
Let's Give Visas to Startup Founders - pchristensen
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/dec2009/tc2009121_842902.htm
======
idlewords
"The idea and the founder's résumé would then need to pass muster with a
government or industry-appointed board of venture capitalists, financiers, or
technology experts"

This is the fatal flaw in the program. The whole _reason_ startup culture
exists is that we don't have a way of knowing in advance what ideas are really
worth pursuing, short of giving them a try. But this program would create a
board of experts whose job it would be to try to predict which ideas had a
reasonable chance at success.

The obvious outcome would be a huge distortion in the kinds of startups
foreign nationals would found. The value of a green card is far higher than
the expected value of a startup, so the process would turn into a bad example
of grantsmanship - trying to tailor your proposal to what you think the
committee wants to see, and then making sure your startup stays solvent long
enough for the permanent residency to come through.

Rather than taking real risks and trying to innovate, the role startups are
supposed to take in our economy, we would be encouraging an extremely
conservative startup culture, whose real purpose would be to secure green card
status for the founders lucky enough to get in the program. How likely are you
to bet the company if the consequence of failure is getting kicked out of the
country?

~~~
aristus
To be fair, this was not at all part of the original proposal; it's one of
those idiotic riders tacked on by politicians after they get their hands on
something. The only "approval" required was in the form of investors stumping
up cash. Any accreditation should be of the _investors_ , not the the
founders.

~~~
jhancock
This is the problem area that bugs me about the founder visa concept. The
concept is great. Embodying it into law requires it go through the sausage
factory.

I jokingly told a doctor last week I could write health care reform in 5
pages. I'm pretty sure I could. But it wouldn't get through congress in that
form.

~~~
neilc
Well, there is potential for abuse: a startup founder gets an "investment" of
$500k from an accredited angel and a permanent resident visa. A little while
later, the startup takes an exit (e.g. dissolves the company and returns the
assets to the investor), netting the founder a greencard in the process.

~~~
wheels
If you've got somebody willing to wire you $500k, you can basically do that
already.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-2_visa>

~~~
neilc
Well, that requires that you leave the country immediately after the business
has been concluded; this proposal says that "... the founder would be granted
a permanent resident visa", which presumably wouldn't expire.

------
arohner
A better solution would be to just fix immigration. Adopt something similar to
the Commonwealth point system
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highly_Skilled_Migrant_Programm...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highly_Skilled_Migrant_Programme),
where you get points for being young, educated, in a useful profession, etc.
Get enough points and you're automatically allowed in.

A system like this would reduce the distortion, and allow talented people into
the country to bootstrap or e.g. work at Google.

~~~
elai
Also removing worldwide taxation of non-resident income of non-resident
citizens. (As in, if I make a million a year living in peru, I don't want to
have to pay taxes for the income above $80'000 to the IRS that I made in Peru
while I lived in Peru). The US is the only (or one of a very small number) of
countries that do this. I do not want to become a US citizen expressively for
that reason.

------
arh
The idea is a good one, but I'm wrestling with the dollar amount that needs to
be invested before the founder can get a visa. Specifically, how likely is it
that a US venture capitalist will invest $250,000 or more in a startup that's
not located in the US (or Silicon Valley for that matter) vs. another startup
that is?

Even if the non-US startup will move to the US once they receive funding, the
largely intangible advantages bestowed on a startup in the Valley (which I've
witnessed in the month that I've lived here) give it a better chance.

To be successful in facilitating the immigration of founders to the US, the
founders' Visa should be available to any startup that has received any
funding from a "qualified US investor" over $15K, which would include non-US
startups accepted into YC.

And to avoid creating a huge immigration loophole (which seems to be the
author's rationale for suggesting a "real money" cutoff), perhaps the Visa
could have a clause that limits it to two years unless additional capital is
secured and the startup is deemed to have "passed muster", at which point a
permanent resident visa could be granted.

~~~
alex_c
_Specifically, how likely is it that a US venture capitalist will invest
$250,000 or more in a startup that's not located in the US (or Silicon Valley
for that matter) vs. another startup that is?_

It might be more likely than you think. If the startup and the founders are
solid, and if there is a clear (and most importantly, fast) visa path like the
one proposed, I don't think most investors would have a problem. If anything,
$250,000 is way too low for a VC, so you might have to find an angel investor
instead. Some countries would have an advantage over others, of course, but I
don't think it's a showstopper - my first startup, based in Canada, received
an offer for funding which would've put us over this threshold.

 _Even if the non-US startup will move to the US once they receive funding,
the largely intangible advantages bestowed on a startup in the Valley (which
I've witnessed in the month that I've lived here) give it a better chance._

Can you elaborate? What is the difference, once both startups are in the
Valley, and assuming there are no language issues? So many startup founders
are already originally from other states or even countries.

~~~
arh
It may be more likely than I think, but what matters is if it is so much more
likely that P(Silicon Valley startup getting funding) < P(Canada/foreign
startup getting funding), all other things being equal. Do you think that this
is the case?

I don't think that every startup needs to be in the Valley to get funding, but
what I've witnessed here is a prime example of "it's not (only) what you know,
it's who you know". If you have a viable startup, knowing people that have
made names for themselves in the startup scene, many of which are based in
Silicon Valley, can go a long way towards getting introduced to potential
investors, whether they be angel investors or VCs.

~~~
alex_c
I don't think we're disagreeing on much. Yes, of course, a startup with better
connections in the US has a better chance to get funding from US investors,
and it's easier for an US startup to make these connections.

My point is that P(Canada/foreign startup getting funding) is greater than
zero even with today's visa situation, and is still large enough to make a
visa program worthwhile, even if it is smaller than P(Silicon Valley startup
getting funding).

------
msort
Current waiting time for China and India-born employment-based Green Card
application is likely to be 4-5 years.

Many of those applicants are potential startup founders. Sadly they cannot
pursue their ambitions due to the long immigration process. Some of them will
choose to leave US and found their startups in their home countries.

~~~
dannyr
Speeding up the Green Card process is actually a better solution & also has
the greater probability of happening vs granting a founders visa.

------
rnugent
Why can't the venture capital go there. Every article on Venture these days
says American VCs are looking overseas more than here. Surely they'll find the
best and brightest with great ideas and can invest at a better exchange rate
by keeping entrepreneurs local. We have more than enough innovation in this
country. Our problem is once the idea is proven we can't make an industry out
of it without being undercut.

------
ojbyrne
So my question is - if the startup has $250k in funding, why can't they
sponsor for an H1B for the founder(s)?

~~~
rglullis
Yearly quota. Only 65k applications for H1B visas are accepted every year. To
be able to sponsor someone out of the quota, the institution has to be either
a non-profit or educational - universities and such.

~~~
ojbyrne
Good point.

