Acquiring foreign permanent residency

[aotearoa]

Hello everyone. I have been lurking around this group anonymously for quite some time now. Thanks for all the great info you all are sharing.

Let me explain my concerns and ask you a question. I have a green card (employment based, I-485 approved in April of 2003). I am originally from Europe. I also have a good business opportunity to start a multinational company based mainly in New Zealand and Australia. I have been doing research into that matter for some time now and it seems to me that the easiest path for me would be to acquire Australian or New Zealand legal permanent residency (I qualify for that). That would ease up the pains of opening corporate/personal accounts and things like that.

I do not intend to abandon US residence, I would still have a house here, a car, and, of course, I would file all my taxes here, as required. I intend to leave US for no longer than 3-4 months in any given year to pursue this opportunity. On the other hand - I am not sure though if I could keep a steady job in the US during those visits abroad and my family would travel with me.

I read the threads here very carefully concerning working abroad etc, but I could not find anything pertaining to my situation. In theory I should be able to keep my green card easily - I did not relinquish the residence, I still have a house, a car, pay my taxes. I am not absent from the US for more than four months in a year. But in practice, can an officer at a PoE refuse to admit me on the grounds that I have relinquished my residence based solely on a permanent resident visa from another country in my passport? Maybe someone sees a flaw in my thinking and kindly point it out to me?

A priority for me is to keep the US residence, so if it turns out that I would be refused entry I will not pursue this business opportunity.

In the end - I know that I should seek an advice of a good immigration attorney - that is what I intend to do anyway, but I would like to go there armed with knowledge (or more questions) based on this discussion.

Thank you for reading all this

aotearoa

 

[dsfgh100]

Quite frankly, then you didn't really read or understand them...
Any stay abroad has to be temporary in nature. Acquiring permanent residence in some other country is an indication that your stay abroad is not temporary. In fact, the phrase "permanent residence" should be a dead giveaway that you intend to reside somewhere else permanently, which is quite the opposite of temporary...
So, short answer: you would lose US permanent residency.

JoeF, There yo go again. Dispensing your quack-advices and misinforming people. You are a Software Engineer, Write Code!

Acquiring permanent residency in another country in addition to US itself will not disqualify you. Having said that, the criteria in very general terms is "losing permanent resident status through long absences outside the U.S.". What long absences means is anyone's guess. Some think it is 6 months.

You are on the right track, since you plan to keep a home, a car and maintain relationships with USA. Hold on to the rent payment receipt, car title, and anything else that could help you prove ties to this country.

Hope this helps.

 

[dsfgh100]

Another ad hominem attack...
You are a lost cause.

There are in fact documented cases where people have lost their US Permanent Residency because they took up Canadian residency.
It is a known fact that taking up residency abroad results in the loss of the US GC. It does not matter if a person returns to the US once in a while.

JoeF my dear Software Engineer. If your Software is anything like your legal advice, I would see core dump all around you.

Just to be clear on this, your earlier advice was against taking permanent residency status from another country. Your last advice is about taking foreign residency. Make up your mind on what you are talking about. Don't flip-flop like your leader Flipflop Kerry.

I reiterate, there is nothing wrong with taking up permanent residency in foreign country. The only thing US wants is that you do not go through long term absences outside the US. Plain and simple. Again, no one knows what "long term" means, it could be 6 months.

Now JoeF, go ahead, start your barrage of anger. Anger is sign of your weakness.

 

[dsfgh100]

Another ad hominem attack.
Get lost.

When you take up "permanent residence" somewhere else, you obviously take up residence there. That's what the phrase "permanent residence" shows. So, what part of "permanent" and "residence" don't you understand?
If you take up residence somewhere else, you lose the GC. Period. The duration of the absence from the US doesn't matter. You could lose the GC even if you are absent just for a day.

Earth to JoeF, Earth to JoeF: Permanent residence does not mean you will have to stay in the country all the time, every day. And don't flip english to prove your flopping arguement. What will you say next? Green Card is Green? Because you see "Green" and "Card" ?

