Order Code RL34030
Point Systems for Immigrant Selection:
Options and Issues
June 5, 2007
Ruth Ellen Wasem
Specialist in Immigration Policy
Domestic Social Policy Division
Chad C. Haddal
Analyst in Immigration Policy
Domestic Social Policy Division

---

Point Systems for Immigrant Selection:
Options and Issues
Summary
Replacing or supplementing the current preference system for admitting legal
permanent residents (LPRs) with a point system is garnering considerable interest for
the first time in over a decade. Briefly, point systems such as those of Australia,
Canada, Great Britain, and New Zealand assign prospective immigrants with credits
if they have specified attributes, most often based on educational attainment, skill
sets used in shortage occupations, extent of work experience, language proficiency,
and desirable age range.
President George W. Bush has stated that comprehensive immigration reform
is a top priority of his second term, and his principles of reform include increased
border security and enforcement of immigration laws within the interior of the United
States, as well as a major overhaul of temporary worker visas, expansion of
permanent legal immigration, and revisions to the process of determining whether
foreign workers are needed. The Bush Administration is reportedly among those
advocating to replace or supplement the current legal immigration preference system
with a point system that would assign prospective immigrants with credits if they
have specified attributes.
Proponents of point systems maintain that such merit-based approaches are
clearly defined and based on the nation’s economic needs and labor market
objectives. A point system, supporters argue, would be more acceptable to the public
because the government (rather than employers or families) would be selecting new
immigrants and this selection would be based on national economic priorities.
Opponents of point systems state that the judgement of individual employers are the
best indicator of labor market needs and an immigrant’s success.
Opponents warn that the number of people who wish to immigrate to the United
States would overwhelm a point system comparable to those of Australia, Canada,
Great Britain, and New Zealand. In turn, this predicted high volume of prospective
immigrants, some say, would likely lead to selection criteria so rigorous that it would
be indistinguishable from what is now the first preference category of employment-
based admissions (persons of extraordinary ability in the arts, science, education,
business, or athletics; outstanding professors and researchers; and certain multi-
national executives and managers) and ultimately would not result in meaningful
reform.
The bipartisan compromise proposal for comprehensive immigration reform
introduced in the Senate on May 21, 2007, as S.Amdt. 1150 to S. 1348, the
Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007, includes a point system. This
report will be updated as events warrant.

---

Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Issue Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Pro/Con Summation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Current Criteria for U.S. Permanent Residence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Features of Point Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Score/Scale Dimensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Tiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Constellation of Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Theoretical Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
International Point Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
New Zealand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
United Kingdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Proposed Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Category Weighting Comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Prior U.S. Considerations of Point Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Immigration Act of 1990 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Current Proposal for Immigration Point System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Admissions Levels for S.Amdt. 1150’s Point System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Point Distributions Proposed in S.Amdt. 1150 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Merit-Based Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Z Visa Point Supplement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Tier Comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Current Themes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
From Encouraging Migration to Managing Demand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
From Personal Relationships to National Priorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
From Augmenting to Replacing Existing Visa Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Concluding Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Appendix A. Current U.S. Legal Immigration Preference System . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Appendix B. New Zealand Point System Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Basic Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Summary of Points Distribution Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Appendix C. United Kingdom Current Point System Requirements . . . . . . . . . . 23
Basic Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Summary of Points Distribution Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
MBA Provision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

---

Appendix D. Australian Point System Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Basic Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Summary of Points Distribution Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Appendix E. Canadian Point System Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Basic Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Summary of Points Distribution Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Appendix F. Proposed Point System in Senate Amendment 1150 . . . . . . . . . . . 30
List of Figures
Figure 1. Percentage of Points Distributed Across Major Categories for
Select Countries with Point Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Figure 2. Percentage Weighted to Each Factor in S.Amdt. 1150-Proposed
Point System, by Tier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
List of Tables
Table 1. New Zealand Point Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Table 2. United Kingdom Point Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Table 3. Australian Point Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Table 4. Canadian Point Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

---

Point Systems for Immigrant Selection:
Options and Issues
Introduction
Issue Definition
President George W. Bush has stated that comprehensive immigration reform
is a top priority of his second term, and his principles of reform include increased
border security and enforcement of immigration laws within the interior of the United
States, as well as a major overhaul of temporary worker visas, expansion of
permanent legal immigration, and revisions to the process of determining whether
foreign workers are needed. Some are advocating to replace or supplement the
current legal immigration preference system1 with a point system that would assign
prospective immigrants with credits if they have specified attributes (e.g., educational
attainment, work experience, language proficiency).
Replacing or supplementing the current preference system for admitting legal
permanent residents (LPRs) with a point system is garnering considerable interest for
the first time in over a decade. Briefly, point systems such as those of Australia,
Canada, Great Britain, and New Zealand assign prospective immigrants with credits
if they have specified attributes, most often based upon educational attainment, skill
sets used in shortage occupations, extent of work experience, language proficiency,
and desirable age range.
Pro/Con Summation. Proponents of point systems maintain that such merit-
based approaches are clearly defined and based upon the nation’s economic needs
and labor market objectives.2 A point system, supporters argue, would be more
acceptable to the public because the government (rather than employers or families)
would be selecting new immigrants and this selection would be based upon national
economic priorities. Such a system would distribute qualifying points from various
1 CRS Report RL32235, U.S. Immigration Policy on Permanent Admissions, by Ruth Ellen
Wasem. (Hereafter, CRS Report RL32235, U.S. Immigration Policy on Permanent
Admissions.)
2 U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on
Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law, Hearing on An
Examination of Point Systems as a Method for Selecting Immigrants, May 1, 2007; and U.S.
Senate, Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, Hearing on
Employment-Based Permanent Immigration: Examining the Value of a Skills Based Point
System, September 14, 2006.

---

CRS-2
“merit-based” categories, thereby making the system analogous to the “skilled
immigration” point systems of other countries.3
Opponents of point systems state that the judgement of individual employers are
the best indicator of labor market needs and an immigrant’s success. Some warn that
the number of people who wish to immigrate to the United States would overwhelm
a point system that is comparable to those of Australia, Canada, Great Britain, and
New Zealand. In turn, this predicted high volume of prospective immigrants, some
say, would likely lead to selection criteria so rigorous that it would be
indistinguishable from what is now the first preference category of employment-
based admissions (persons of extraordinary ability in the arts, science, education,
business, or athletics; outstanding professors and researchers; and certain multi-
national executives and managers) and ultimately would not result in meaningful
reform.4
Current Criteria for U.S. Permanent Residence
Four major principles underlie current U.S. policy on permanent immigration:
the reunification of families, the admission of immigrants with needed skills, the
protection of refugees, and the diversity of admissions by country of origin. Each of
these four principle constitutes its own stream, or column, of immigrants. Thus, for
example, the queue for family-based immigrants generally functions independently
of the queue for employment-based admissions. The Immigration and Nationality
Act (INA) specifies a complex set of numerical limits and preference categories that
give priorities for permanent immigration reflecting these principles. Prospective
immigrants must first meet the eligibility requirements for the specific visa category,
and then form a queue based upon numerical limits set by visa category and country
of origin. These preference categories are detailed in Appendix A, Current U.S.
Legal Immigration Preference System.
Under the INA, immigrants are legal permanent residents (LPRs) who are
foreign nationals living lawfully and permanently in the United States. During
FY2005, a total of 1.1 million aliens became LPRs in the United States. Of this total,
57.8% entered on the basis of family ties. Other major categories in FY2005 were
employment-based LPRs (including spouses and children) at 22.0%, and
refugees/asylees adjusting to LPR status at 12.7%.5
Features of Point Systems
A point system is a criteria-based immigrant selection process wherein each
criterion is assigned a certain value or range. Those qualities in an applicant which
are valued more highly, or are more sought after, are given a higher point value. In
order to qualify, or “pass,” an applicant must receive a predetermined number of
points or fall within the top end of the point distribution. The scope and complexity
3 Ibid.
4 Ibid.
5 CRS Report RL32235, U.S. Immigration Policy on Permanent Admissions.

