6 ms·

This will be gamed hard by rich people to get into the U.S. Essentially a red carpet side door if you have a slab of cash.

marcinzm 10y ago
That's nothing new, if you pay $1million (or $500k depending on the area of investment) then you can essentially get a green card as it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EB-5_visa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EB-5_visa
- clishem 10y ago
  Many other countries, such as the Netherlands, have a similar law: http://www.dutchdailynews.com/netherlands-offers-residency-to-foreigners-for-1-25-million-euro/ http://www.dutchdailynews.com/netherlands-offers-residency-t...
  - geodel 10y ago
    Interesting. It seems equivalent of USD 1.3M. I wonder if it is competitive for investors.
    - icebraining 10y ago
      Portugal has a similar system, called "Golden Visas", which is significantly cheaper. Of course, being true to this country, there's already a five year backlog due to bureaucracy and investigations into misappropriations and fraud.
franciscop 10y ago
I am not native English speaker so I might be misreading, but isn't parole meant to be for people in prison? So how does this have anything to do with getting into the U.S.? There is already something like what you are suggesting in the U.S. AFAIK, just $500k or $1M depending on the situation.
- df3 10y ago
  In this situation the parole is probably in the context of deportation proceedings.
- Finbarr 10y ago
  Parole in this case is just leave to enter the US.
- parsnipsumthing 10y ago
  Parole essentially means granting the right to enter or remain the US to an applicant who does not technically meet the conditions for the visa or status. It's usually applied on humanitarian grounds or to fill "gaps" in the immigration system [1] where there would be negative consequences. It's an attempt to soften the harsh consequences that often arise from these counterintuitive rules in a very technical legal space that is almost impossible to legislatively correct. [1] https://www.cbp.gov/travel/us-citizens/advance-parole https://www.cbp.gov/travel/us-citizens/advance-parole
- imagist 10y ago
  "Parole" refers to any situation where someone is given some trust for a period of time before they are given complete trust. It usually refers to people who get out of prison but have to check in with a parole officer for a while, but in this case it refers to immigrants being allowed into the country but having to check in with DHS.
- emilyfm 10y ago
  Parole is a term used by immigration for cases where they use their own authority to let someone in when the law doesn't quite allow it. For example in late 2000 the US government didn't get around to renewing the "visa waiver" law in time. Rather than suddenly requiring visas from everybody from the former visa waiver countries (and cause travel chaos), passports were stamped "PAROLED" for visa waiver people (mostly tourists) entering until the law was renewed. (I had a stamp like that in October 2000).
parsnipsumthing 10y ago
I doubt it. There are already 2 programs that allow rich people to immigrate by investing their own money: the EB-5 and the E-2 visa [1]. However, these visas require that people invest their own money. This visa is different because it allows investment with other people's money. It's a big change. [1] https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-through-job/green-card-through-investment https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-through-job/gree...
- hkmurakami 10y ago
  E2 is explicitly a non immigration visa. In fact you need to demonstrate your intent to NOT immigrate during your interview process.
  - parsnipsumthing 10y ago
    The E-2 is a non immigration visa without dual intent. So... just like an F-1 student visa which is a non immigration visa without dual intent. All this means in reality is that once you've come to the US and established the basis for another visa, your "intent" changes and you apply for an applicable immigration visa. People do every year with both the F-1 and the E-2 visa. However, some people prefer to reside in the US long term with non immigration status. The E-2 allows people to emigrate to the US and remain there, indefinitely renewing their E-2 visa, whilst (i) protecting their future non-US tax status, and (2) entering and exiting the US for long periods of time (as long as the business is operating successfully). This contrasts with a green card, which (i) subjects green card holders to "citizen-like" tax obligations after a specified period of time and (ii) typically requires continuous residence in the US. The continuous presence restriction would lift upon receipt of citizenship but not everyone wants (or is able) to hold dual citizenships. An E-2 is just fine for many rich people.
Finbarr 10y ago
You need to raise the money from investors with a track record of investing in high growth startups, so won't be quite as easy as writing yourself a $250k check.
- addicted 10y ago
  It would also be a stupid thing to game this rule when there already exists a separate system that allows you to write a 500k check and get a green card.
  - chrisper 10y ago
    It is not as easy as that. You need to have plans, lots of paperwork, and lots of time (about 2 years). https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/17/realestate/want-a-green-card-invest-in-real-estate.html https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/17/realestate/want-a-green-c...
