Candian working remotely in US

[bsd058 296]

Here are some threads:

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/281387-canadian-working-remotely-for-a-us-company/

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/266033-working-remotely-from-the-us/

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/339912-need-to-work-whileon-k1-visa-ead-is-pentding/

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/369415-my-question/

Hope this helps. I wasn't able to find anything official. You might want to call a lawyer to see if this is perfectly legal. I suppose if I do it while on vacation, it might not hurt her to do it. Sorry I couldn't help you further.

[tdpnk 0]

If I crossed the border into the US from Canada with the Uhaul, with 90% of the items mine, and without her in the truck, would I still receive flack?

[tdpnk 0]

Also, did your wife pay taxes in the US on that income? Or just Canadian?

[Boiler 45,939]

She can not work in the US, her Employer's location does not matter.

Immigration comes with work privileges.

How they would know is another issue.

[Teddy B 17,252]

She can not work in the US, her Employer's location does not matter.

Immigration comes with work privileges.

How they would know is another issue.

My wife did, she's a book keeper and was able to handle her accounts through her laptop for a couple months. Even told the POE officer she was going to. If you're not working for a US company and not getting paid in US dollars, they allow it.

[Rob & Monika 87]

Actually it depends on where her place of residence is. We had a guy who wanted to move to another state within the US and telecommute, and management wanted to keep this guy and were more than willing to accommodate him. The problem was that if he resides in another state, any income he made in that state gets taxed by the state he resides in, and they were not setup to deal with that and didn't want to go through the hassle, so he left the company.

Now, if she is just "visiting", then telecommuting is fine. Once she establishes residency, then she is subject to the tax laws of that state. Each state is different, and each state has different definitions of what "residency" is. In short, she can do it, but come tax time, she will have to deal with determining who gets what for taxes.

[Rob & Monika 87]

As far as the EAD...the very first thing the USCIS page says is "U.S. employers". It's illegal for a US Employer to hire someone who is not authorized to work in the US. This has no bearing on foreign employers.

[Krikit 1,165]

Myself and a number of other Canadians and UK citizens have done exactly that.... worked remotely while in the US visiting, and then while awaiting adjustment of status. I even took a few business trips back to Canada during this time. I did an InfoPass appointment to request authorization and they had no issues with it whatsoever. Working remotely for a non-US employer holds no interest for them. Their concern lies with US employment; not foreign employment.

[Teddy B 17,252]

If I crossed the border into the US from Canada with the Uhaul, with 90% of the items mine, and without her in the truck, would I still receive flack?

Probably not, they will more than likely pull you into secondary to ask you some questions and have a look in the truck, so be prepared for that.

Also, did your wife pay taxes in the US on that income? Or just Canadian?

Canadian taxes only.

Edited November 30, 2012 by Teddy B

[jaycali 415]

She can enter the states with you as a B1/B2 tourist

B1/B2 status is for B1/B2 visa holders. She won't need a visa if she's Canadian with no criminal and/or negative immigration history.

If I crossed the border into the US from Canada with the Uhaul, with 90% of the items mine, and without her in the truck, would I still receive flack?

You may and you may not. CBP's job is to keep people from obtaining immigration benefits which they are not entitled to at time of entry. Entering the US as a tourist/visitor with intent to immigrate is a prime example of what the CBP's job is to prevent. They may or may not believe she's intending to immigrate. My intuition has it that they'll at least raise an eye brow or two, as it is obvious that you're married, and obvious that you are in the process of moving back to the states. Your explanation as to why you're moving and she's not moving (she's visiting) with you will play a key role here.

A CBP officer is required by US law to assume that anyone who shows up at the US border is an intending immigrant, until satisfied otherwise. In other words, unless she enters on an immigrant visa, the burden of proof is on her to show that she will return to Canada.

She can not work in the US, her Employer's location does not matter.Immigration comes with work privileges.How they would know is another issue.

Myself and a number of other Canadians and UK citizens have done exactly that.... worked remotely while in the US visiting, and then while awaiting adjustment of status. I even took a few business trips back to Canada during this time. I did an InfoPass appointment to request authorization and they had no issues with it whatsoever. Working remotely for a non-US employer holds no interest for them. Their concern lies with US employment; not foreign employment.