---

CRS-3
of point systems offer a range of possibilities. Three elements are central to devising
a point system: the factors/criteria; the scoring/scaling dimensions; and the possible
use of tiers.
Factors. As noted above, points systems are based upon a list of criteria or
factors. Most often, the factors are based upon the prospective immigrant’s
educational attainment, work experience, language proficiency, occupation, and age.
Other factors that arise, albeit less frequently, link a prospective immigrant to the
destination country, such as offers of employment, close family ties, prior work or
educational experience in the destination country. These factors are typically
focused on criteria that predict economic success, but also might include factors that
are geared toward adaptability, social acculturation or assimilation.
Score/Scale Dimensions. Another element of points systems is how they
are scored or scaled. For example, the factor of education may be scaled according
to the years of schooling (e.g., 2 points for each year of schooling beyond high
school) or scored according to a specific number of points given to the prospective
immigrant who meets the educational requirements (e.g., 25 points for an advanced
degree).
Tiers. A tiered approach to points systems organizes the factors into separate
streams. For example, there might be a tier for shortage occupations, a tier for recent
graduates in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, and a tier for
extended family of U.S. citizens. Within each of these tiers there might be separate
scoring mechanisms that assign points, for example, according to age, work
experience, or language proficiency.
Constellation of Elements. As the discussion below reveals, points systems
may be devised to draw on a constellation of these elements. That is, within a tier,
there may be factors and sub-factors given differing weights. Or, some factors may
be scaled and other factors may be scored within the same tier or overall point
system.
Theoretical Considerations
There are theoretical approaches that underlie the debate over any system to
select immigrants, and these theories particularly arise in the context of point
systems. There are a variety of economic, social, and public policy theories that often
shape the discussion.
By adjusting the point values to favor admissions of immigrants with skill sets
that are in highest demand, the point systems rooted in classical economic theory
might aim to maximize the probability that the migrant will be a net contributor to
the country’s economy — both in the short and long term.6 Moreover, by keeping
6 Testimony of Queen’s University Professor of Economics Charles M. Beach, in U.S.
Congress, Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, Employment-Based
Permanent Immigration: Examining the Value of a Skills-Based Point System, 109th Cong.,
(continued...)

---

CRS-4
the immigrant labor force supply at or slightly below market demand, a point system
based upon economic theory might attempt to approximate a labor market
equilibrium without the potential for severe adjustment costs (e.g., “overheating”
housing market) or exogenous shocks to the labor market (e.g., large influx of foreign
nationals). Classical economists would note that despite such governmental efforts
at pinning down labor market demand for skill sets, the use of a government agency
to determine market forces will incur the loss of efficiency. The most efficient
outcome, classical economists argue, is always going to be achieved through the free
flow of individuals in an open market (and thus by having open borders). Yet,
scholars will also note that such inefficiency may serve as incentives in the
marketplace for desirable economic change, such as technological innovation and
wage growth.7
The objective to maximize the likelihood of immigrant assimilation might lead
to a point system which values those social factors correlated to acculturation.
Family ties and relatives residing in the United States might be highly valued for the
community and social linkages they provide to the immigrant. Some factors (such
as being within a certain age range, higher levels of education and language skills)
might be chosen for social assimilation as well as economic reasons. If the societal
goal is to increase the ethnic and racial diversity of the immigrant stream, then a
point system might add credits for immigrants coming from countries that are
traditionally under-represented in the migrant flow.8
Finally, a point system might be designed with a public policy underpinning to
maximize public support. In theory, an immigrant selection system might be more
efficacious with the public if it is one in which elected officials (rather than
individual employers or families) are establishing priorities at the national level to
choose new immigrants. One strand of recent research characterizes point systems
as potentially inspiring public confidence by appearing to use universal, data-driven,
and objective selection criteria that convey to the public that the government is being
proactive in ways that put national economic interests first.9
6 (...continued)
2nd Sess., September 14, 2006, S.Hrg. 109-775 (Washington: GPO 2007).
7 Testimony of Princeton University Professor of Sociology Douglas S. Massey, in U.S.
Congress, Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, Employment-Based
Permanent Immigration: Examining the Value of a Skills-Based Point System, 109th Cong.,
2nd Sess., September 14, 2006, S.Hrg. 109-775 (Washington: GPO 2007).
8 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Balancing Interests: Rethinking U.S.
Selection of Skilled Immigrants, by Demtrios G. Papademetriou and Stephen Yale-Loehr,
1996.
9 Migration Policy Institute, Selecting Economic Stream Immigrants through Points Systems,
by Demetrios G. Papademetriou, May 2007.

---

CRS-5
International Point Systems
Among the countries that currently employ a merit-based point system, the four
highest profile systems are those of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United
Kingdom. Generally, such merit based criteria are referred to by these countries as
“skilled immigration.” Each of these countries employs a point system in assessing
candidates for skilled immigration. In the four different systems, those skilled
immigration applicants with the most points according to various characteristics
would immigrate ahead of applicants with lower point totals. In addition, each of
these four countries employs a preference system for family-based immigration.
They also employ quotas to determine levels of family and humanitarian
immigration. These family and humanitarian immigrants are thus placed in separate
immigration queues.
Although the categories vary for each country, each of these countries generally
requires that the potential applicant demonstrate some sort of official language
competence, educational qualifications, and be within a certain age range. Although
failing to meet one of these qualifications may automatically disqualify applicants in
some countries, these criteria are not basic requirements in every country. While the
United Kingdom, for example, requires a basic knowledge of English for every
applicant, skilled immigrants to Canada can technically qualify without knowledge
of either of the country’s official languages (English or French). Generally, an
applicant who receives a passing mark in any of the four countries discussed below
is believed to possess skills that are in sufficient demand to ensure ample
employment opportunities (if such an offer has not already been extended).
New Zealand10
In New Zealand, which has skilled immigration criteria that are detailed in
Appendix B, an applicant for skilled migration must accumulate 140 points (out of
a possible 290 points) to qualify for permanent admission. In order to even be
assessed on these criteria, the applicant must meet health, character, and basic
English language requirements, in addition to being under the age of 56. The New
Zealand immigration service evaluates a candidate for skilled employment on the
basis of four broad criteria: (1) existing skilled employment, or an offer thereof; (2)
work experience; (3) educational qualifications; and (4) age. During adjudication,
he or she can receive a minimum of 50 points and a maximum of 95 points, including
bonus points, for the skilled employment criterion. Additionally, candidates who
have at least two years of previous employment can receive a minimum of 10 points
and a maximum of 65 points, including bonus points, depending on length and type
of experience. Candidates with basic educational qualifications may receive a
minimum of 50 points, while those with higher qualifications may receive up to a
maximum of 100 points, including bonus points. Finally, all skilled employment
applicants who pass the basic requirements receive points for their age, from a
10 Information in this section is compiled from the New Zealand Immigration Service,
Operations Manual: Part 3, Residence, April 10, 2007, pp. 87-1,87-2, at
[http://www.immigration.govt.nz/migrant/general/generalinformation/operationsmanual/],
visited May 10, 2007.

