Wouldn't you have been a good (great!) candidate for an O-1A or EB-1?
Completely understand if you couldn't be bothered at this point though. What a loss for the US.
Completely understand if you couldn't be bothered at this point though. What a loss for the US.
O-1A: very hard to get in business without either a letter from a senator/governor or a long history of speaking gigs (according to my immigration lawyer).
The other (and apparently more common) way business folks get O-1 approval is an endorsement from a high-level government official. My lawyer was reasonably confident that if I could secure financing and demonstrate potential this would be possible, however I'm not comfortable working that hard for that long only to be held up on the whims of a senator in an election year, particularly since I couldn't incorporate without having status.
It's frustrating but understandable. The UCIS has no way to evaluate "Extraordinary Ability", so they can only go off your perceived position relative to your peers.
Both of those options were suggested by my lawyers, and once you realize it's possible and common one starts seeing it everywhere.
If was telling the truth that he has founded and exited several technology companies including one worth over a billion dollars, then there are any number of ways he could found a business in the US: E-2, EB-5, and yes the O-1A.
Being a founding engineer doesn't mean as much as you'd think to a non-technical audience, I have zero chance at an O1.
EB-5 requires me to be putting in 1MM$ of my own money. That's significant for me and more importantly not needed for the business.
E2 is the best bet, and I discussed this at length with counsel. The non-dual intent (same as TN) nature of the status though will put me in exactly the same situation in a few years. Expecting me to invest in the country, while not allowing me to put down roots, is ridiculous and not fair to my family.
Also, I do realize that it's technically possible to apply for citizenship while on TN/E2, but that prevents international travel. I need to be in Canada regularly to care for my parents.
edit: modifying original post to weaken "no legal way" to "no acceptable legal way". Anything is possible.
E2 absolutely agree it just feels like deferring the problem to a later date. A lot of exposure for not as much in return.
I think the bottom line is you don't need to be in the US as much as you needed to before, given your track record. Here the US should need/want you more than the other way round.
L-1A is probably quite doable though and it's dual intent. You need to wait a year, but that may have passed already anyway.
An L-1A is an option a year from now (I've only recently incorporated), but it's hard to build a sufficiently large company to satisfy the requirements to sponsor without putting down enough roots that it's no longer worthwhile moving.
I think you've nailed it though with:
> I think the bottom line is you don't need to be in the US as much as you needed to before, given your track record. Here the US should need/want you more than the other way round.
It's just not worth it to go through the contortions and hassle required to stay and start a company in the US. In a connected economy I can get the full value of the education & networks I've picked up in the states from any first-world country, and create value there.