

My US Visa got denied - thanasisp
http://20minus.com/wp/2012/03/06/my-us-visa-got-denied/

======
ajays
The OP claims to be an entrepreneur . And then I read this in the blog:

 _I had such a long waiting period, that all my energy and momentum was
drained. A man with no face, trapped, with no freedom to move or express,
waiting for a (seemingly at the time) life-scale type of decision to be made
for him._

Really? As an entrepreneur, one shouldn't be so disheartened by the outcome of
a process that is totally outside your control. Entrepreneurship is about
taking risks, suffering setbacks, and getting up quickly after these setbacks.
Not getting a visa isn't something I would consider a huge setback; in this
day and age, it is possible to start Internet-based companies almost anywhere.
And Europe isn't some backwaters area.

I don't want to sound mean, but to the OP: getting your visa denied isn't a
big deal. Just start your company there, and when it becomes big, open an
office in the US and stroll in like a boss.

~~~
thanasisp
While internet means international network, the internet industry isn't really
international. The sooner one realizes that the sooner he/she can get in the
right path to success.

While there are always exceptions that prove the rule, there is the rule. And
the rule says that the internet industry lies in the SF Bay area.

Examine it under any metric you wish, quantitative or qualitative and you will
end up in the same conclusion.

I have gotten more into this matter in a past post of mine:
[http://20minus.com/wp/2011/03/20/how-lean-startup-forced-
me-...](http://20minus.com/wp/2011/03/20/how-lean-startup-forced-me-to-leave-
my-country/)

cheers

~~~
kamjam
That's rubbish, and if you think that is true then you have been watching The
Social Network movie a few too many times and brainwashed by Hollywood.

And the way the USA is acting right now trying to pass draconian laws and
police the internet for everyone, every sane company will/should be moving
their operations to a progressive thinking nation.

I also don't understand why you are so upset. Just because someone else got
the visa is no guarantee you would. You know that saying, "don't count your
chickens before they've hatched"...

------
bradleyjg
From the regs:

 _(12) Investment . An investment is the treaty investor's placing of capital,
including funds and other assets (which have not been obtained, directly or
indirectly, through criminal activity), at risk in the commercial sense with
the objective of generating a profit. The treaty investor must be in
possession of and have control over the capital invested or being invested.
The capital must be subject to partial or total loss if investment fortunes
reverse. Such investment capital must be the investor's unsecured personal
business capital or capital secured by personal assets. Capital in the process
of being invested or that has been invested must be irrevocably committed to
the enterprise. The alien has the burden of establishing such irrevocable
commitment. The alien may use any legal mechanism available, such as the
placement of invested funds in escrow pending admission in, or approval of, E
classification, that would not only irrevocably commit funds to the
enterprise, but might also extend personal liability protection t o the treaty
investor in the event the application for E classification is denied.

(13) Bona fide enterprise . The enterprise must be a real, active, and
operating commercial or entrepreneurial undertaking which produces services or
goods for profit. The enterprise must meet applicable legal requirements for
doing business in the particular jurisdiction in the United States.

(14) Substantial amount of capital . A substantial amount of capital
constitutes an amount which is:

(i) Substantial in relationship to the total cost of either purchasing an
established enterprise or creating the type of enterprise under consideration;

(ii) Sufficient to ensure the treaty investor's financial commitment to the
successful operation of the enterprise; and

(iii) Of a magnitude to support the likelihood that the treaty investor will
successfully develop and direct the enterprise. Generally, the lower the cost
of the enterprise, the higher, proportionately, the investment must be to be
considered a substantial amount of capital.

(15) Marginal enterprise . For purposes of this section, an enterprise may not
be marginal. A marginal enterprise is an enterprise that does not have the
present or future capacity to generate more than enough income to provide a
minimal living for the treaty investor and his or her family. An enterprise
that does not have the capacity to generate such income, but that has a
present or future capacity to make a significant economic contribution is not
a marginal enterprise. The projected future income-generating capacity should
gen erally be realizable within 5 years from the date the alien commences the
normal business activity of the enterprise._

I can understand the desire for a start up visa (I would support one) but it
doesn't currently exist. Just because you have a friend in France who slipped
one by the USCIS doesn't mean that anyone else will be able to.