    - parsnipsumthing 10y ago
      Nope. You mean you need a consultation firm that does all of this for you for a fee, of which there are many. The EB-5 is a huge site for immigration fraud and in many cases it functions as a green card-for-cash exchange. In fact, the poor foreign investors who didn't understand this are now suing state governments and associated companies because they received no returns from their investment.[1] [1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/ellensheng/2016/08/01/foreign-investors-defrauded-through-u-s-eb-5-visa-program/#5bec7db74afe http://www.forbes.com/sites/ellensheng/2016/08/01/foreign-in... Google "EB-5 fraud" for many many more cases but note that, unlike in most immigration cases, the fraud here is being perpetrated against the visa applicants, not the immigration service. There is no suggestion that they do not have the capital or that they have not received a visa, just that there are no returns.
ghufran_syed 10y ago
Those people can already do this, with better immigration benefits available: https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-through-job/green-card-through-investment https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-through-job/gree...
chatmasta 10y ago
Is that a problem? Why would we not want more rich people becoming citizens and paying US taxes on their worldwide income?
- imagist 10y ago
  Of course we would want that, but that's not what we get. The rich pay few taxes and the international rich pay even less, given they already have offshore tax havens by the nature of being from another country. Given a green card allows establishment of US companies which are exempt from some tariffs which are imposed on foreign companies, there's no reason to believe that giving the rich green cards will be a net gain for tax revenue. It is indeed sometimes a net loss.
  - friedman23 10y ago
    > The rich pay few taxes and the international rich pay even less The rich pay almost all tax.
    - shagie 10y ago
      The chart depicted in xkcd https://xkcd.com/980/ https://xkcd.com/980/ doesn't seem to agree with this. http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2015-update http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-inco... Shows the top 50% paying nearly all the taxes. That is a far cry from the rich.
      - robotresearcher 10y ago
        The data you link to shows that the top 5% income people pay 58.55% of all taxes, while the the top 50% pay 97.22%, as you indicated. So as a simple-language summary we might all agree that the rich pay a majority of the taxes, while the richer half of the country pays nearly all the taxes.
        shagie 10y ago
user837387 10y ago
So why is it so bad to have rich people relocate to your country?
- mark_edward 10y ago
  Considering the enormous benefits of moving to the US for most of the people in the world, I don't really like the idea of it being easier for the rich rather than the poor to migrate when they're already rich. For a lot of people, crossing a border and doing the exact same job can easily 5-10x real income. It's what my dad did. What I would like is a preferential option for the poor in migration policies. The positive aggregate effects of migration are well known as generally positive according to mainstream economic analysis, but the social problem is that, similar to free trade, it's a policy that creates very very invisible gains (largely unnoticeable as an individual things like marginally lower prices, marginally higher productivity) but with extremely concentrated and visible harm. The family trade is carpentry and I grew up working in it and viscerally saw being undercut by contractors using undocumented labor, so i know it's real. I just think migration doesn't have to be structured this way. I don't have even the vaguest idea of policy in this (although I'm sure there's some research I can read up on), but I think something can be done, whether via some kind of redistribution scheme, regulation, etc. to attempt to mitigate these effects by redistributing aggregate gains to those hurt hard. I watched many people develop virulent xenophobia and racism because of the issues of undocumented labor and improperly managed migration. I wish in addition to free trade treaties we could have free movement treaties without having to form some pseudo federation like the EU.
FabHK 10y ago
I doubt that rich people are trying to get into the US (and make their worldwide income subject to taxation).
- geodel 10y ago
  It depends. A rich person (multi-million range) in Delhi, a city covered with massive pollution, unbearable traffic might be much better of moving with family to US. A billionaire type might have other things to consider.
raquo 10y ago
FWIW Canada beats US out of the water on this one. You can immediately become Canadian permanent resident by merely LOANING the province of Quebec $800K for five years. At current interest rates your actual monetary loss would be ~$80K. You don't even need any qualifications. You don't even need to live in Quebec afterwards, you're free to move anywhere. Oh and you can become Canadian citizen after three years of living in Canada, although because Canada does not reliably track people at its borders you can just fake passport stamps and other stuff. Recent revelations showed that people have been doing that at massive scale.