---

CRS-6
minimum of five points for the age group of 50-55, to a maximum of 30 points for
20-29 year-olds.
Although the qualifying point total for skilled immigration may appear
permissive (with a qualifying mark of less than half of the available points under
New Zealand’s point structure), the prospect is difficult without an employment
offer. Many of the categories include a large number of bonus points for immigrants
attempting to settle in low growth and rural areas, or for previous experience in New
Zealand. Achieving a maximum score without bonus points in the non employment
offer categories (totaling 115 points) will not net an applicant a passing mark for
skilled immigration. Thus, the distribution of points and the level of the passing mark
for New Zealand’s skilled immigration makes an employment offer or existing New
Zealand employment a de facto requirement for skilled immigration. However, an
applicant may still qualify to submit an expression of interest for skilled immigration,
and the New Zealand government may choose to admit some of these applicants if
its skilled immigration quotas are not met.
United Kingdom11
In the United Kingdom, which has skilled immigration criteria that are detailed
in Appendix C, an applicant for skilled migration must accumulate 75 points (out
of a possible 125 points) to qualify for permanent admission. In order to even be
assessed on these criteria, the applicant must meet health, character, and basic
English language requirements, in addition to being able to support himself without
recourse to public funds. Current British policy assesses high skilled migrants
utilizing a point system known as the “Highly Skilled Migrant Program” (HSMP).
The HSMP is designed to be a flexible system for attracting well qualified
individuals to the British labor market.12 Under the HSMP, an applicant can receive
between 30-50 points for educational qualifications, between 5-45 points for past
earnings, between 0-20 points for age, and five points for any previous work or
educational experience in the United Kingdom.13 A passing mark under the British
system is 75 points. Additionally, the United Kingdom has a basic English language
qualifying requirement for the HSMP, wherein the individual must receive a
11 Information in this section is compiled from the Testimony of Foreign Law Specialist at
Law Library of Congress Clare Feikert, in U.S. Congress, House Committee on the
Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and
International Law, Hearing on An Examination of Point Systems as a Method for Selecting
Immigrants, hearings, 110th Cong., 1st sess., May 1, 2007 (Washington: GPO 2007), and
United Kingdom Home Office, A Points-Based System: Making Migration Work for Britain,
Cm 6741, March 2006, at [http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/command-points-
based-migration?view=Binary], visited May 10, 2007.
12 Testimony of Foreign Law Specialist at Law Library of Congress Clare Feikert, in U.S.
Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship,
Refugees, Border Security, and International Law, Hearing on An Examination of Point
Systems as a Method for Selecting Immigrants, hearings, 110th Cong., 1st sess., May 1, 2007
(Washington: GPO 2007).
13 United Kingdom Border and Immigration Agency, Information about the Highly Skilled
Migrant Programme, March 2006,

---

CRS-7
certificate of level six or above on the International English Language Testing
System (IELTS) examination.
A distinction with the British skilled immigration system is that it contains a
special Master of Business Administration (MBA) provision. Graduates from one
of the 50 eligible MBA programs from around the world who graduated since
December 2004 are automatically granted the 75 points necessary to qualify. Yet,
these candidates must still meet any other basic requirements of the visa, such as
English language skills.14 This MBA provision was put into effect in 2005, and the
website listing the eligible MBA programs the British Treasury maintains is included
in Appendix C.
Proposed Changes. The United Kingdom’s immigration system
additionally distinguishes itself from other points systems in that it is scheduled to
become an entirely tiered point system. Under the planned scheme, there will be five
new tiers to replace all existing worker and student visa categories and replace them
with a point system. These five tiers would include (1) high skilled workers, (2)
medium skilled workers, (3) low skilled workers, (4) students, and (5) temporary
workers and youth mobility.15 Family reunification and humanitarian immigration
would not be affected by the point system. The new point system is set to take effect
in April 2008.16
Australia17
The Australian skilled immigration program, which uses criteria that are
outlined in greater detail in Appendix D, does not have a universal set of points to
serve as a qualifying mark. Instead, the passing mark varies between 110-120 points,
depending upon the type of skilled immigration the individual is attempting to
qualify for. Additionally, Australian authorities maintain a reserve pool of applicants
who score between 70-120 points. If the immigration quotas are not filled by passing
applicants, Australian authorities may choose to fill the quota with applicants from
14 Testimony of Foreign Law Specialist at Law Library of Congress Clare Feikert, in U.S.
Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship,
Refugees, Border Security, and International Law, Hearing on An Examination of Point
Systems as a Method for Selecting Immigrants, hearings, 110th Cong., 1st sess., May 1, 2007
(Washington: GPO 2007).
15 United Kingdom Home Office, A Points-Based System: Making Migration Work for
Britain, Cm 6741, March 2006, at [http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/command-
points-based-migration?view=Binary], visited May 10, 2007.
16 Ibid.
17 Information in this section is compiled from the Testimony of Foreign Law Specialist at
Law Library of Congress Lisa White, in U.S. Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary,
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International
Law, Hearing on An Examination of Point Systems as a Method for Selecting Immigrants,
hearings, 110th Cong., 1st sess., May 1, 2007 (Washington: GPO 2007).

---

CRS-8
the reserve pool.18 In order to even be assessed on these criteria, the applicant must
meet health, character, age and basic English language requirements, in addition to
education and work requirements.
Australia has the most diverse set of categories of the point systems discussed
in this report. Australian authorities maintain a skilled occupations list (SOL) that
assigns a certain number of points (between 40-60 points) to each occupation
considered as skilled. Every applicant for skilled immigration must have a nominated
occupation that appears on the SOL and have the necessary work experience in this
occupation. A candidate who has work experience in skilled employment may
receive between 5-10 points depending on type of experience. If the nominated
occupation is on the government’s Migration Occupations in Demand List (MODL),
the individual may receive between 15-20 points. Moreover, an applicant must be
under the age of 45 to qualify, and will receive between 15-30 points in the age
category, with the points awarded decreasing as age increases.
In addition to such work and skill-related criteria, there are also a number of
points that are distributed specifically on the basis of involvement in Australia and
ability to adapt. One of these criteria is for regional study or residence, wherein an
applicant may receive five points for having lived in a designated region or low
population growth metropolitan area. An additional five points may be provided for
either (1) providing a minimum $100,000 (AUS) capital investment in Australia, (2)
Australian work experience of six months or more within the previous four years, or
(3) fluency in one of Australia’s community languages, other than English.
Moreover, if an applicant has received educational training in Australia, the
applicant may receive between 5-15 points, depending upon the type of education.
An applicant may also receive five points if his or her spouse receives qualifying
marks in a sufficient number of categories.
The final category for which an applicant may receive points is for competency
in the English language. Although basic skills in the English language is a
fundamental requirement for receiving a skilled immigrant visa, greater levels of
competency will receive a higher number of points. Applicants who receive a score
of at least five on all components of the International English Language Testing
System (IELTS) will receive 15 points, while native speakers and those scoring six
and higher on all component of the IELTS receive 20 points.19
18 Testimony of Foreign Law Specialist at Law Library of Congress Lisa White, in U.S.
Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship,
Refugees, Border Security, and International Law, Hearing on An Examination of Point
Systems as a Method for Selecting Immigrants, hearings, 110th Cong., 1st sess., May 1, 2007
(Washington: GPO 2007).
19 Ibid.

---

CRS-9
Canada20
In Canada, which has skilled immigration criteria that are detailed in Appendix
E, an applicant for skilled migration must accumulate 67 points (out of a possible
100 points) to qualify for permanent admission. In order to even be assessed on these
criteria, the applicant must meet health and character requirements, as well as
demonstrate that he will be able to support himself without recourse to public funds.
Current Canadian skilled immigration policy depends on a set of six selection criteria
— education, language, experience, age, arranged employment, and adaptability —
for determining admission eligibility for skilled immigrants. The categories of
education, language, and experience in an approved occupation are seen by Canadian
authorities as the key elements to integrating into Canadian society and becoming a
productive member of its economy. Therefore these three categories account for up
to 70 points cumulative maximum — three points above the passing mark. Having
an actual employment offer21 accounts for an additional ten points.22 Age and
adaptability criteria can each net an applicant up to an additional ten points,
respectively.
In terms of competence in the official languages, Canada is the only country
considered in this section that does not require a certain competence level.
Applicants that are fluent in both official languages may receive up to 24 points for
their language skills, but even those without any language qualifications are still
eligible to qualify. However, because of the way in which the points are distributed,
an individual with no competence in either official language would have to have a
confirmed permanent job offer in order to qualify. Additionally, this individual would
have to receive some adaptability points to receive a passing mark. Thus, while a de
jure prerequisite for official language skills does not exist, achieving a passing point
score without these skills would be difficult for most applicants.23
20 Information in this section is compiled from the Testimony of Senior Foreign Law
Specialist at Law Library of Congress Stephen F. Clarke, in U.S. Congress, House
Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border
Security, and International Law, Hearing on An Examination of Point Systems as a Method
for Selecting Immigrants, hearings, 110th Cong., 1st sess., May 1, 2007 (Washington: GPO
2007), and Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Overseas Processing Manual: Federal
Skilled Workers, no. OP 6, July 17, 2006, pp. 11-28, at [http://www.cic.gc.ca/manuals-
guides/english/op/op06e.pdf], visited May 22, 2007.
21 Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Overseas Processing Manual: Federal Skilled
Workers, no. OP 6, July 17, 2006, pp. 11-28, at [http://www.cic.gc.ca/manuals-guides/
english/op/op06e.pdf], visited May 22, 2007.
22 If an applicant does not have an actual employment offer, he must demonstrate that he has
sufficient funds on hand to qualify. These fund levels vary depending on household size and
are outlined in Appendix E.
23 Testimony of Senior Foreign Law Specialist at Law Library of Congress Stephen F.
Clarke, in U.S. Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on
Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law, Hearing on An
Examination of Point Systems as a Method for Selecting Immigrants, hearings, 110th Cong.,
1st sess., May 1, 2007 (Washington: GPO 2007).