You never answered my post propounding my case. Instead you are scaring people for no reason. Just my opinion....

 

[dsfgh100]

As a PR, you have to reside in the US at all times. Any trips abroad have to be temporary. Read it up in the law.
Taking up "permanent residence" abroad is not temporary. Ergo, loss of the GC.
But logic doesn't seem to be your strength.

I don't know if you realize it, you are supporting my arguement now, and disproving your own earlier statements. You were using "permanent residence" and "foreign residence" interchangeably. Now you have come on the right track. Well done, JoeF. I don't regret the 30 minutes I spent in making you see the right track.

Just one more thing... Using Bold face font don't make your arguement right.

 

[aotearoa]

Thanks JoeF and dsfgh100 for your insight.

JoeF:
I agree that I need to return “to an unrelinquished lawful permanent residence in the United States after a temporary absence abroad.”

In the "Matter of Kane" (15 I&N 258, BIA 1975) Board of Immigration Appeals determined that a trip abroad is "temporary" as following:
- “The traveler should normally have a definite reason for proceeding abroad temporarily.”
- “The visit abroad should be expected to terminate ‘within a period relatively short, fixed by some early event.”
- The traveler must intend to return to the United States as a place of employment or business and home. The traveler must possess this intent when leaving the U.S. and at all times while abroad.

I have a definite reason: establishing a company abroad. The visit is going to be relatively short (3-4 months), terminated by an event of my return flight home. And I maintain my "place of general abode" - my house, still making mortgage payments etc. So I disagree with you on losing the residency on the matter of excludability.

Moreover, Australian permanent residency is not even called "permanent residency". It is called "subsection 136 visa", so it is not that "dead giveaway" as you might think. Again, I don't intend to evade law or misrepresent material facts. Also, quite frankly, I don't think you read my message in its entirety. I intend to establish a company, not necessarily work for it. If it benefits me more I will establish a company in the US and then proceed to open an Australian and New Zealand divisions.

There are in fact documented cases where people have lost their US Permanent Residency because they took up Canadian residency.

JoeF, please provide links to these cases you are talking about.

dsfgh100:
I am not concerned about the length of stay abroad. I will keep my stays abroad below 4 months in any given year.

Again, thanks everyone for your insight.

aotearoa

 

[dsfgh100]

Thanks JoeF and dsfgh100 for your insight.

JoeF:
I agree that I need to return “to an unrelinquished lawful permanent residence in the United States after a temporary absence abroad.”

In the "Matter of Kane" (15 I&N 258, BIA 1975) Board of Immigration Appeals determined that a trip abroad is "temporary" as following:
- “The traveler should normally have a definite reason for proceeding abroad temporarily.”
- “The visit abroad should be expected to terminate ‘within a period relatively short, fixed by some early event.”
- The traveler must intend to return to the United States as a place of employment or business and home. The traveler must possess this intent when leaving the U.S. and at all times while abroad.

I have a definite reason: establishing a company abroad. The visit is going to be relatively short (3-4 months), terminated by an event of my return flight home. And I maintain my "place of general abode" - my house, still making mortgage payments etc. So I disagree with you on losing the residency on the matter of excludability.

Moreover, Australian permanent residency is not even called "permanent residency". It is called "subsection 136 visa", so it is not that "dead giveaway" as you might think. Again, I don't intend to evade law or misrepresent material facts. Also, quite frankly, I don't think you read my message in its entirety. I intend to establish a company, not necessarily work for it. If it benefits me more I will establish a company in the US and then proceed to open an Australian and New Zealand divisions.


JoeF, please provide links to these cases you are talking about.

dsfgh100:
I am not concerned about the length of stay abroad. I will keep my stays abroad below 4 months in any given year.

Again, thanks everyone for your insight.

aotearoa

aotearoa, I have 2 things to tell you.

Firstly, This recent post of yours very clearly says that you understand the issue and are on top of things. What purpose did posting on this board serve you? (I ask this in all respect)

Secondly, From your first post, I did not see a problem in what you were planning to do. If you read my earlier post, I was essentially saying the same thing you say now.

