

Ask HN: Why does "remote" in a job posting really mean "remote...from the US"? - WantToBeAnExpat

Recently, I've been looking to relocate outside of the US. The city I would be relocating to is one of the largest cities in the world. There is reliable (cheap!) internet service, and the government is reasonably open regarding internet access (at least on par with, for example, Australia). In fact, I've already worked remotely from this location for short (2 week) stints in the past, and I found I had no problem getting the work done or keeping in touch with the team.<p>So why is it that every time I respond to a job advertisement claiming a "remote" position, the recruiters hesitate as soon as I mention moving away from the US? My understanding is that the burden of working out tax and other monetary considerations would be completely on me. I'm more than happy to adjust my schedule to the time-zone of the majority of the rest of the team.<p>Obviously, I could understand why some sectors of the industry would be wary (issues with export controls, etc.), but even basic web shops have been hesitating or outright turning me down. So my question is: is there some legitimate business concern to limit remote workers to "within the US"? or is reluctance to hire overseas remote employees based primarily on unfounded fears?<p>What should I be doing to improve my odds of finding the right position?
======
fishtoaster
Benefits (eg, healthcare) might be difficult to extend overseas, as compared
to within the US, especially for smaller companies.

Further, there might be some general hesitancy due to fear of the unknown. A
small company might have few or no dedicated HR staff who are familiar with
the legal and financial ramifications of dealing with paying someone overseas.
Even if it is the case that it's pretty easy to do, they don't have anyone who
knows that for sure.

Edit: It also occurs to me that if they need you to come in in person on rare
occasions, it costs more money and effort to do that from outside the US than
inside.

~~~
WantToBeAnExpat
I've heard/suspected concerns with benefits, but I find this to be,
well...laughable! Consider that healthcare costs in the US are some of the
highest of anywhere in the world. Specifically, I've already priced health
insurance costs for my family, and they would come to $6000 (USD) per year to
cover everyone.

~~~
sixtofour
But a company that offers benefits already has an insurance contract with a
broker and provider. That policy probably doesn't cover anyone outside the
country; it may not even cover people in or out of certain states. So your
remote benefits, while possibly cheaper, are a one-off, and a company may be
reluctant to bother with such an unknown.

------
byoung2
If it is possible, could you have them hire you as a 1099 contractor instead
of an employee? You would be in charge of taxes and benefits since you would
technically be working for yourself (and they would have less say over where
and how you do your job). You could start the job while living in the US, and
then after you have worked for them for a few months and earned their trust,
you could then inform them that you are relocating to another country. Tim
Feriss would say that you should inform them after you have already been
working from your new location for some time.

~~~
WantToBeAnExpat
This approach has definitely crossed my mind. I would prefer the relative
stability of a full-time gig (well, mostly I would prefer the 401k), but I
think going the 1099 route might be my best bet.

------
nirvana
In my experiences dealing with recruiters, they have trouble with the basics,
like knowing the difference between java and javascript, and expecting them to
be able to handle a resume in PDF form is sometimes too much. I think the
problem might be that you're dealing with recruiters. If you're a US citizen,
it really shouldn't matter that you're remote.

We've been outside the US for quite awhile and as far as any of the legal or
other issues, we're still US citizens. We have US mailing addresses, US health
insurance (that covers us worldwide, we checked on that) etc.

Fortunately, I don't have to work for an employer, but if I was working for
others, I'd tend to structure things as a contractor or as a corporate entity
that they were hiring to do work. this makes things easier for them, and
actually cheaper which means you can charge more and possibly more financially
efficient (if they are paying for overhead that you don't have and wouldn't
use as an employee.)

Not exactly in the same situation as you, but that's roughly how we're
handling things. We formed a corporation and when we need to deal with other
business it is as a corporation.

------
rorrr
Because

1) Taxes

2) Legal issues (much easier to deal with problems in a local jurisdiction)

3) In India, for example, there's a culture now that everyone wants to become
a developer, because that's where the money is. It resulted in the markets
full full of talentless hacks who took 3 months of some HTML/Javascript/PHP
courses and call themselves programmers. I had to work with some of these
guys, they truly don't get programming, and spend 10 to 100 more time to do
anything compared to your average local programmer.

Don't get me wrong, there are many talented programmers in India, it's just
your chances of finding one are pretty slim.