---

CRS-10
For those potential migrants who wish to settle in Quebec, there are special
provisions that require the potential migrant to apply directly to the government of
Quebec. Under terms of the Canada-Quebec Accord on Immigration, Quebec is able
to establish its own immigration requirements for admission into the province.24
Currently, these requirements are not the same as those of the Canadian authorities.
Immigrants who wish to go to Quebec as a skilled worker must first apply to the
Quebec government to receive a Certificat de sélection du Québec (Quebec selection
certificate). Once this has been completed, the applicant must submit a separate
application for permanent residence to the Canadian government for consideration
under the Canadian requirements. Once an applicant has cleared each of these stages,
he or she will be admitted as a skilled worker to Quebec.25
Category Weighting Comparison
As demonstrated in Figure 1 below, the points for qualifying for skilled
employment immigration vary across the four different countries. For example, in
Australia having an employment offer (and the bonus points associated with it)
represents 53.3% of the points available, as compared to 32.8% in New Zealand and
10.0% in Canada. Canada places a greater emphasis on the work experience
category, which comprises 21.0% of the points available, while in Australia it
represents 6.7% of the available points and 22.4% of New Zealand’s skilled
immigration points. The United Kingdom does not grant points for employment
offers or work experience among its first tier applicants.
As Figure 1 below demonstrates, there are six major categories which are used
by most of the countries discussed in this section that employ a point system for
skilled immigration: employment offer, work experience, education, age, language
proficiency, and other criteria. All four countries do grant points for the age,
education, and work experience categories, while the United Kingdom is the only
country that does not give points directly for previous work experience. Instead, it
grants points for previous earnings (which comprises the entire “other” category for
that country). Canada and Australia both give points for language competency,
which in Australia is in addition to the basic language requirement for skilled
immigration.
24 Citizenship and Immigration Canada,” Immigrating to Quebec as a Skilled Worker,”
October 26, 2006, at [http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/skilled/quebec/index.html], visited May
22, 2007.
25 Ibid.

---

CRS-11
Figure 1. Percentage of Points Distributed Across Major
Categories for Select Countries with Point Systems
60
ts
in
o
50
P
le
b
ila
40
a
v
l A
ta
30
o
f T
o
e
20
g
ta
n
e
10
rc
e
P
0
New Zealand*
United Kingdom*
Australia*
Canada
Countrie s
Employment Offer
Work Experience
Education
Age
Language Proficiency
Other
So u rce : CRS presentation of selected point system schedules presented in Ap p e n d ix B-Ap p e n dix E.
No te : *Denotes that the country has a basic requirement for English language skills to be admitted as a skilled
immigrant.
When looking at the patterns across Figure 1, it is evident that the point
distribution in each of the selected countries is different and therefore reflects
different preferences for applicant attributes. Australia, for example, has 53% of its
points tied to employment offers, and 20% of the points distributed for age. The
remaining four categories receive 6.7% of the points each. Australia’s relatively
large point range between categories stands in contrast to that of Canada, which has
the most even distribution of points across categories. The Canadian skilled
immigration system grants 25% of available points to the education category, 24%
to language proficiency, and 21% to work experience. The remaining 3 categories
are each granted 10% of the available points.
New Zealand and the United Kingdom each have point distributions with
weighting schemes that fall between those of Australia and Canada. For New
Zealand’s system, 34.5% of the points distributed go towards the education criteria,
while 32.8% goes towards employment offers. Work experience accounts for an
additional 22.4% of the points total, while age has the lowest share with 10.3%. In
the United Kingdom, 41.7% of the points total is allocated for the education category,
while 16.7% is distributed for age. An additional 37% is allocated for past earnings
(classified in the chart under the category heading of “other”). Lastly, the current
British point system allocates 4.2% of its points for having a United Kingdom
qualification or work experience — listed in Figure 1 under the category heading of
“work experience.”
Although the distribution of points across categories is important for the
filtering of applicants, the placement of the passing mark will also affect the ability
of these categories to determine immigrant eligibility. For example, skilled
immigration to Australia requires that an applicant accumulate between 73.3%-80%
of the available points. Such a high passing mark ensures that applicants must
receive high qualifying marks in most categories. New Zealand requires that an
individual accumulates 48.2% of all available points. Yet, because the country offers

---

CRS-12
a large number of bonus points for employment in rural and targeted areas, achieving
a passing mark becomes more difficult for individuals who wish to settle outside
these areas. The Canadian point system requires an applicant to accumulate 67% of
available points, thereby ensuring that an individual must score points in at least three
categories. For the United Kingdom, achieving a passing mark requires receiving at
least 62.5% of all available points.
Prior U.S. Considerations of Point Systems
The United States has weighed the option of a point system for selecting
immigrants in the past, but thus far has not elected to enact one. The discussion
below provides the highlights of the most recent periods when points systems were
elements of major efforts to reform legal immigration. It specifically focuses on the
policy debates of the 1980s that culminated in the Immigration Act of 1990.
Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy
During the 1980s, point systems were one of the focal points during the debate
over the proposals to reform legal immigration to the United States. The Select
Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy (SCIRP), which Congress
established in 1978, did not endorse a point system as part of its comprehensive
package of immigration reform recommendations in 1981. The SCIRP offered this
explanation for its position:
Despite considerable support for a point system, it became clear that it would be
difficult for Commissioners, not to mention Congress, to decide on criteria and
the specific value of points to be awarded for each. Fundamental value questions
are at issue. For example, if points are given for English-language ability, certain
countries would clearly be favored. Administration of a point system could also
be difficult. For example, if educational achievement is given points, how does
one compare among societies vastly different educational systems. For these and
other reasons only two Commissioners [out of a total of 16 Commissioners]
voted for a point system as a selection mechanism for independent immigrants.26
Interest in devising a point system for selection of immigrants continued nonetheless,
and options appeared in a variety of the immigration reform bills in the 1980s.
Immigration Act of 1990
Prior to the current debate, the most extensive debate on a U.S. point system
occurred as Congress considered the legislation that ultimately became the
Immigration Act of 1990 (P.L.101-649). During the late 1980s, the Immigration and
Naturalization Service (INS) proposed that 100,000 visas would be available for
aliens according to a 150-point system. Aliens with the most points according to
26 Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy, U.S. Immigration Policy and the
National Interest, Staff Report, 1981, pp. 404-405.