Cheers!

 

[dsfgh100]

Frankly, it seems like JoeF is cyber-stalking me. Read this thread and notice that I was sending my comments to "aotearoa". And who responds to that? Good old JoeF the cyber-stalker. He is behind me, for a reason I do not understand.

 

[Abr2004]

Dear dsfgh100 :

Please do not let JoeF disturb your mind and continue answering people's questions on this forum in the same correct way you did to aotearoa's question. JoeF has some knowledge about immigration, because he has posted thousand times. But he also got paranoid from the Bush government. He knows that scaring people is a good trick to make them a slave for the future. JoeF knows very well that being allowed to reside in another country doesn't abandon the US Green Card of a US permanent resident. However, because of some illogical reasons he wants US permanent residents to stay in the US 365 days per year and that these people should not think of getting a visa which allows them to reside somewhere else in the world, too. Maybe he is jealous. I cannot imagine another reason.

Being a US Green Card holder doesn't mean that you are imprisoned. If you get something that allows you to live and work somewhere else, too, than it doesn't automatically mean that you will live and work abroad and do it permanently. It ONLY means that you CAN live and work in this other country permanently. CAN/ALLOWED and DO are different things, Mr. JoeF.

Thank God I am not living in the US anymore. I am pretty sure that JoeF belongs to these malicious guys in America who report innocent people to FBI and other police institutions if he doesn't like them. Such behavior is disgusting.

Again:
Everybody in the US is allowed to found a company abroad and to obtain a visa which allows (for JoeF: ALLOWS) him to live and work there permanently without losing their US Green Card.

To aotearoa:
If you are serious about your business endeavor, I recommend you to leave America as soon as you have got your US citizenship. America is no longer the Land of the Free. (because of people like Bush and JoeF)

Bye bye.

 

[aotearoa]

What purpose did posting on this board serve you?

I am trying to ingite a discussion to collect as many (possibly opposing) views/concerns/opinions about my situation, so I can better use the lawyer's time when I actually go and present my situation to him/her.

 

[aotearoa]

These have been posts to immigration-related Usenet newsgroups (alt.visa.us and misc.immigration.usa.) I do not have links for that, but newsgroup posts are archived at groups.google.com.

All I can find is some cases in the opposite direction - people losing their Canadian PR (or landed immigrant status) by applying for US green card. Perhaps you can quote some keywords for the search that would bring up some of the cases you were talking about?

Thanks,
aotearoa

 

[aotearoa]

I recommend you to leave America as soon as you have got your US citizenship.

Thanks for the suggestion, however I still have long way to go before that could happen. The business opportunity I am talking about is not going to last that long.

 

[dsfgh100]

Hmm, I don't think anybody ever lost Canadian PR merely because of applying for a US GC. Getting the US GC is the issue there. I do remember a post where a person who had both US PR and Canadian PR traveled between both countries, and eventually was asked by US immigration officials to give up one of them, the reason being that you can't reside in two countries at the same time.

Let me get this straight. Everything you dispense on this board comes from what you read from other people's postings? In that case, you are just a quack.

The sequence of acquiring residence doesn't really matter. It is just that from a US standpoint, having a residence somewhere else won't work with them.
Canada itself apparently doesn't have an issue with people having residence in two countries, but the US has.
And this would be similar with other countries, e.g., Australia.

Hey People. Listen to JoeF the Quack. He is not an expert at Canadian and Australian immigration too. I am guessing he (she?) is not satisfied giving bad advice on US immigration, and now wants to spread it to other countries.

The US side doesn't care if the law in other countries is so that you can acquire permanent residency there without actually living there. The US doesn't have jurisdiction over that other country.

Duh! Is JoeF the original Homer Simpson? He just discovered US does not have jurisdiction over other countries. Yipeee!

