Programa de Libertad Condicional para Emprendedores Internacionales (IEP)
Kyle Huffman • February 10, 2023
La revitalización de un programa suspendido temporalmente el año pasado generó entusiasmo entre los emprendedores, pero ¿qué ha sucedido desde entonces?
Click here to red this article in English
El programa de Libertad Condicional para Emprendedores Internacionales (también llamado Regla para Emprendedores Internacionales) ha tenido una historia complicada. Lo que fue diseñado para convertirse en una nueva opción relativamente simple y directa para que los emprendedores inicien nuevas empresas en los Estados Unidos se ha convertido en un proceso largo y confuso, lleno de incertidumbre, lo que lo convierte en uno de los caminos menos deseables para los extranjeros, para crear legalmente una nueva empresa en los Estados Unidos.
El IEP se creó inicialmente durante la administración de Obama en enero de 2017, durante la sesión “lame duck” o pato cojo de Obama. En teoría, el programa sonaba como una excelente oportunidad para abrir más caminos legales para que los emprendedores crearan negocios en los Estados Unidos, impulsando aún más la economía de los Estados Unidos y aliviando la carga de opciones de inmigración más intensivas. Una persona que quisiera seguir este programa tendría que demostrar que cumple con los siguientes criterios:
- Participación sustancial (al menos el 10 %) en una entidad nueva que tiene potencial para un rápido crecimiento y creación de empleo.
- El emprendedor debe tener un papel central y activo en la nueva entidad.
- La entidad recientemente creada debe haber sido creada en los Estados Unidos dentro de los últimos cinco años.
Sin embargo, lo que en teoría era un gran concepto, no se ha traducido en un programa valioso o funcional en la práctica. Poco después de que el programa se introdujera, tarde en el segundo mandato de Obama, la nueva administración Trump presentó desafíos legales al programa. Esto hizo que el programa quedara en un estado de limbo mientras los desafíos se abrían paso en los tribunales. El programa estuvo disponible por un breve período entre diciembre de 2017 y mayo de 2018 después de que un tribunal federal anuló la regla que suspendía el programa. Sin embargo, esa suspensión terminó siendo de corta duración debido a que DHS anunció en mayo de 2018 que el programa se eliminaría. En junio de 2021, la administración de Biden restableció el programa IEP.
A pesar de que el programa está activo desde hace más de un año, todavía no logra su objetivo de restaurar la fe en el sistema de inmigración de los Estados Unidos. Hubo un puñado de solicitudes del programa IEP presentadas en el período entre diciembre de 2017 y mayo de 2018, lo que resultó en solo una solicitud de IEP
exitosa bajo la administración de Trump, que hemos encontrado.
Desde el relanzamiento del programa IEP en mayo de 2021, decenas de profesionales de la ley de inmigración han presentado cientos de solicitudes. Sin embargo, todavía hay informes mínimos de aplicaciones exitosas. Además, el procesamiento premium no está disponible actualmente para las solicitudes del programa IEP, y USCIS no publica los tiempos de procesamiento posterior para estas solicitudes. Esto hace que sea casi imposible para los profesionales estimar con precisión el cronograma completo para una solicitud de IEP. Además de la falta general de solicitudes exitosas, las solicitudes que están recibiendo respuestas han sido solicitudes de evidencia que supuestamente contienen secciones significativas de lenguaje repetitivo.
Con tanta incertidumbre sobre el tiempo de procesamiento de estas solicitudes y la falta de un número significativo de resultados exitosos con más de un año de tiempo desde la reactivación del programa, no es de extrañar qué los profesionales se han sentido frustrados con la administración de Biden por este programa.