---

CRS-13
various characteristics would immigrate ahead of aliens with lower point totals.27
These proposed characteristics included points for arranged employment in a desired
occupation, knowledge of English, age, education and experience or training in an
occupation that was in demand. One version of the INS recommendation added a
category that would have given points to citizens of an “underrepresented” country.
The legislation that would become Immigration Act of 1990 was S. 358, and
many consider it the most recent comprehensive overhaul of legal immigration. As
introduced, S. 358 would have allocated 55,000 visas according to a point system
based on age, education, English language ability, occupational demand,
occupational training and work experience. During the Senate Committee on the
Judiciary consideration of S. 358, the point system was a major issue. According to
a report of that mark-up session, the selection criteria debate was especially
noteworthy.
The most spirited portion of the mark-up concerned an amendment by Sen.
Simon to delete from the point system points for knowledge of the English
language. After nearly an hour of debate, in which several Senators told stories
about personal relatives who had arrived in this country not speaking English, the
amendment passed by a 12-2 vote....28
As passed by the Senate in 1989, S. 358 would have allocated 54,000 visas annually
according to a point system. A total of 90 points would have been credited as
follows:
! age — 10 points for age 21-35 and 5 points for age 36-45
! education — 10 points for high school, an additional 10 points for
a bachelor’s degree, and further 5 points for a graduate degree;
! occupational demand — 20 points;
! occupational training or work experience — 20 points; and
! pre-arranged employment — 15 points.
Twenty percent of the visas in the “selected immigrant” category would have gone
to those who scored the highest total points; the other 80% would have been
distributed randomly to qualifying aliens who had at least 60 points. Labor market
tests (such as requirements to recruit U.S. workers or offer prevailing wages) would
not have been mandated for aliens entering through this point system under this bill.
The House-passed version of S. 358 differed from the Senate bill, and the conferees
on S. 358 ultimately opted not to include the point system in the Immigration Act of
1990 (P.L.101-649).
27 The INS proposal would also have eliminated the family-based preference for brothers or
sisters of U.S. citizens (at that time — fifth preference). The replacement point system
would have credited 20 points for brothers or sisters of U.S. citizens. To ease the impact of
the fifth preference category elimination, the first three years after enactment the INS would
have granted an additional 30 points to pending beneficiaries of fifth preference visa
petitions. This “double-hit” of 50 points aimed to ensure that brothers or sisters of U.S.
citizens would have dominated the independent category the first three years.
28 Interpreter Releases, vol. 66, no. 23, “Senate Judiciary Committee Approves Compromise
Legal Immigration Bill,” June 19, 1989.

---

CRS-14
Instead, the Immigration Act of 1990 established the current 5 tiered
employment-based preference system and labeled the following as the first preference
“priority workers”:
! persons of extraordinary ability in the arts, science, education,
business, or athletics;
! outstanding professors and researchers; and
! certain multi-national executives and managers.
LPRs who meet these criteria are permitted entry without the labor market tests
required of most other employment-based LPRs, and the law allocates up to 28.6%
of the 140,000 employment-based LPRs for these priority workers. The 1990 Act
also amended the INA to enable certain members of the professions holding
advanced degrees or persons of exceptional abilities in the sciences, art, or business
to enter without labor market tests if it is deemed to be in the national interest. It
allocates up to 28.6% of the 140,000 LPR visas for the second preference category.29
In 1995, the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform recommended “that
immigrants be chosen on the basis of the skills they contribute to the economy,” but
it did not endorse a point system as the basis for this selection.30 The House and
Senate immigration reform bills that received legislative action in the mid-1990s
likewise did not include provisions for a point system.31
Current Proposal for Immigration Point System
S.Amdt. 1150 to S. 1348 — entitled the “Comprehensive Immigration Reform
Act of 2007” — offers a proposal for a “merit-based” point system to replace the
current employment-based preference system’s first three categories.32 This point
system proposal, which is detailed inAppendix F, would involve two tiers, namely
a tier for merit-based legal permanent residents, and a supplemental second tier for
29 CRS Report RL33977, Immigration of Foreign Workers: Labor Market Tests and
Protections, by Ruth Ellen Wasem.
30 U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform, Report to Congress, Legal Immigration:
Setting Priorities, Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1995. The Commission
was established as a result of a mandate by the Immigration Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-649). It
is often referred to as the Jordan Commission for its original chairwoman, the Honorable
Barbara Jordan.
31 CRS Report 96-149, Immigration: Analysis of Major Proposals to Revise Family and
Employment Admissions, by Joyce C. Vialet and Ruth Ellen Wasem, February 14, 1996,
available upon request.
32 Appendix A details these preference categories. S.Amdt. 1150 to S. 1348 also would
eliminate most of the family-based preference categories. For a full analysis, see CRS
Report RL32235, U.S. Immigration Policy on Permanent Admissions.

---

CRS-15
unauthorized workers who have as a prerequisite qualified for a proposed new Z visa
category.33
Admissions Levels for S.Amdt. 1150’s Point System
It appears that S.Amdt. 1150 would establish 3 different worldwide ceiling
levels for the “merit-based” system. For the first five fiscal years post-enactment, the
worldwide ceiling would be set at the level made available during FY2005 — a
reported total of 246,878.34 Of this number, 10,000 would be set aside for
exceptional Y visa holders; and 90,000 would be set aside for reduction of
employment-based backlog existing on the date of enactment.
After other provisions in S.Amdt. 1150 enabling authorized aliens to adjust
begin to go into effect (in three or four years), the bill would set the worldwide level
at 140,000. Of this number, 10,000 would again be set aside for exceptional Y visa
holders, and 90,000 would again be set aside for reduction of employment-based
backlog existing on the date of enactment.
After the provision in the proposal allowing unauthorized aliens to legalize (Z
visa) and the supplemental tier goes into effect, the worldwide level would be set at
380,000. The provision would again set aside 10,000 for exceptional Y visa holders.
Point Distributions Proposed in S.Amdt. 1150
Both tiers of the S.Amdt. 1150’s point system would include multiple factors.
Although most factors would be one-dimensional (where scores would be based upon
either meeting or not meeting a factor requirement), some factors such as
“employment” would be multidimensional. These multidimensional factors would
include scores as well as scales depending on the level of the applicants qualification
for the factor. According to the legislative proposal, adjustments to the weighting
scheme of the immigration factors and the level of the “passing mark” for applicants
would each be set by a newly established Standing Commission on Immigration and
Labor Markets.35
Merit-Based Points. S.Amdt. 1150’s point system for merit-based
immigrants would be based upon a total of 100 points divided between four factors:
! employment experience in the United States,
! educational attainment,
33 The Z visa is a proposed new nonimmigrant (or temporary) visa category for individuals
who are unlawfully present in the U.S. This proposed visa would allow applicants to adjust
status to lawful temporary presence, and eventually gain legal permanent residence under
earned adjustment provisions, provided that the applicant qualifies. (S.Amdt. 1150 § 601).
34 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Office of Immigration Statistics, 2005 Yearbook
of Immigration Statistics, table 6, 2006.
35 S.Amdt. 1150, §502(b)(1)(C).

---

CRS-16
! English language and civics proficiencies, and
! extended family residing in the United States.36
Across these four categories it would include several sub-factors, such as “age”
within the “employment” factor, that would be meant to capture an applicant at an
optimal time in terms of human capital. Additionally, the proposal emphasizes skill
sets in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), and
would grant an individual up to 16 points for having a STEM-related education and
employment. Individuals who complete a Department of Labor Registered
Apprenticeship would also receive 8 points.37
For the merit-based immigrants, S.Amdt. 1150’s point schedule would grant the
largest number of points for the employment factor. This category would grant up
to a maximum of 47 points, based upon occupation,38 employer endorsement, and
experience — all with U.S. firms — as well as age and national interest criteria.
Additionally, an applicant would receive up to 28 points for education, depending
upon level of completed education and the field of study.39 Moreover, the English
and civics proficiencies factor would yield up to a maximum of 15 points. The factor
for extended family already in the United States would yield up to a maximum of 10
points.
Z Visa Point Supplement. For individuals wishing to qualify for LPR status
under a Z visa, S.Amdt. 1150’s proposed point system includes a supplemental point
schedule. Although the legislative language is not precise, it appears that individuals
applying under the Z visa requirements would be assessed using the same schedule
as the merit-based LPRs in addition to the supplemental schedule, thereby adding
fifty additional points from various qualifying factors for a cumulative total of 150
points. These proposed additional factors, which are also detailed in Appendix F,
are
36 S.Amdt. 1150, §502(b)(1)(A).
37 The Senate bill proposes to create a new student visa category for students intending to
study in a STEM-related field. These students would not have to demonstrate an intent to
return to their country of residence when applying for a student visa. This proposal also
includes a provision to allow for off-campus employment and an extension of the optional
practical training period to a length of 24 months subsequent to graduation. It is not clear
from the current Senate bill whether STEM students could receive immigration points for
this training under the employment category or as a registered apprenticeship for education.
38 An applicant with U.S. employment in a “specialty occupation,” as determined by the
Department of Labor, would be granted 20 points. An applicant with U.S. employment in
a “high demand occupation,” including the top 30 occupations on the 10-year job growth
list from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, would be granted 16 points.
39 Graduate or professional degree would receive 20 points, bachelor’s degrees would
receive 16 points, associate’s degrees would receive 10 points, high school diploma would
receive 6 points, and a completed certified Perkins Vocational Education program would
receive 5 points. An additional 8 points are available if the applicant has an associates
degree or above in a STEM field, or if the individual completes a Department of Labor
Registered Apprenticeship.