They just say that acquiring or having permanent residency somewhere else is an indication that you abandoned your residence in the US. If push comes to shove, you would have to convince an immigration judge that this isn't the case. Still having property here would of course help, but is that enough to overcome the indication of taking up residency abroad? Given BIA decisions in the past, I doubt it.
In any case, you should expect intense scrutiny, and a high likelihood of losing the US GC. In my opinion, it is not worth the risk. A better way is to get US citizenship before embarking on this road. Since the government can not dictate where US citizens live, there is no problem to reside abroad at that point.

JoeF, Read all the posts in this thread. You have been proven wrong in your quack advice. Again. And Again.

 

[VaniSundaram]

Let me get this straight. Everything you dispense on this board comes from what you read from other people's postings? In that case, you are just a quack.



Hey People. Listen to JoeF the Quack. He is not an expert at Canadian and Australian immigration too. I am guessing he (she?) is not satisfied giving bad advice on US immigration, and now wants to spread it to other countries.



Duh! Is JoeF the original Homer Simpson? He just discovered US does not have jurisdiction over other countries. Yipeee!



JoeF, Read all the posts in this thread. You have been proven wrong in your quack advice. Again. And Again.

U r correct dsfgh100.............. this joef is causing trouble by putting wrong info on the board........ how many ppl got deported bcos of joef's wrong advice??????? god save them......


W'04

 

[dsfgh100]

nonsense deleted

We understand JoeF. He is a pathetic loser who has nothing better to do on a Saturday night, than call names and dispense misinformation on this board.

JoeF, get a life. And talk some sense on this board. You blabbering joker.

 

[dsfgh100]

nonsense deleted

We understand JoeF. He is a pathetic loser who has nothing better to do on a Saturday night, than call names and dispense misinformation on this board.

JoeF, get a life. And talk some sense on this board. You blabbering joker.

 

[dsfgh100]

  0    1    2    3    4    5    6    7    8    9    10
  ___________________________________________________
  |    |    |    |    |    |    |    |    |    |    |
  ---------------------------------------------------
      ^
      |

In honor of JoeF the biggest joker and the source of all things Crappy

 

[ag28]

I think one can have both countries residency

Acquiring permanent residency is one thing and staying permanently is another.
One may acquire PR for both countries. even though the intent that one is showing is that they want to take up PR in another country, doesn't mean they have to give up the GC here. What will happen is that because they won't be folowing the residence requirements of the other country, then they would have to give up the other country's PR.
if some countries having relaxed PR laws allw you to visit there only once a year (if they are so short of people), then technically I could visit there once a yr and stay the other 364 days here. This way, wont I be able to maintain PR for both countries.
So, I think one would have to look into the PR restrictions of individual countries where they want to apply for PR.
So just by obtaining PR from country B doesn't make you lose the PR of country A even though your intention on paper may seem that you woud want to stay permanently in B.
This is just my take on the issue.

 

[dsfgh100]

Acquiring permanent residency is one thing and staying permanently is another.
One may acquire PR for both countries. even though the intent that one is showing is that they want to take up PR in another country, doesn't mean they have to give up the GC here. What will happen is that because they won't be folowing the residence requirements of the other country, then they would have to give up the other country's PR.
if some countries having relaxed PR laws allw you to visit there only once a year (if they are so short of people), then technically I could visit there once a yr and stay the other 364 days here. This way, wont I be able to maintain PR for both countries.
So, I think one would have to look into the PR restrictions of individual countries where they want to apply for PR.
So just by obtaining PR from country B doesn't make you lose the PR of country A even though your intention on paper may seem that you woud want to stay permanently in B.
This is just my take on the issue.

ag28, My point exactly. I was differentiating between "permanent residency" and "country residency". You are the 4th person making this point on this thread, and be on a look-out for JoeF asking you to "Get Lost". He says that to anyone and everyone who talks reason.

 

[dsfgh100]

repeated nonsense

JoeF, You have been wrong all through this thread, you are wrong again. In fact, you are so wrong that you mislead others with wrong information. All you can do is scare people with details that has no legal basis.

Any one reading this knows that you are a joker without any legal training and experience. I hope some one interested in answers to the question raised in this thread will read the entire thread, though they could conveniently ignore comments from JoeF and save themselves time.