marcinzm 10y ago

That's nothing new, if you pay $1million (or $500k depending on the area of investment) then you can essentially get a green card as it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EB-5_visa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EB-5_visa

clishem 10y ago
Many other countries, such as the Netherlands, have a similar law: http://www.dutchdailynews.com/netherlands-offers-residency-to-foreigners-for-1-25-million-euro/ http://www.dutchdailynews.com/netherlands-offers-residency-t...
- geodel 10y ago
  Interesting. It seems equivalent of USD 1.3M. I wonder if it is competitive for investors.
  - icebraining 10y ago
    Portugal has a similar system, called "Golden Visas", which is significantly cheaper. Of course, being true to this country, there's already a five year backlog due to bureaucracy and investigations into misappropriations and fraud.

franciscop 10y ago

I am not native English speaker so I might be misreading, but isn't parole meant to be for people in prison? So how does this have anything to do with getting into the U.S.? There is already something like what you are suggesting in the U.S. AFAIK, just $500k or $1M depending on the situation.

df3 10y ago
In this situation the parole is probably in the context of deportation proceedings.
Finbarr 10y ago
Parole in this case is just leave to enter the US.
parsnipsumthing 10y ago
Parole essentially means granting the right to enter or remain the US to an applicant who does not technically meet the conditions for the visa or status. It's usually applied on humanitarian grounds or to fill "gaps" in the immigration system [1] where there would be negative consequences. It's an attempt to soften the harsh consequences that often arise from these counterintuitive rules in a very technical legal space that is almost impossible to legislatively correct. [1] https://www.cbp.gov/travel/us-citizens/advance-parole https://www.cbp.gov/travel/us-citizens/advance-parole
imagist 10y ago
"Parole" refers to any situation where someone is given some trust for a period of time before they are given complete trust. It usually refers to people who get out of prison but have to check in with a parole officer for a while, but in this case it refers to immigrants being allowed into the country but having to check in with DHS.
emilyfm 10y ago
Parole is a term used by immigration for cases where they use their own authority to let someone in when the law doesn't quite allow it. For example in late 2000 the US government didn't get around to renewing the "visa waiver" law in time. Rather than suddenly requiring visas from everybody from the former visa waiver countries (and cause travel chaos), passports were stamped "PAROLED" for visa waiver people (mostly tourists) entering until the law was renewed. (I had a stamp like that in October 2000).

parsnipsumthing 10y ago

I doubt it. There are already 2 programs that allow rich people to immigrate by investing their own money: the EB-5 and the E-2 visa [1]. However, these visas require that people invest their own money. This visa is different because it allows investment with other people's money. It's a big change. [1] https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-through-job/green-card-through-investment https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-through-job/gree...

hkmurakami 10y ago
E2 is explicitly a non immigration visa. In fact you need to demonstrate your intent to NOT immigrate during your interview process.
- parsnipsumthing 10y ago
  The E-2 is a non immigration visa without dual intent. So... just like an F-1 student visa which is a non immigration visa without dual intent. All this means in reality is that once you've come to the US and established the basis for another visa, your "intent" changes and you apply for an applicable immigration visa. People do every year with both the F-1 and the E-2 visa. However, some people prefer to reside in the US long term with non immigration status. The E-2 allows people to emigrate to the US and remain there, indefinitely renewing their E-2 visa, whilst (i) protecting their future non-US tax status, and (2) entering and exiting the US for long periods of time (as long as the business is operating successfully). This contrasts with a green card, which (i) subjects green card holders to "citizen-like" tax obligations after a specified period of time and (ii) typically requires continuous residence in the US. The continuous presence restriction would lift upon receipt of citizenship but not everyone wants (or is able) to hold dual citizenships. An E-2 is just fine for many rich people.