---

CRS-17
! recent agricultural work experience,
! authorized U.S. employment experience,
! home ownership, and
! medical insurance.
Legal U.S. employment experience and home ownership would each be scored on a
scale dimension, where each qualifying year would yield one point, while agricultural
work experience would score 21, 23, or 25 points depending upon if the applicant
had been employed in agriculture for three, four, or five years, respectively. The U.S.
employment experience would yield up to 15 points, while the home ownership
would grant the applicant up to a maximum of 5 points. Applicants with medical
insurance would receive an additional 5 points.
Tier Comparison. As Figure 2 demonstrates, it appears that the percentage
weighting of S.Amdt. 1150’s point system would vary depending upon which tier an
applicant was applying under. For merit-based immigrants, 47.0% of the available
points would be in the employment in the United States category, while for Z visas
the analogous employment category would account for 31.3% of the available points.
Additionally, education would be weighted less for Z visas, accounting for 18.7% of
available points, as opposed to 28.0% for merit-based immigrants. For Z visas, the
points credited for agricultural experience would account for approximately 16.6%
of the total available points. Additionally, the other three factors exclusive to Z visas
— a set of factors seemingly aimed at applicant adaptability to the U.S. — would add
up to 16.7% of the points total for applicants under the Z visa tier. Lastly, English
and civics, as well as extended family, would both be relatively stronger weighted
factors for the merit-based LPR visa tier than for the Z visa tier.

---

CRS-18
Figure 2. Percentage Weighted to Each Factor in
S.Amdt. 1150-Proposed Point System, by Tier
5 0
4 7
4 5
4 0
3 5
3 1 .3
2 8
3 0
2 5
1 8 .7
2 0
1 6 .7
1 5
1 5
1 0 .0
1 0
1 0 .0
1 0
6 .7
3 .3
3 .3
5
0
E m p lo y m e n t
E d u c a tio n
E n g lis h &
E x t e n d e d
A g ric u lt u ra l
L a w fu l U . S .
H o m e
M e d ic a l
C ivic s
F a m ily
W o rk
E m p lo y m e n t
O w n e rs h ip
In s u ra n c e
E x p e rie n c e
S k i lle d Im m i g ra nts
Z V i s a s
S o u rc e : C R S s y n t h e s is a n d p re s e n t a t io n o f in fo rm a t io n fro m S . A m d t . 1 1 5 0 , § 5 0 2 (b )(1 )(A ).
Current Themes
The current comprehensive immigration reform proposal embodied in S.Amdt.
1150 is sparking a lively discussion, and the point system is among its controversial
features. The themes highlighted below are illustrative of the multifaceted aspects
of this debate.
From Encouraging Migration to Managing Demand
Nations currently using points systems, such as thus discussed above, typically
seek to tailor the selection process to recruit immigrants most likely to invigorate
their economies. The stated objectives are generally to encourage migration that
complements shortfalls and skill mismatches in their labor forces, coupled with other
factors that are thought to correlate with success. The challenge for policy makers
is adapting a point system — a method that is typically used to encourage migration
— to manage the high-demand migration context of the United States. In this debate,
“passing marks” and per-country ceilings will become key elements.
From Personal Relationships to National Priorities
The current preference system for selecting LPRs to the United States is largely
based upon relationships that are personal. More specifically, prospective LPRs
qualify either through marriage and close familial relationships and through the
employer-employee relationships. A point system might well move the selection
process away from the judgements of individuals and needs of local labor markets
to a standardized set of criteria based on national priorities. At issue in this context
is who/what is perceived to be the proper people/optimal entity to determine who will
be permitted to come to the United States.

---

CRS-19
From Augmenting to Replacing Existing Visa Categories
Whether a point system (or any new mechanism for selecting immigrants) is
augmenting an existing selection system or replacing an existing selection system,
it affects the debate. Establishing a new stream of immigrants is likely to spark
objections among those who oppose increasing immigration levels. If, alternatively,
a point system replaces an existing set of immigration preference categories then
stakeholders in the current system are likely to oppose it. If a point system creates
an independent stream of immigrants it might reduce the control of employers over
the selection process and bypass the labor market protections for U.S. workers.
Given that many policy makers as well as observers view immigration policy as a
“zero-sum game,” this aspect may be the most contentious of all.
Concluding Comments
The challenge in formulating an immigration system is structuring it to represent
the country’s values, priorities and needs. The difficulty in many countries is
designing a system that effectively operationalizes these specific values, priorities
and needs into immigration policy. Point systems are appealing to some because they
may be structured to provide a parsimonious and transparent tool defining merit-
based immigrant eligibility. Yet, paradoxically, these same attributes of point
systems also make them more likely to be a politically charged instrument. The
objective quantification of merit itself provokes debate over what human capital,
personal traits and values prospective immigrants should bring to a country.

---

CRS-20
Appendix A. Current U.S. Legal Immigration
Preference System
Category
Numerical Limit
Total Family-Sponsored Immigrants
480,000
Immediate relatives
Aliens who are the spouses
and
Unlimited
unmarried minor children of U.S.
citizens and the parents of adult U.S.
citizens
Family-sponsored Preference Immigrants
Worldwide Level 226,000
1st preference
Unmarried sons and daughters
of 23,400 plus visas not required for
citizens
4th preference
2nd preference
(A) Spouses and children of LPRs
114,200 plus visas not required
(B) Adult unmarried sons and daughters for 1st preference
of LPRs
3rd preference
Married sons and daughters of citizens
23,400 plus visas not required for
1st or 2nd preference
4th preference
Siblings of citizens age 21 and over
65,000 plus visas not required for
1st, 2nd, or 3rd preference
Employment-Based Preference Immigrants
Worldwide Level 140,000
1st preference
Priority workers: persons
of 28.6% of worldwide limit plus
extraordinary ability in the arts, science, unused 4th and 5th preference
education, business, or athletics;
outstanding professors and researchers;
and certain multi-national executives
and managers
2nd preference
Members of the professions holding 28.6% of worldwide limit plus
advanced degrees or persons of unused 1st preference
exceptional abilities in the sciences, art,
or business
3rd preference — Skilled shortage workers with at least 28.6% of worldwide limit plus
skilled
two years training or experience, unused 1st or 2nd preference
professionals with baccalaureate degrees
3rd preference — Unskilled shortage workers
10,000 (taken from the total
“other”
available for 3rd preference)
4th preference
“Special immigrants,”
including 7.1% of worldwide limit;
ministers of religion, religious workers religious workers limited to
other than ministers, certain employees 5,000
of the U.S. government abroad, and
others
5th preference
Employment creation investors who 7.1% of worldwide limit; 3,000
invest at least $1 million (amount may minimum reserved for investors
vary in rural areas or areas of high in rural or high unemployment
unemployment) which will create at areas
least 10 new jobs
Source: CRS summary of §§ 203(a), 203(b), and 204 of INA; 8 U.S.C. § 1153; excerpted from CRS
Report RL32235, U.S. Immigration Policy on Permanent Admissions.