En febrero de 2022, una coalición de abogados de inmigración y partes interesadas de la industria se unieron para crear la Coalición para el Emprendimiento Internacional, que escribió una carta abierta a la administración de Biden abogando por cambios para mejorar el programa IEP. Algunos de los cambios sugeridos incluyen publicar públicamente los tiempos de procesamiento del Formulario I-941, expandir el procesamiento premium al programa IEP y cambiar el departamento dentro de USCIS que es responsable de adjudicar las solicitudes de IEP a otro departamento que ya está capacitado para manejar tipos más similares de aplicaciones. La implementación de estos cambios contribuiría en gran medida a mejorar el programa de libertad condicional para emprendedores internacionales y, en última instancia, ayudaría a la administración de Biden a lograr su objetivo de restaurar la fe en el sistema de inmigración de Estados Unidos. Con suerte, la administración de Biden implementará estos cambios pronto y ayudará al programa IEP a alcanzar su máximo potencial.
Si tiene alguna pregunta sobre lo que significa para usted el programa de libertad condicional para emprendedores internacionales, programe una consulta con uno de nuestros experimentados abogados.
If you have any questions about what the International Entrepreneur Parole program means for you, please schedule a consultation with one of our experienced attorneys.
Esperamos con interés trabajar con usted.
Este blog no pretende ser un consejo legal y nada aquí debe interpretarse como el establecimiento de una relación abogado-cliente. Programe una consulta con un abogado de inmigración antes de actuar sobre cualquier información que lea aquí.
Kyle Huffman
Similar Posts
Embarking on the exhilarating journey of launching a new tech startup in the United States is a venture that blends innovation with ambition, and the dynamic landscape of the country offers an unparalleled stage for entrepreneurs to turn their groundbreaking ideas into thriving businesses. The United States highly values its position among the technology leaders of the world. In a nation fueled by a relentless pursuit of technological advancements, the process of bringing a startup to life involves navigating through a myriad of opportunities, challenges, and regulatory landscapes. This is particularly true for foreign entrepreneurs, who must also navigate the immigration system in addition to focusing on launching their businesses. Nevertheless, the United States recognizes the value in bringing technological innovators into the country and has created special considerations for immigrants with education in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) who are seeking to develop important cutting-edge technologies in the United States. These special considerations apply to the EB-2 National Interest Waiver, an immigrant visa classification which leads to permanent residency, and eventually citizenship in the United States. At the heart of every EB-2 National Interest Waiver petition is a proposed endeavor, and while these proposals for the United States can be about nearly anything, the Immigration Service is directed to recognize particular importance for proposals that aim to develop specific technologies that the Biden administration has identified as critical for U.S. competitiveness and national security. In particular, these areas of critical and emerging technologies include: Advanced Computing Advanced Engineering Materials Advanced Gas Turbine Engine Technologies Advanced Manufacturing Advanced and Networked Sensing and Signature Management Advanced Nuclear Energy Technologies Artificial Intelligence Autonomous Systems and Robotics Biotechnologies Communication and Networking Technologies Directed Energy Financial Technologies Human-Machine Interfaces Hypersonics Networked Sensors and Sensing Quantum Information Technologies Renewable Energy Generation and Storage Semiconductors and Microelectronics Space Technologies and Systems If you are a tech entrepreneur with an education in a STEM field, seeking to launch a startup in the U.S. developing any of these technologies, the EB-2 National Interest Waiver might be your ticket to permanent residency. Whether you're drawn to the iconic landscapes of Silicon Valley or the emerging tech scenes across the nation, the time is now to make your mark. If you are interested in applying for a National Interest Waiver to launch a startup in the United States, schedule an appointment with one of our skilled attorneys.