Finbarr 10y ago

You need to raise the money from investors with a track record of investing in high growth startups, so won't be quite as easy as writing yourself a $250k check.

addicted 10y ago
It would also be a stupid thing to game this rule when there already exists a separate system that allows you to write a 500k check and get a green card.
- chrisper 10y ago
  It is not as easy as that. You need to have plans, lots of paperwork, and lots of time (about 2 years). https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/17/realestate/want-a-green-card-invest-in-real-estate.html https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/17/realestate/want-a-green-c...
  - parsnipsumthing 10y ago
    Nope. You mean you need a consultation firm that does all of this for you for a fee, of which there are many. The EB-5 is a huge site for immigration fraud and in many cases it functions as a green card-for-cash exchange. In fact, the poor foreign investors who didn't understand this are now suing state governments and associated companies because they received no returns from their investment.[1] [1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/ellensheng/2016/08/01/foreign-investors-defrauded-through-u-s-eb-5-visa-program/#5bec7db74afe http://www.forbes.com/sites/ellensheng/2016/08/01/foreign-in... Google "EB-5 fraud" for many many more cases but note that, unlike in most immigration cases, the fraud here is being perpetrated against the visa applicants, not the immigration service. There is no suggestion that they do not have the capital or that they have not received a visa, just that there are no returns.

ghufran_syed 10y ago

Those people can already do this, with better immigration benefits available: https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-through-job/green-card-through-investment https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-through-job/gree...

chatmasta 10y ago

Is that a problem? Why would we not want more rich people becoming citizens and paying US taxes on their worldwide income?

imagist 10y ago
Of course we would want that, but that's not what we get. The rich pay few taxes and the international rich pay even less, given they already have offshore tax havens by the nature of being from another country. Given a green card allows establishment of US companies which are exempt from some tariffs which are imposed on foreign companies, there's no reason to believe that giving the rich green cards will be a net gain for tax revenue. It is indeed sometimes a net loss.
- friedman23 10y ago
  > The rich pay few taxes and the international rich pay even less The rich pay almost all tax.
  - shagie 10y ago
    The chart depicted in xkcd https://xkcd.com/980/ https://xkcd.com/980/ doesn't seem to agree with this. http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2015-update http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-inco... Shows the top 50% paying nearly all the taxes. That is a far cry from the rich.
    - robotresearcher 10y ago
      The data you link to shows that the top 5% income people pay 58.55% of all taxes, while the the top 50% pay 97.22%, as you indicated. So as a simple-language summary we might all agree that the rich pay a majority of the taxes, while the richer half of the country pays nearly all the taxes.
      - shagie 10y ago

user837387 10y ago

So why is it so bad to have rich people relocate to your country?

mark_edward 10y ago
Considering the enormous benefits of moving to the US for most of the people in the world, I don't really like the idea of it being easier for the rich rather than the poor to migrate when they're already rich. For a lot of people, crossing a border and doing the exact same job can easily 5-10x real income. It's what my dad did. What I would like is a preferential option for the poor in migration policies. The positive aggregate effects of migration are well known as generally positive according to mainstream economic analysis, but the social problem is that, similar to free trade, it's a policy that creates very very invisible gains (largely unnoticeable as an individual things like marginally lower prices, marginally higher productivity) but with extremely concentrated and visible harm. The family trade is carpentry and I grew up working in it and viscerally saw being undercut by contractors using undocumented labor, so i know it's real. I just think migration doesn't have to be structured this way. I don't have even the vaguest idea of policy in this (although I'm sure there's some research I can read up on), but I think something can be done, whether via some kind of redistribution scheme, regulation, etc. to attempt to mitigate these effects by redistributing aggregate gains to those hurt hard. I watched many people develop virulent xenophobia and racism because of the issues of undocumented labor and improperly managed migration. I wish in addition to free trade treaties we could have free movement treaties without having to form some pseudo federation like the EU.

FabHK 10y ago

I doubt that rich people are trying to get into the US (and make their worldwide income subject to taxation).

geodel 10y ago
It depends. A rich person (multi-million range) in Delhi, a city covered with massive pollution, unbearable traffic might be much better of moving with family to US. A billionaire type might have other things to consider.

raquo 10y ago

FWIW Canada beats US out of the water on this one. You can immediately become Canadian permanent resident by merely LOANING the province of Quebec $800K for five years. At current interest rates your actual monetary loss would be ~$80K. You don't even need any qualifications. You don't even need to live in Quebec afterwards, you're free to move anywhere. Oh and you can become Canadian citizen after three years of living in Canada, although because Canada does not reliably track people at its borders you can just fake passport stamps and other stuff. Recent revelations showed that people have been doing that at massive scale.