---

CRS-21
Appendix B. New Zealand Point
System Requirements40
Basic Requirements
Principal applicants under the Skilled Migrant Category are assessed against:
! health, character and English language requirements; and
! employability and capacity building requirements; and
! settlement and contribution requirements.
An application under the Skilled Migrant Category will be approved if:
! the principal applicant and family members included in the
application meet health and character, and English language
requirements where required; and
! the principal applicant qualifies for the points for employability and
capacity building factors on the basis of which their Expression of
Interest was selected from the Pool; or
! the principal applicant meets the criteria set from time to time by the
Minister of Immigration on the basis of which their Expression of
Interest was selected from the Pool; and
! the principal applicant is less than 56 years of age; and
! the principal applicant is assessed as having the ability to
successfully settle in and contribute to New Zealand; and
! all necessary verification of the application has been completed.
Summary of Points Distribution Factors
PASSING MARK:
140 POINTS
EXPRESSION OF INTEREST:
100 POINTS
Table 1. New Zealand Point Distribution
FACTORS
POINTS
Skilled Employment (Maximum 95 Points):
! Current skilled employment in New Zealand for 12
months or more
60
! Offer of skilled employment in New Zealand or current
skilled employment in New Zealand for less than 12
months
50
40 Information in this section is compiled from the New Zealand Immigration Service,
Operations Manual: Part 3, Residence, April 10, 2007, pp. 87-1,87-2, at
[http://www.immigration.govt.nz/migrant/general/generalinformation/operationsmanual/],
visited May 10, 2007.

---

CRS-22
FACTORS
POINTS
Bonus points for employment or offer of employment in:
! An identified future growth area, identified cluster
5
! An area of absolute skills shortage
10
! Region outside Auckland
10
! Partner employment or offer of employment
10
Work Experience (Maximum 65 Points):
! 2 years
10
! 4 years
15
! 6 years
20
! 8 years
25
! 10 years
30
Additional bonus points if work experience in New Zealand:
! 2 years
5
! 4 years
10
! 6 years or more
15
Additional bonus points for work experience in an identified future growth area, identified
cluster:
! 2 to 5 years
5
! 6 years or more
10
Additional bonus points for work experience in an area of absolute skills shortage:
! 2 to 5 years
5
! 6 years or more
10
Qualifications (Maximum 100 Points):
! Recognized basic qualification (e.g. trade qualification,
diploma, bachelors degree, bachelors degree with
50
Honors)
! Recognized post-graduate qualification (Masters degree,
55
Doctorate)
Bonus points for:
! Recognized New Zealand qualification (and at least two
10
years study in New Zealand)
! Qualification in an identified future growth area, cluster
5
or area of absolute skill shortage
! Qualification in an area of absolute skill shortage
10
! Partner qualifications
10
! Close family support in New Zealand
10
Age (20 to 55 Yrs) (Maximum 30 Points):
! 20-29
30
! 30-39
25
! 40-44
20
! 45-49
10
! 50-55
5

---

CRS-23
Appendix C. United Kingdom Current Point
System Requirements41
Basic Requirements
To qualify for immigration, the principal applicant must at a minimum
demonstrate the following criteria:
! Applicant can work, or continue to work, in his chosen field in the
United Kingdom. If necessary, he will need to show relevant
qualifications and professional membership to work in certain
occupations in the United Kingdom.
! Applicant can support himself without recourse to public funds (this
can be demonstrated on the basis of either savings or earning
potential)
! Applicant intends to make the United Kingdom his main home
! Applicant has either never been made bankrupt or is considered to
be a discharged bankrupt.
! Applicant has never been convicted of any criminal offences
! Applicant is proficient in the English language.
Summary of Points Distribution Factors
PASSING MARK:
75 POINTS
Table 2. United Kingdom Point Distribution
FACTORS
POINTS
Qualification (Maximum 55 Points):
! Ph.D.
50
! Masters Degree or Professional Level Qualification
35
(e.g., Chartered Accountant)
! A Bachelors Degree
30
United Kingdom qualification or work experience (Maximum 5 Points):
! Either United Kingdom qualification or work experience
5
41 Information in this section is compiled from the Testimony of Foreign Law Specialist at
Law Library of Congress Clare Feikert, in U.S. Congress, House Committee on the
Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and
International Law, Hearing on An Examination of Point Systems as a Method for Selecting
Immigrants, hearings, 110th Cong., 1st sess., May 1, 2007 (Washington: GPO 2007), and
United Kingdom Home Office, A Points-Based System: Making Migration Work for Britain,
Cm 6741, March 2006, at [http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/command-points-
based-migration?view=Binary], visited May 10, 2007.

---

CRS-24
FACTORS
POINTS
Age (Maximum 20 Points):
! 27 or under
20
! 28 or 29
10
! 30 or 31
5
Past Earnings (Maximum 45 Points):
! £16,000-17,999
5
! £18,000-19,999
10
! £20,000-22,999
15
! £23,000-25,999
20
! £26,000-28,999
25
! £29,000-31,999
30
! £32,000-34,999
35
! £35,000-39,999
40
! £40,000+
45
Notes: The past earnings are those for countries categorized as “Band A” countries, which includes
the United States. The HSMP contains five different bands for distributing points for past earnings,
depending on which country the applicant is applying from. These bands vary based on income levels
in countries around the world. For example, while an applicant from Norway would use the Band A
listing of salaries, an applicant from Afghanistan would use Band E. Thus, while the applicant from
Norway would need past earnings of over £40,000 to attain the maximum points allotted for that
category, the applicant from Afghanistan would need past earnings of over £3,600 to achieve the same
number of category points. For band listings and further past earnings guidance, see United Kingdom
Home Office, Highly Skilled Migrant Programme: Guidance for Applicants, June 1, 2007, at
[http://www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk/6353/11406/49552/hsmp1guidancejune07.pdf], visited June 5,
2007.
MBA Provision. The United Kingdom currently has a provision for graduates
of 50 top MBA programs,42 who have graduated since December 2004, to remain in
the United Kingdom for up to 12 months in order to seek employment and gain the
necessary points to qualify for permanent residence. The basic structure of the
program will also be taken up in a Post-Study category for skilled overseas students
who have chosen to study at an institution in the United Kingdom. These students
would thus be given the same 12 month transitional opportunity.
42 The list of the 50 qualifying MBA programs may be found at
[http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk./media/F2F/24/pbr04_50mbas_50.pdf], visited May 24,
2007.

---

CRS-25
Appendix D. Australian Point
System Requirements43
Basic Requirements
In order to qualify for immigration, the principal applicant must at a minimum
demonstrate the following criteria:
! under 45;
! English at least at “vocational” level;
! have a post secondary education;
! nominated occupation on skilled occupations list (SOL); and
! necessary work experience in his nominated occupation.
Summary of Points Distribution Factors
PASSING MARK:
110-120 POINTS
RESERVE POOL:
70-120 POINTS
Table 3. Australian Point Distribution
FACTORS
POINTS
Nominated Occupation on the Skilled Occupations List (Maximum 60 Points):
! Highly Sought Skills
60
! Very Sought Skills
50
! Sought Skills
40
Age (Maximum 30 Points):
! 18-29
30
! 30-34
25
! 35-39
20
! 39-44
15
English Language Proficiency (Maximum 20 Points):
! Native English speaker; or
20
! gained a tertiary degree from a University where English is
20
the primary language of instruction; or
! achieved a band score of at least 6 on all four components
of the International English Language Testing System
20
(IELTS) test; or
43 Information in this section is compiled from the Testimony of Foreign Law Specialist at
Law Library of Congress Lisa White, in U.S. Congress, House Committee on the Judiciary,
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International
Law, Hearing on An Examination of Point Systems as a Method for Selecting Immigrants,
hearings, 110th Cong., 1st sess., May 1, 2007 (Washington: GPO 2007).