In the landscape of U.S. immigration law, the pursuit of an employment-based green card can be a significant milestone for foreign nationals aspiring to establish their careers in the United States. Among the various pathways available, self-sponsorship for an employment-based green card stands out as an option that grants individuals the ability to sponsor their own immigration journey, offering a unique opportunity for skilled professionals and entrepreneurs. Traditionally, most employment-based green card categories require an employer to sponsor the foreign national, demonstrating the need for their skills or expertise. However, certain visa categories permit self-sponsorship, allowing individuals to petition for permanent residency without a specific employer's sponsorship. These include: 1. EB-1A Extraordinary Ability: Individuals with extraordinary abilities in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics may self-petition for an employment-based green card. They must demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim, providing extensive evidence of their achievements in their field. 2. EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW): This category enables individuals whose work is deemed to be in the interest of the United States to self-sponsor. Applicants must demonstrate their work's significance and how it benefits the nation as a whole. 3. EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program: Entrepreneurs investing in a new commercial enterprise that creates jobs for U.S. workers can self-petition for an employment-based green card. They must meet certain investment thresholds and fulfill job creation requirements. While these classifications have the advantage of allowing an individual to self-petition, each of these applications have distinct, stringent requirements to meet. This route can be challenging, requiring substantial evidence and a compelling case to prove extraordinary abilities or qualifications. Additionally, meeting the high standards set by USCIS for self-sponsorship can be demanding, necessitating thorough preparation and documentation. Navigating the complexities of immigration law, especially concerning self-sponsorship, often requires professional legal guidance. Seeking assistance from experienced immigration attorneys or consultants can significantly enhance the chances of a successful self-sponsored green card application, ensuring compliance with the intricate regulations and requirements. If you have any questions about what this means for you, please schedule a consultation with one of our experienced attorneys. We look forward to working with you.
Great news for our EB-2 NIW clients! USCIS continues to expand on premium processing for petitioners with a pending I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers under the EB-2 and EB-2 classifications. This third phase only applies to previously filed Form I-140 petitions under the E13 multinational executive and manager classification or E21 classification as a member of professions with advanced degrees or exceptional ability seeking a national interest waiver (NIW). Clients who are eligible for a premium processing upgrade as of USCIS' announcement on September 15, 2022 are E13 multinational executive and manager petitions received on or before January 1, 2022; and E21 NIW petitions received on or before February 1, 2022 Eligible petitions may submit Form I-907 to USCIS with the required filing fee of $2,500. The premium processing timeframe is 45 days from the date USCIS receives the request for premium processing. Santos Lloyd has been steadily receiving I-140 decisions, so we anticipate that more decisions will be coming throughout the next few months until the end of the year. We will continue to keep updated on policy changes and updates from USCIS and will post updates regularly on these changes. For clients who are eligible and interested in the upgrade, please contact our office for further information. If you are not yet eligible for the upgrade, please await further information from USCIS as we anticipate more phases coming in the months to come.
We have continued to have great results in our EB-2 National Interest Waiver cases this month. During the month of September, our firm received over a dozen National Interest Waiver Approvals, with none being denied. These approvals were for people from a diverse set of professional backgrounds including entrepreneurs, restaurateurs, a medical professional, soccer coach, electrician, travel agency, and more. These individuals and their families are now looking forward to permanent residency in the United States. If you have any questions about what this topic means for you, please schedule a consultation with one of our experienced attorneys. We look forward to working with you.
Family-based immigration remains one of the most common paths to lawful permanent residency in the United States. It offers a lifeline to families hoping to reunite across borders, but the process is far from simple. The outcome of the applications can be delayed as a result of potential missteps while preparing the applications. Here are some of the most common pitfalls and how to avoid them: Incomplete or Inaccurate Forms One frequent mistake is submitting incomplete or inaccurate information on the forms like the I-130 (Petition for Alien Relative) and the I-485 (Adjustment of Status). Even minor errors such as misspelled names, missing signatures, or incorrect dates—can result in Requests for Evidence. To avoid this misstep, double-check all entries, cross-reference documents, and consult with an attorney before submission. Remember, immigration forms are legal documents so accuracy matters. Insufficient Supporting Evidence Proving a genuine familial relationship is the basis of family-based petitions. For spousal cases, USCIS looks closely at evidence of a bona fide marriage. Little or no supporting documents and evidence may lead to Requests for Evidence and even skepticism from USCIS. To establish a bona fide marriage, include documentation to show shared finances and liabilities. Filing Under the Wrong Category or Preference There are different immigration paths depending on whether the petitioner is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident, and whether the beneficiary is a spouse, child, sibling, or parent. Each category has different processing times and visa availability. It is critical that before applying, you understand which preference category applies to your case. Immediate relatives of U.S. citizens (spouses, parents, unmarried children under 21) generally receive faster processing and are not subject to annual visa caps. Not Disclosing Past Immigration or Criminal History Many applicants fail to account for past immigration violations such as visa overstays, unauthorized work, or prior removal orders. Similarly, if you fail to disclose past criminal history and these issues surface later in the process they can affect the outcome of the case. Disclose everything to your attorney, no matter how minor or old the issue seems. Prior violations don’t always mean denial but not disclosing them may lead to serious consequences. If you're considering filing a family-based petition, consult with an experienced immigration attorney at our office. Our office is committed to helping families navigate this complex process with clarity and confidence.