I have to agree with Krikit here. I've asked both my local US embassy, my DSO at my old college and two separate immigration lawyers about this. I also stated in my G-325A and DS-230 that I had worked remotely - It was never even brought up at my CR-1 visa interview. If the job is foreign-based, payment is from a foreign source, and of such nature that physical presence in the US is not required, no US workers are displaced, and work authorization is irrelevant.

The law is in place so that no US workers are displaced, not to prevent tourists from finishing up a bit of work at their hotel room and emailing it back to their foreign employer before they go to Disneyland.

Edited November 30, 2012 by Jay Jay

[Teddy B 17,252]

B1/B2 status is for B1/B2 visa holders. She won't need a visa if she's Canadian with no criminal and/or negative immigration history.

The B1/B2 status applies to Canadian tourists as well, they just don't require the actual visa.

[jaycali 415]

The B1/B2 status applies to Canadian tourists as well, they just don't require the actual visa.

Sorry, my mistake.

Edited November 30, 2012 by Jay Jay

[Boiler 45,939]

B1/B2 status is for B1/B2 visa holders. She won't need a visa if she's Canadian with no criminal and/or negative immigration history.

You may and you may not. CBP's job is to keep people from obtaining immigration benefits which they are not entitled to at time of entry. Entering the US as a tourist/visitor with intent to immigrate is a prime example of what the CBP's job is to prevent. They may or may not believe she's intending to immigrate. My intuition has it that they'll at least raise an eye brow or two, as it is obvious that you're married, and obvious that you are in the process of moving back to the states. Your explanation as to why you're moving and she's not moving (she's visiting) with you will play a key role here.

A CBP officer is required by US law to assume that anyone who shows up at the US border is an intending immigrant, until satisfied otherwise. In other words, unless she enters on an immigrant visa, the burden of proof is on her to show that she will return to Canada.

I have to agree with Krikit here. I've asked both my local US embassy, my DSO at my old college and two separate immigration lawyers about this. I also stated in my G-325A and DS-230 that I had worked remotely - It was never even brought up at my CR-1 visa interview. If the job is foreign-based, payment is from a foreign source, and of such nature that physical presence in the US is not required, no US workers are displaced, and work authorization is irrelevant.

The law is in place so that no US workers are displaced, not to prevent tourists from finishing up a bit of work at their hotel room and emailing it back to their foreign employer before they go to Disneyland.

My Brother worked in the US for his UK Employer continued to be paid in the UK etc etc, he was on a L.

My wife used to be in IT, I did notice that a lot of particularly Canadians did seem to be pushing the definition of undertaking 'Business', meetings etc, as opposed to 'working'.

They were actually employed by a US Company paid by a US Company but based in Canada. Not that it matters.

Illegal working is usually not an issue when adjusting through marriage to a USC, pop over to immigrate2us for proof positive.

As I said whether anybody really cares under most circumstances, probably not.

Now I think of it the last Company I worked for in the UK, I never got to go to the US on Business but plenty of colleagues did. I think if shove came to push then they could have had issues.

A more obvious example is Indian outsource companies who were sending people over on a B for 6 months. That seems to have got harder, I am sure it still happens.

[jaycali 415]

My Brother worked in the US for his UK Employer continued to be paid in the UK etc etc, he was on a L.My wife used to be in IT, I did notice that a lot of particularly Canadians did seem to be pushing the definition of undertaking 'Business', meetings etc, as opposed to 'working'.They were actually employed by a US Company paid by a US Company but based in Canada. Not that it matters.Illegal working is usually not an issue when adjusting through marriage to a USC, pop over to immigrate2us for proof positive.As I said whether anybody really cares under most circumstances, probably not.Now I think of it the last Company I worked for in the UK, I never got to go to the US on Business but plenty of colleagues did. I think if shove came to push then they could have had issues.A more obvious example is Indian outsource companies who were sending people over on a B for 6 months. That seems to have got harder, I am sure it still happens.

The key is whether or not any US worker is displaced. If physical presence in the US is required for the job, such as a journalist, then a visa is required. However, a Canadian working remotely for a Canadian company is doing a job that no US person without Canadian work authorization could legally do. If the job does not require physical presence in the US it isn't under US jurisdiction in any way.

I suppose this is a gray area of the law, as "working remotely" has only really been possible in the last decade or so. I have yet to see any law for or against it.

Edited December 1, 2012 by Jay Jay

[Boiler 45,939]

That would describe the Indian outsourcing arguement for using a B.