If you can get $1,000,000 together, check out the EB-5 visa. Another common
tactic is to get a business started in your own country and then use an L to
open a branch in the United States.

~~~
mdda
Actually, this is a box-checking exercise, and doesn't stand in the way of
setting up a startup. I went through the same process in 1999, and have
renewed ever since - and I did all my own paperwork (which is a huge pain), so
I'm pretty familiar with how it works.

Initially, I talked to a lawyer about 'doing it right' - but concluded that I
would have spent as much time describing it to the lawyer as writing the
application myself.

One key point : You must be planning to create a company, not 'do a startup'.
Have a business plan, with milestones. Quantify the investment, and project
how it will pay back. Rent some office space, and have a contract. The embassy
isn't in the business of understanding the Lean Startup experimentation
process. They are interested in definite plans to grow a business (and employ
Americans, too).

Of course, some of these points in the business plan may have a large 'error
bar' on them. But you need to show to the Embassy that you're not crazy - and
that they could not be labelled a 'soft touch' for granting the visa. There's
no point trying to "slip one by the USCIS" : If that's the way you're thinking
about it, that's the way it will appear.

To get the visa, you have to satisfy the regs. To satisfy the regs, you must
have documentation that proves that each point, and subpoint, is satisfied.
Each of these pieces of evidence needs _at least_ 1 official piece of paper or
a whole bunch of other justification.

Hope this makes sense.

~~~
bradleyjg
It makes plenty of sense and it matches my experience. The UCSIS wants people
that are going to come with substantial amount of money and set up a business.

They don't want someone coming in to go to San Francisco and network, pitch to
investors, rapidly iterate till you find market fit, etc.

I think they should allow educated, motivated people to come into the country
and give it a shot, but that's just not how the law is right now.

~~~
mdda
I agree that they should be more flexible (i.e. if someone can prove that they
would earn more than the US average wage, it would be a net benefit to the US
for them to be allowed in).

Further to the idea of coming over to SF and couch-surfing while iterating :
The UCSIS wants to see 'CEOs' coming over. So that's what you need to give
them. Your friends/fellow hackers may be surprised at the suit and
distinguished haircut : But the picture you have to present at the Embassy
(and through the documents) is one of business success being a forgone
conclusion.

It goes beyond what you might do to impress a VC-like investor (who may also
take a casual approach as some kind of signalling too). The UCSIS person is
also getting 'invested' in your company. And they want to know that they're
going to get their money back for sure. There's no equity upside for the UCSIS
: They're much more like a debt investor/bank manager.

------
jfruh
A good time to remind Americans how insanely difficult it is to get into the
U.S. legally:

[http://reason.com/assets/db/07cf533ddb1d06350cf1ddb5942ef5ad...](http://reason.com/assets/db/07cf533ddb1d06350cf1ddb5942ef5ad.jpg)

~~~
huherto
This is crazy. IMHO, The main draw back is that you can only go thru one lane.
Either family, skills or money. Canada has a system that allows you accumulate
points in several categories. It is in the best interest of the US to have a
system that works.

~~~
endersshadow
There's a lot of complexity and nuance around why the US immigration laws are
the way they are. There are _a lot_ of people that want to get into the US. _A
lot_. I cannot emphasize that enough. The process has a lot of issues, but you
have to understand why it got that way. The US's goal is to ensure that
anybody who garners entry to live and work in the US is a contributing member
of society. The three ways it does that is that (a) you have family here that
are presumably productive members of society, (b) you have a set of skills
that makes you a valuable asset to the US, or (c) you have a ton of money and
can create jobs in the US. If you have only some money and average skills,
you're not nearly as valuable as if you have either (b) or (c). Since the US
has an incredible number of applicants, it only selects the best they can.

You wouldn't find it insane if colleges or employers made the same decisions.
The decision of his visa isn't made in a vacuum--it's made with regard to
everybody else who applied for visas, too. And that's a lot of people.