When applying for a green card or seeking admission into the United States, one of the legal hurdles many applicants may face is the public charge ground of inadmissibility. This test evaluates whether someone is likely to become primarily dependent on the government for support. But what exactly does that mean—and what types of public benefits can trigger this issue? In this article, we’ll break down what “public charge” really means, who is affected, what types of public benefits are considered, and what immigrants should be mindful of when making decisions about public programs like Medi-Cal and Medicaid. What Is the Public Charge Ground of Inadmissibility? The public charge rule applies to individuals applying for a visa, green card (adjustment of status), or entry into the U.S., unless they fall into an exempt category. Under this rule, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) must determine whether the applicant is likely to become primarily dependent on the government for subsistence. This typically refers to receiving: Public cash assistance for income maintenance (such as SSI or TANF), or Long-term institutional care at government expense. This determination is based on the "totality of circumstances," including age, health, financial resources, education, skills, and whether a sponsor has submitted a valid Affidavit of Support. Who Is Exempt from the Public Charge Rule? Many categories of immigrants are exempt from the public charge ground of inadmissibility. These include: Asylees and refugees Special immigrant juveniles Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) self-petitioners T and U visa applicants Temporary Protected Status (TPS) applicants Importantly, even if someone later adjusts status through a different pathway that is subject to public charge, any benefits they received while in an exempt category will not be held against them. What Public Benefits Are Not Considered in the Public Charge Test? It is a common and harmful myth that using any public benefit will jeopardize your immigration status. In fact, most non-cash benefits do not count against you in a public charge determination. According to USCIS and DHS guidance, the following types of assistance (current as of July 1, 2025) are not considered: Health-Related Benefits Medi-Cal/Medicaid, except for long-term institutional care Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) Health insurance through the ACA Marketplace, including subsidies COVID-19 testing, vaccines, and treatment Community health services, crisis counseling, and short-term shelters Food and Nutrition SNAP (Food Stamps) WIC School meal programs Food banks and emergency food assistance Housing and Energy Emergency shelter Rental assistance (e.g., McKinney-Vento programs) Energy assistance (e.g., LIHEAP) Education and Childcare Public schooling Head Start Childcare subsidies (e.g., CCDF) Educational grants and scholarships Federal Cash and Tax Benefits Earned income tax credit (EITC) Child Tax Credit (CTC) Stimulus checks Unemployment insurance Social Security and veteran’s benefits Disaster and pandemic-related cash aid In short, just because a benefit is public or government-funded doesn’t automatically make it count against you. A Word of Caution About Medi-Cal and Medicaid, in Particular As of today (07/01/2025), standard use of Medi-Cal (California’s version of Medicaid) or Medicaid for most health-related services is not considered in a public charge determination. This includes preventative care, emergency services, pregnancy-related services, and short-term care. However, if Medicaid is used for long-term institutionalization, such as in a nursing home or psychiatric facility, that does count under the public charge test. Despite current guidance, we are seeing political shifts and changes in tone from the current administration that suggest public charge policies may become more restrictive in the future. This includes renewed interest in expanding the types of public benefits that may be considered, particularly around medical assistance. For that reason, we generally recommend that individuals who are applying for adjustment of status, or who may be subject to the public charge ground in the future, avoid enrolling in Medi-Cal or Medicaid at this time, unless absolutely necessary. Final Thoughts Immigration law is complex, and the rules surrounding public charge can feel confusing or even frightening. But it’s important to understand that using most public benefits—especially for food, education, and healthcare—will not automatically jeopardize your green card or visa application. Still, because policy can change quickly, we urge individuals to consult with an immigration attorney before applying for any public assistance—especially healthcare programs like Medi-Cal or Medicaid. If you have questions or concerns about how public benefits might impact your immigration case, our office is here to help. We are committed to providing up-to-date, personalized guidance to keep your immigration journey on track. Disclaimer The information provided herein is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every immigration case is unique, and the application of the public charge rule may vary depending on your specific situation. If you believe this topic may apply to you or you need individualized legal guidance, we encourage you to contact one of our highly-qualified legal professionals for a consultation and assistance tailored to your circumstances. Resources: USCIS Public Charge Resources ILRC Medi-Cal and Public Charge Alert (2024) California Medi-Cal Immigrant Eligibility FAQ
