H-1B visas in IT.

[some_al_fan]

Again. Don't care about the foreigner. Don't care a lick.
If that is unacceptable to the foreigner, then I would invite him to not accept it.
And to avoid any confusion, I would charge the same amount of social security, but I would characterize it as a surcharge so there is no attempt later by the foreigner to make claim against the US government. Call is a "stick it to the foreigner" charge.

Please read the doc. It is not about foreigners, but about US citizens, working abroad for US corporations and not being taxed to pay into retirement funds in these foreign countries in exchange for the US not taxing citizens of these countries.
Do you not care about US citizens?

 

[75thru79]

Please read the doc. It is not about foreigners, but about US citizens, working aboard for US corporations and not being taxed to pay to retirement funds at these foreign countries in exchange for US not taxing citizens of these countries
Do you not care about US citizens?

I don't know what doc you are referring to. The entire thread is about international visas given to people to work in the US and the specific post(s) you responded to is about the F-1 visa in particular and how they don't pay US payroll taxes. No one is talking about US students working abroad.

 

[some_al_fan]

I don't know what doc you are referring to. The entire thread is about international visas given to people to work in the US and the specific post(s) you responded to is about the F-1 visa in particular and how they don't pay US payroll taxes. No one is talking about US students working abroad.

View attachment 52302

I am referring to this doc: https://www.ssa.gov/international/a...=The aim of all U.S.,a set of objective rules

International students on F-1 from the countries on that list should not be paying FICA, since we have bilateral agreements with these countries.

 

[75thru79]

I am referring to this doc: https://www.ssa.gov/international/agreements_overview.html#:~:text=The aim of all U.S.,a set of objective rules

International students on F-1 from the countries on that list should not be paying FICA, since we have bilateral agreements with these countries.

With all due respect, we are talking about what should be done, not what is actually being done.

 

[some_al_fan]

With all due respect, we are talking about what should be done, not what is actually being done.

I am also talking about that.
And that means that if we start collecting FICA from foreigners (F-1 visa holders are considered “foreigners”), then foreign countries will start collecting retirement taxes from US citizens working abroad.

 

[75thru79]

I am also talking about that.
And that means that if we start collecting FICA from foreigners (F-1 visa holders are considered “foreigners”), then foreign countries will start collecting retirement taxes from US citizens working abroad.

That's fine. I don't have exact figures but I would suspect that the total payroll for F-1 visa holders in the US dwarfs that of US visa holders in foreign countries. I realize we can't tax foreigners because of this agreement but laws/agreements can be changed.....

 

[CrimsonJazz]

Again. Don't care about the foreigner. Don't care a lick.
If that is unacceptable to the foreigner, then I would invite him to not accept it.
And to avoid any confusion, I would charge the same amount of social security, but I would characterize it as a surcharge so there is no attempt later by the foreigner to make claim against the US government. Call is a "stick it to the foreigner" charge.

 

[crimsonaudio]

I am also talking about that.
And that means that if we start collecting FICA from foreigners (F-1 visa holders are considered “foreigners”), then foreign countries will start collecting retirement taxes from US citizens working abroad.

Easy fix, simply charge the businesses extra taxes to cover those FICA funds. Nothing out of the foreign worker's pocket, but also removes the impetus to hire a foreigner over a US citizen.

 

[some_al_fan]

That's fine. I don't have exact figures but I would suspect that the total payroll for F-1 visa holders in the US dwarfs that of US visa holders in foreign countries. I realize we can't tax foreigners because of this agreement but laws/agreements can be changed.....

5.5 million US citizens are living abroad. Let’s say 1-2 million of them are retirees, and that still leaves 3 or so million US citizens who are working abroad.

AARO - The Association of Americans Resident Overseas

The Association of Americans Resident Overseas (AARO), founded in 1973 and headquartered in Paris, is an international, non-partisan association with members in 21 countries.

www.aaro.org

:

In comparison, there are only 250k working F-1 visa holders.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

Easy fix, simply charge the businesses extra taxes to cover those FICA funds. Nothing out of the foreign worker's pocket, but also removes the impetus to hire a foreigner over a US citizen.

So, uh.......you gonna be running for office anytime soon? You've got my vote.

 

[Tidewater]

Please read the doc. It is not about foreigners, but about US citizens, working abroad for US corporations and not being taxed to pay into retirement funds in these foreign countries in exchange for the US not taxing citizens of these countries.
Do you not care about US citizens?

I did read the document. In fact, I posted the same document in another thread.
Yes, the US government does have reciprocal agreements with selected countries so that the worker avoids double taxation.
But not all countries: just Canada, Europe, Australia and the odd outliers, South Korea, Chile and Uruguay.
India is not one of those, so I would wager there are not many US workers working in India, some, maybe, but not many. For those, I guess the SSA could not count the income for years of employment and amount earned when calculating social security payments. Maybe they can pay Indian social security (whatever that is) and receive Indian social security on retirement if they meet India's requirements.

Regardless of all that, It sickens me that federal government will allow foreigners to undercut American workers in the United States. That is wrong and it should stop.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

 

[some_al_fan]

Someone is trying to feel relevant. Of course, it will generate media buzz.

