AC21 topics ) OR
iii) have an offer letter for some company who willing to employ you when you receive your CG
well, then you will have issues�
2) Can they cancel my approved i 140?
I believe: no they can not. They can of course report that there was some fraud and you misused them to get a GC and so on � and this case i140 will be revoked. But why would they do this? If this is a layoff situation they will not care about your h1b/labor certification � whatever. They �costsaving� and they let you go � any other thing will incur extra cost for them�
But before you go: try to get the approval letter from the company (and ALL other documents they might hold regarding your case, Copies etc.).
3) I am planning to use EAD for my next job, How much time do I have to find a new job to be in Status?
Not sure � as I mentioned before you are not out of status (until your application is pending) so in theory you can be here without a job and use your savings till you run out cash or they will request some evidence about your employment�
So in practice you need to find a job as soon as you could. If you have valid EAD it should not be an (immigration) issue.
So here it is:
-Collect your immigration papers;
-Check your EAD exp date! If it is close (120days) try to renew it with your old company right know!
-Check your AP exp date if you have one and renew it while you are employed/ apply for one if you do not have it.
-Search for a job: make sure you go by the AC21 rules (need to be same or similar job etc ).
-If you are the primary applicant do not apply for unemployment benefits (Could be that you can and will receive some benefits � but somewhere I�ve seen this warning)
-If you move: report your new address!
1) If I get laid off and my employer cancels the h1b, Am i out of status?
No. First of all your employer will not cancel your H1b � i.e. as far as I know they do not have to report this. Of course as of your employment is terminated your H1B is useless since it is connected to the old employer. So in a simple way you can not use it for new employment (unless you find other employers willing to help you transfer your H1B � it is possible but probably hard to find one at this time, and I guess you need to initiate this while you are still employed�-not sure)
As far as your immigration status: since your i485 is pending you are not out of status. Unfortunately you are in an inconvenient status � if between jobs they ask for Employment verification or some other stuff and you can not proof that
i) you are working for your sponsoring company OR
ii) working for an other one (certain rules here see EAD/AC21 topics ) OR
iii) have an offer letter for some company who willing to employ you when you receive your CG
well, then you will have issues�
2) Can they cancel my approved i 140?
I believe: no they can not. They can of course report that there was some fraud and you misused them to get a GC and so on � and this case i140 will be revoked. But why would they do this? If this is a layoff situation they will not care about your h1b/labor certification � whatever. They �costsaving� and they let you go � any other thing will incur extra cost for them�
But before you go: try to get the approval letter from the company (and ALL other documents they might hold regarding your case, Copies etc.).
3) I am planning to use EAD for my next job, How much time do I have to find a new job to be in Status?
Not sure � as I mentioned before you are not out of status (until your application is pending) so in theory you can be here without a job and use your savings till you run out cash or they will request some evidence about your employment�
So in practice you need to find a job as soon as you could. If you have valid EAD it should not be an (immigration) issue.
So here it is:
-Collect your immigration papers;
-Check your EAD exp date! If it is close (120days) try to renew it with your old company right know!
-Check your AP exp date if you have one and renew it while you are employed/ apply for one if you do not have it.
-Search for a job: make sure you go by the AC21 rules (need to be same or similar job etc ).
-If you are the primary applicant do not apply for unemployment benefits (Could be that you can and will receive some benefits � but somewhere I�ve seen this warning)
-If you move: report your new address!
meridiani.planum
04-04 01:35 AM
I just spoke with my company's attorney and she said that I shouldnt get RFE on my I-140. And just in case I get she will inform me and work with the counsel of my ported company to submit a response. Hooray....I am going. My employer is a big known MNC so the only RFE that I may get is exp letter which is very unlikely. With economy going down I dont want to wait for another 6 months for my I-140.
ok then go for it dude. Do keep us posted on how this works out, I hope you get your I-140 approved soon without an RFE..
ok then go for it dude. Do keep us posted on how this works out, I hope you get your I-140 approved soon without an RFE..
anoopraj2010
07-29 06:39 PM
Ahem.. ? :confused:
0 comments:
Post a Comment