~~~
jfruh
_The three ways it does that is that ... (b) you have a set of skills that
makes you a valuable asset to the US ... You wouldn't find it insane if
colleges or employers made the same decisions._

The problem is that there's a major disconnect with what the comfortable
middle and upper-class people who make decisions about the immigration system
think of as a "valuable asset to society" and the actual economic incentives
for most people who want to immigrate to the United States. To use your
corporate analogy, it's as if the hiring committee of a major corporation
decided that there were so many applicants for jobs that everyone the company
would hire should have the same skills and credentials that the people on the
hiring committee have -- master's degrees and continuing education credits --
even though what the company needs to hire is janitors and security guards.

You don't think that people who come here illegally (or, best case scenario,
who come here under agricultural visas that give them temporary residence and
no stake in the country) to work in the fields or construction are
contributing anything? Well, enjoy it when your food doubles in price, then.
Or, more likely, enjoy your food staying the same price but the people who
grew it don't have any labor protection laws or real roots in this country.

My point is not that we should just open the borders willy-nilly. But we need
to have some kind of process for people who want to live here that doesn't
result in decades of limbo, and doesn't cost tens of thousands of dollars to
someone who's going to take up a minimum-wage agricultural job. And the
process should help them become Americans. You know, like the process did for
most of this country's history up until the 1930s or. That process did all
right, as near as I can tell.

~~~
endersshadow
To clarify, I was stating the reasons the immigration policy in the US is the
way it is. It's not insane. That doesn't mean it's devoid of unintended
consequences, inefficiencies, and issues, though. Immigration is a very hard
problem to solve for, especially given the heated emotional discourse about it
on a political stage.

The process up until the 1930s didn't do all right--you're being naive in your
nostalgia. It created an entire underclass, gave rise to ghettos, and forced
people to give up their names in order to take more anglicized names.
Moreover, there was a huge strain on infrastructure with the influx of poor
Southeastern Europeans immigrating (mixed in with an incredible dose of racism
and xenophobia). Wikipedia has a good summary of the laws and why they were
passed [1].

There are a lot of problems with the immigration policy, and there are a lot
of reasons that it's the way it is. My point is that this particular case of a
guy being denied a visa could hardly be thought of as insane. Unfortunate for
him, yes. Insane, no.

[1]:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_laws_concerning_immi...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_laws_concerning_immigration_and_naturalization_in_the_United_States)

------
phatbyte
Ok, I know you have your reasons but why the US ? Why don't you start your
startup in your own country or in another European country ? Any good reason
for not staying there ?

As an european I sadly see everyone from this side of the world trying
desperately be part of the new startup gold rush in the US. Fund startup, get
VC money, sell it, ???, profit.

Not very long time ago, I was like you too. I wanted so much to move to SF and
build my startup or be part of one. But now, I don't care. Why ?

1 - I can incorporate my company in Delaware right from my living room.

2 - I can have hire good professionals from around the world to work with me
(looking at 37signals as a role model)

3 - And quite frankly, the position of the US regarding european citizens that
want to live and work in the US is too restrictive and amazingly elitist. Not
even Mordor is that hard travel to. I just wished other countries had the same
mesures/restrictions as they do for US citizens that want to live and work
abroad. Europe (although lots of americans couldn't even put it on the map)
isn't made of third world countries.

4 - Also, lots of good startups are operating in this side of the world.

So, why are you giving the US all the credits for your work ? If they don't
want you, screw it. It's not the end of the world, and your can pretty much do
the same thing here as you would over there.

As a developer and founder of a new born company, I feel like we need to show
the world that europe is a good place to fund a startup, we might not have the
YC or other popular investors, but if more and more startups got created here,
maybe they would start looking for us.