In reality, it would be extremely rare for an H-1B to work as a director of Product.

Quick glance at the New Relic site shows that they have an open rec for a Senior Director of Product, not Director of Product:

Find Your Perfect Career

New Relic careers. Join us at New Relic.

job-boards.greenhouse.io

 

[some_al_fan]

I did read the document. In fact, I posted the same document in another thread.
Yes, the US government does have reciprocal agreements with selected countries so that the worker avoids double taxation.
But not all countries: just Canada, Europe, Australia and the odd outliers, South Korea, Chile and Uruguay.
India is not one of those, so I would wager there are not many US workers working in India, some, maybe, but not many. For those, I guess the SSA could not count the income for years of employment and amount earned when calculating social security payments. Maybe they can pay Indian social security (whatever that is) and receive Indian social security on retirement if they meet India's requirements.

Regardless of all that, It sickens me that federal government will allow foreigners to undercut American workers in the United States. That is wrong and it should stop.

Why do you need all this complexity rather than introducing a “foreign worker tax” to be 10-15% (or whatever the number) for F-1/J-1/etc?
With that approach, you won’t be running into questions like “what do we do with social security contributions if an F-1 visa worker converts into a permanent resident,” or "what do we do with social security contributions if an F-1 visa worker requests his/her contributions to be moved to another country,” or whatever.

 

[75thru79]

Why do you need all this complexity rather than introducing a “foreign worker tax” to be 10-15% (or whatever the number) for F-1/J-1/etc?
With that approach, you won’t be running into questions like “what do we do with social security contributions if an F-1 visa worker converts into a permanent resident,” or "what do we do with social security contributions if an F-1 visa worker requests his/her contributions to be moved to another country,” or whatever.

Sounds good to me. I could care less what they call it: "Mediocre White Men Tax", "I Hate Gingers Tax", "I Hate Eurotrash Tax". Bottom line is our government should not be creating policies that make it cheaper to hire foreign visa holders than Americans.

 

[Tidewater]

Why do you need all this complexity rather than introducing a “foreign worker tax” to be 10-15% (or whatever the number) for F-1/J-1/etc?
With that approach, you won’t be running into questions like “what do we do with social security contributions if an F-1 visa worker converts into a permanent resident,” or "what do we do with social security contributions if an F-1 visa worker requests his/her contributions to be moved to another country,” or whatever.

Perfect.
My policy objectives would be:
(a) under no circumstances should it be cheaper for an American company in the US to hire a gastarbeiter than an American. American companies should only be able to hire gastarbeiters if they truly cannot fill the position with an American (and how would you determine that? By forcing the company to pay more for the labor. If the company is willing to pay more for the labor than filling it with an American, then they truly do need that skill set and cannot fill it with an American.)
(b) I would want to shield the federal government from any future claim to reimbursement from Social Security based on work done in the US as a gastarbeiter. If they later become a US citizen, then we start the calculation for number of years worked and income earned from that date.

 

[Tidewater]

I do not know who this guy is but it seems that changes are brewing in the realm of H1B visas.

One thing that needs to change, the salary minimum was set in 1990 at $60k and that figure never was adjusted for inflation. Today, that would be $139,000 if it had been adjusted for inflation. If you must pay at least $139,000 at minimum for an H1B visa holder or you could get an entry level American for less, it would level the playing field for Americans so they could get an entry level position and start careers.

 

[JDCrimson]

I doubt this legislation gets changed. International capitalism is what has us where we are as a nation.

Our domestic businesses perfect new technologies using our domestic resources once the technologies are perfected these same domestic businesses look for foreign resources to economize the new technologies. Offshoring profits and generally undermining the standard of living for the American worker-consumer.

 

[some_al_fan]

I do not know who this guy is but it seems that changes are brewing in the realm of H1B visas.

One thing that needs to change, the salary minimum was set in 1990 at $60k and that figure never was adjusted for inflation. Today, that would be $139,000 if it had been adjusted for inflation. If you must pay at least $139,000 at minimum for an H1B visa holder or you could get an entry level American for less, it would level the playing field for Americans so they could get an entry level position and start careers.

Here are average salaries and the number of H-1B by company: https://www.myvisajobs.com/reports/h1b/

I don’t think 60k is the minimum. It is the minimum of 60k AND prevailing wage for the position:

Prevailing Wages | Flag.dol.gov

flag.dol.gov

For example, if Amazon is filing an H-1B request for a software engineer in the Seattle area, then the prevailing wage could be in the $ 150,000+ range; thus making 150+k the minimum salary to get H-1B, not 60k

 

[Tidewater]

Here are average salaries and the number of H-1B by company: https://www.myvisajobs.com/reports/h1b/

I don’t think 60k is the minimum. It is the minimum of 60k AND prevailing wage for the position:

Prevailing Wages | Flag.dol.gov

flag.dol.gov

For example, if Amazon is filing an H-1B request for a software engineer in the Seattle area, then the prevailing wage could be in the $ 150,000+ range; thus making 150+k the minimum salary to get H-1B, not 60k

Then I guess there won;t be a lot of pushback to the idea of raising the minimum to $139k.