---

CRS-26
FACTORS
POINTS
! achieved a band score of at least 5 on all four components
15
of the IELTS test
Specific Work Experience (Maximum 10 Points):
! Nominated occupation is worth 60 points and applicant
worked in nominated occupation for at least the past three
10
out of four years
! Nominated occupation is worth 40, 50 or 60 points and
applicant worked in skilled employment (in any occupation
5
on the SOL) for at least the past three out of four years
Employment Offer/Occupation in Demand (Maximum 20 Points):
! Nominated occupation is found on the Migration
15
Occupations in Demand List (MODL)
! Nominated occupation is found on the MODL and applicant
holds a job offer in nominated occupation from an
Australian organization that has employed at least 10 people
20
on a full-time basis for the previous two fiscal years
Australian Qualification (Maximum 10 Points):
! At least a one-year diploma from an Australian university
5
! A Ph.D. (Doctorate) from an Australian university
10
Spousal Qualifications (Maximum 5 Points):
! Spouse (or de facto spouse) meets all the basic requirements
and is able to nominate an occupation from the SOL and
5
have his/her qualifications assessed as suitable for his/her
nominated occupation
Other (Maximum 5 Points):
! Worked in Australia on a valid visa for at least six months
out of the past four years in a skilled occupation (one found
5
on the SOL)
! Invest at least A$100,000 in a Designated Government
5
investment in Australia for a term of at least 12 months
! Fluent (to the level of Professional Interpreter / Translator
as set out by the National Australian Association of
5
Translators and Interpreters) in one of Australia’s
community languages

---

CRS-27
Appendix E. Canadian Point System Requirements44
Basic Requirements
In order to qualify for skilled immigration, the principal applicant must at
a minimum demonstrate a sufficient number of points under the points criteria.
If the applicant does not have an offer of employment, he must additionally
show sufficient level of funds on hand to qualify. By household size, these
levels of funds are:
! For a single person C$10,168
For a family unit consisting of the following:
! 2 persons C$12,659
! 3 persons C$15,563
! 4 persons C$18,895
! 5 persons C$21,431
! 6 persons C$24,170
! 7 persons or more C$26,910
Summary of Points Distribution Factors
PASSING MARK:
67 POINTS
Table 4. Canadian Point Distribution
FACTORS
POINTS
Age (Maximum 10 Points):
! Between 21 and 49
10
! Either 20 or 50
8
! Either 19 or 51
6
! Either 18 or 52
4
! Either 17 or 53
2
44 Information in this section is compiled from the Testimony of Senior Foreign Law
Specialist at Law Library of Congress Stephen F. Clarke, in U.S. Congress, House
Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border
Security, and International Law, Hearing on An Examination of Point Systems as a Method
for Selecting Immigrants, hearings, 110th Cong., 1st sess., May 1, 2007 (Washington: GPO
2007), and Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Overseas Processing Manual: Federal
Skilled Workers, no. OP 6, July 17, 2006, pp. 11-28, at [http://www.cic.gc.ca/manuals-
guides/english/op/op06e.pdf], visited May 22, 2007.

---

CRS-28
FACTORS
POINTS
Official Language Proficiency45 (Maximum 24 Points):
First official language:
! High proficiency
16
! Moderate proficiency
8
! Basic proficiency
2
Second official language:
! High proficiency
8
! Moderate proficiency
8
! Basic proficiency
2
Work Experience (Maximum 21 Points):
! At least 1 year
15
! At least 2 years
17
! At least 3 years
19
! 4 or more years
21
Employment Offer (Maximum 10 Points):
! Applicant has a job offer approved by Human Resources
Development Canada (HRDC). Applicant must have the
abilities to perform the tasks of the job, and meet the
educational and, where relevant, licensing and regulatory
10
requirements for the job. Applicant may also gain the ten
points in some circumstances he is already in employment
in Canada.
Education (Maximum 25 Points):
! Completed secondary school educational credential
5
! One year post-secondary educational credential, other than a
university credential, and at least 12 years of completed full-
12
time or full-time equivalent studies
! One year post-secondary educational credential, other than a
university educational credential, and at least 13 years of
15
completed full-time or full-time equivalent studies
! One year university educational credential at the bachelor’s
level, and at least 13 years of completed full-time or full-
15
time equivalent studies
! Two year post-secondary educational credential, other than
a university educational credential, and at least 14 years of
20
completed full-time or full-time equivalent studies
45 Language skills are based upon reading, writing, listening to, and speaking skills. Each
skill may be scored individually. For the first official language the applicant is given 4
points per high proficiency skill, 2 points per moderately proficient skill, and one point for
each skill where basic proficiency is demonstrated. For the second official language, these
skill scores are adjusted to 2 points, 2 points and 1 point, respectively. For both the first and
second official language, a person may only be granted a maximum of 2 points from the
basic proficiency category across all four language skills.

---

CRS-29
FACTORS
POINTS
! A university educational credential of two years or more at
the bachelor’s level, and at least 14 years of completed full-
20
time or full-time equivalent studies
! Three year post-secondary educational credential, other than
a university educational credential, and at least 15 years of
22
completed full-time or full-time equivalent studies
! Two or more university educational credentials at the
bachelor’s level and at least 15 years of completed full-time
22
or full-time equivalent studies
! University educational credential at the master’s or doctoral
level and at least 17 years of completed full-time or full-time
25
equivalent studies
Adaptability (Maximum 10 Points):
Educational credentials of the accompanying spouse or common-law partner:
! Completed a one or two-year post-secondary program and
3
has at least 13 years of total education
! Completed a three-year post secondary program and has at
4
least 15 years of total education
! Completed a three-year university degree and has at least 15
4
years of total education
! Completed a Master’s or Ph.D. and has at least 17 years of
5
total education
Previous study in Canada46:
! Applicant or accompanying spouse or common- law partner
completed a program of full-time study of at least two years’
duration at a post-secondary institution in Canada, provided
5
this occurred after the age of seventeen and with valid study
permits.
Previous work in Canada:
! A minimum of one year of full-time work in Canada on a
valid work permit for an applicant or accompanying spouse
5
or common-law partner.
Relatives in Canada:
! Applicant or accompanying spouse or common- law partner
has a relative (parent, grandparent, child, grandchild, child
of a parent, child of a grandparent, or grandchild of a parent)
5
who is residing in Canada and is a Canadian citizen or
permanent resident.
Arranged employment:
! Applicant has earned points under the Employment Offer
5
factor
46 The applicant or qualifying spouse or partner is not required to have obtained an
educational credential for these two years of study in Canada to earn the points, but simply
to have completed at least two years of study.

---

CRS-30
Appendix F. Proposed Point System in Senate
Amendment 1150
Category
Description
Points
Employment (Maximum 47 Points):
! U.S. employment in Specialty
Occupation (Department of Labor
20
Occupation
definition) U.S. employment in
High Demand Occupation (Bureau
of Labor Statistics’ largest 10-yr
16
job growth, top 30)
! U.S. employment in STEM or
National interest/
health occupation, current for at
8
critical infrastructure
least 1 year
! A U.S. employer willing to pay
50% of LPR application fee either
Employer endorsement
6
1) offers a job, or 2) attests for a
current employee
2 per year
Experience
! Years of work for U.S. firm
(max 10
points)
Age of worker
! Worker’s age: 25-39
3
Education (Maximum 28 Points):
20
! M.D., M.B.A., Graduate degree,
etcBachelors degreeAssociates
16
degree
Terminal Degree
10
! High School diploma or
GEDCompleted certified Perkins
6
Vocational Education program
5
! Completed Department of Labor
8
Bonus Points
Registered ApprenticeshipSTEM,
associate degree and above
8
English & Civics (Maximum 15 points):
! Native speaker of English or
15
TOEFL score of 75 or
Skill Level
higherTOEFL score of 60-74Pass
10
USCIS Citizenship Tests in
English and Civics
6

---

CRS-31
Category
Description
Points
Extended Family (Maximum 10 Points):
! Adult (21 or older) son or daughter
8
of U.S. citizen (USC) Adult (21 or
older) son or daughter of legal
Scores Applied if
6
permanent resident (LPR)
Threshold of
! Sibling of USC or LPR
55 in Above Categories
!
4
If had applied for a family visa in
any of the above categories after
May 1, 2005
2
Max
Category
Description
Points
Supplemental Schedule for Z Visas (Maximum 50 Points):
! Worked in agriculture for 3 years,
21
150 days per year
! Worked in agriculture for 4 years
23
Agriculture National
(150 days for 3 years, 100 days
Interest
for 1 year)
! Worked in agriculture for 5 years,
25
100 days per year
1 per year
U.S. Employment
! Year of lawful employment
(max 15
Experience
points)
1 per year
owned
Home ownership
! Own place of residence
(max 5
points)
! Current medical insurance for
5
Medical Insurance
entire family

---