~~~
freshfey
Upvoted but I'm not so sure about your number 1. I always thought that you
need to have a US bank account (hence US citizenship) to incorporate the
company in Delaware. How would you achieve that as a non-US citizen?

~~~
phatbyte
You don't have to have a US bank account, it's not a requirement. It's always
a plus to have one, specially if you want to use US payment gateways, but
that's it.

------
gioele
Are there surveys of what are the most startup-friendly non-US countries?

I suppose that the things that matters are mostly monetary and boil down to
"how much money do I need to pony up in the beginning stages?". On the other
hand, if I had to move, I'd move only to a country where I know that I will
not refused medical care for any reason and it is unlikely that I can end up
in jail or being detained for wearing the wrong t-shirt. Oz?

PS: the website has a .com domain. Ah, irony of being refused a visa from the
US while still being somehow under their legal reach.

------
muyuu
One word: Berlin.

~~~
illumen
Another word: why?

~~~
hluska
Om Malik wrote an article about Berlin - check out this link:

[http://gigaom.com/2011/12/27/why-berlin-is-poised-to-be-
euro...](http://gigaom.com/2011/12/27/why-berlin-is-poised-to-be-europes-new-
tech-hub/)

I hope this helps!

Greg

------
jamesu
Except maybe for funding, I don't get the obsession with wanting to base a
startup in the US. If you have a good business model and great marketing
skills, you should be able to create a successful business anywhere.

------
shareme
I have a question:

How might accepting a US citizen co-founder impact such a visa process? Does
ti improve the the chances for success and if so why?

------
c1sc0
Why did you apply in the first place? Is there a particular reason why you
can't just get a tourist visa & cross the border every few months?

~~~
thanasisp
I am not a tourist. My intention is [was] to stay in the us and make this
startup work. Uninterrupted.

This can take from 2 up to 10 years or who knows how many... Can't do that on
a Tourist visa, it's a "half measure".

~~~
philiphodgen
Half-measures avail us nothing. :-)

You are right to reject the tourist visa option: it might work for a few quick
visits to network and meet people, but it is not the best way to go if you are
serious. And I have seen that when I behave in a serious and business-like
way, I get serious and business-like results. (Off-topic: when I started being
rigorous about claiming business expenses only for real business expenses and
stopped telling half-truths on my tax returns, then I started making a lot
more money. Correlation, not causation? Maybe. I put it down to an attitude
adjustment.)

Back on topic. Did you prepare the E-2 visa application yourself or did you
hire a U.S. immigration lawyer to do the work for you? Immigration work is 80%
technical knowledge, 80% procedural skills, and 80% immaculate paperwork.
That's why getting someone with deep experience counts.

(Disclosure: I have a vested interest in selling the concept of "hire an
extremely experienced professional").

(Disclosure: I am not an immigration lawyer; that stuff scares me.)

~~~
philiphodgen
Follow-up.

Think about the category "L" visa. Executive of foreign corporation
transferred to work at the U.S. branch. Set up a Swedish corporation. Create a
U.S. subsidiary corporation. Decide to assign yourself to the USA to work.

Devil. Details. Etc.

These visa applications can be completed in 6 weeks or so -- this is what my
immigration lawyer friends tell me.

~~~
thanasisp
Thank you for the tips philip!

Of course i had an experienced lawyer that took my hand throughout all the
process... And we also examined all available options...

L type visas are not as simple as you describe. The criteria that have to be
met are not suitable for a startup company. The killing requirement is that
you (the employee that will be assigned in the US subsidiary) has to work in
the mother company for at least a year.

... And let's not get into what the requirements for the mother company are...

~~~
philiphodgen
Good all around. It sounds like you did everything correctly. Consulate
officials are known to operate in a non-uniform fashion in processing visa
applications. That is all I will say in public. :-)