As an immigration law firm, we regularly assist highly skilled professionals working in the U.S. on temporary work visas such as H-1B who are seeking a path to permanent residency. For many of these individuals, the EB-2 and EB-3 employment-based green card categories are the most pursued—and frequently misunderstood—routes . While both are viable pathways to permanent residency, they differ in meaningful ways that can significantly impact the timing, eligibility, and overall strategy of your case. The EB-2 category is intended for individuals who either hold an advanced degree or demonstrate exceptional ability in their field . Most applicants qualify by having a master’s degree (or higher), or a bachelor’s degree accompanied by at least five years of progressive experience in their profession. There is also a subcategory within EB-2 known as the National Interest Waiver (NIW), which allows qualified individuals to self-petition without employer sponsorship if their work substantially benefits the United States. This route is especially relevant for researchers, entrepreneurs, and professionals in high national interest or mission-critical fields. In contrast, the EB-3 category includes professionals with a bachelor’s degree as well as skilled workers with at least two years of training or experience . While the educational threshold for EB-3 may appear less rigorous, the process itself is equally structured. One key distinction between EB-2 and EB-3 lies in the requirements of the job being offered, not just the applicant’s own credentials. For example, if a position requires only a bachelor’s degree, even a highly qualified candidate with a master’s degree may still fall under EB-3. Regardless of which category applies, most employment-based green card cases begin with the PERM labor certification process . This is a formal procedure overseen by the U.S. Department of Labor, in which the employer must test the labor market and demonstrate that there are no able, willing, qualified, and available U.S. workers for the position. The employer must also agree to pay the prevailing wage as determined by the Department of Labor. This step is both mandatory and highly detail-sensitive; inaccuracies in the job description, recruitment steps, or wage determination can lead to significant delays or even denials. Once PERM certification is approved, the employer files Form I-140 , the Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker. This petition confirms that the employee meets the requirements for the offered position under either EB-2 or EB-3, and that the employer is financially capable of providing the job as described. If the employee’s priority date—which is based on the date the PERM was filed—is current according to the Department of State’s Visa Bulletin, the individual may then file Form I-485 to adjust their status to lawful permanent resident. One of the more nuanced aspects of this process involves understanding how priority dates and visa backlogs affect the timeline. For applicants from countries with high demand, such as India or China, significant delays are common—particularly under EB-2. Paradoxically, there are times when the EB-3 category moves faster, prompting some applicants to file a second I-140 under EB-3 while retaining the original priority date. This strategy can be effective but requires careful legal planning to ensure it’s done correctly. Another strategic factor is portability. If your I-485 application has been pending for at least 180 days and your I-140 has been approved, you may be eligible to change employers under the AC21 portability provisions, so long as the new job is in the same or a similar occupational classification. This flexibility can be critical for employees who experience job changes or promotions during the often lengthy green card process. Ultimately, the choice between EB-2 and EB-3 isn’t about prestige —it’s about aligning your qualifications, the job requirements, and your immigration history with current legal standards and market conditions. The right strategy depends not only on your education and experience, but also on your long-term career goals and country of origin. At our firm, we work closely with both employers and employees to develop individualized immigration strategies that streamline the process and avoid unnecessary setbacks. Whether you're a corporate professional evaluating your green card options or an employer preparing to sponsor a key team member, we offer the insight and experience to move your case forward with confidence.
