{ "id": "R42048", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "R42048", "active": false, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 596919, "date": "2016-07-28", "retrieved": "2020-01-03T15:05:29.041203", "title": "Numerical Limits on Permanent Employment-Based Immigration: Analysis of the Per-country Ceilings", "summary": "The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) specifies a complex set of numerical limits and preference categories for admitting lawful permanent residents (LPRs) that include economic priorities among the criteria for admission. Employment-based immigrants are admitted into the United States through one of the five available employment-based preference categories. Each preference category has its own eligibility criteria and numerical limits, and at times different application processes. The INA allocates 140,000 visas annually for employment-based LPRs, which amount to roughly 14% of the total 1.0 million LPRs in FY2014. The INA further specifies that each year, countries are held to a numerical limit of 7% of the worldwide level of LPR admissions, known as per-country limits or country caps.\nSome employers assert that they continue to need the \u201cbest and the brightest\u201d workers, regardless of their country of birth, to remain competitive in a worldwide market and to keep their firms in the United States. While support for the option of increasing employment-based immigration may be dampened by economic conditions, proponents argue it is an essential ingredient for economic growth. Those opposing increases in employment-based LPRs assert that there is no compelling evidence of labor shortages and cite the rate of unemployment across various occupations and labor markets. \nWith this economic and political backdrop, the option of lifting the per-country caps on employment-based LPRs has become increasingly popular. Some argue that the elimination of the per-country caps would increase the flow of high-skilled immigrants without increasing the total annual admission of employment-based LPRs. The presumption is that many high-skilled people (proponents cite those from India and China, in particular) would then move closer to the head of the line to become LPRs.\nTo explore this policy option, analyses of approved pending employment-based petitions are performed on two different sets of data: approved pending petitions with the Department of State (DOS) National Visa Center (NVC), and approved pending petitions with U.S. Citizenship and Immigrant Services (USCIS). Because DOS and USCIS play different roles in the visa application process, their datasets represent different populations. DOS\u2019s data from the NVC contains individuals who apply for a visa while residing outside of the United States. They are considered new arrivals once they are issued a visa and enter the United States. USCIS\u2019s data contains individuals who are already residing in the United States and are applying to change their immigration status from a temporary status to a permanent LPR visa. This process is referred to as an adjustment of status. \nAs of November 2015, there were 100,747 approved employment-based LPR petitions pending at the National Visa Center. The 3rd preference category of \u201cprofessional, skilled, and unskilled\u201d workers had the highest number of pending approved petitions (67,792). The 5th preference category of \u201cimmigrant investors\u201d had 17,662 approved petitions pending and the 2nd preference category of \u201cadvanced degree\u201d workers had 11,400 approved petitions pending. There were also 3,747 approved petitions pending for the 1st preference category of \u201cextraordinary\u201d workers and 379 for the 4th preference category for \u201cspecial immigrants.\u201d \nIn terms of the USCIS data, there were a total of 117,731 approved I-485 petitions pending as of April 2016, and most were for the 2nd preference \u201cadvanced degree\u201d workers (46,765). There were 37,971 approved I-485 petitions pending in the 3rd preference \u201cprofessional, skilled, and unskilled\u201d category and 30,457 pending in the 1st preference \u201cextraordinary\u201d category. In addition, there were 1,409 5th preference \u201cimmigrant investor\u201d and 1,129 4th preference \u201cspecial immigrant\u201d approved I-485 petitions pending. \nThe top four countries in the National Visa Center data set were (in descending rank order) India, the Philippines, China, and South Korea. The top four countries in the USCIS data sets were (in descending rank order) India, China, the Philippines, and Mexico. The data indicates that more Indians and Mexicans are waiting to adjust status in the United States, while more Filipinos and Chinese are waiting to immigrate from abroad. \nSome argue that the per-country ceilings are arbitrary and observe that employability has nothing to do with country of birth. Others maintain that the statutory per-country ceilings restrain the dominance of high-demand countries and preserve the diversity of immigrant flows.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/R42048", "sha1": "00010ed72380b932bf45b319831cd1132269abd4", "filename": "files/20160728_R42048_00010ed72380b932bf45b319831cd1132269abd4.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R42048_files&id=/2.png": "files/20160728_R42048_images_01ea7b3dbbcc5fd92a6862ab410935c17775d384.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R42048_files&id=/4.png": "files/20160728_R42048_images_aff4fbf3ebbf98eab8902f16e7900e472bc48d8d.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R42048_files&id=/5.png": "files/20160728_R42048_images_c7cb15dbefa69b8ef36078f60d333600d8d2a0cd.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R42048_files&id=/3.png": "files/20160728_R42048_images_8f26689c27c1322cc121c145e6f61a4c58054d6b.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R42048_files&id=/7.png": "files/20160728_R42048_images_cf116f08253ff86bc8d365f9850819a3065c3aca.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R42048_files&id=/8.png": "files/20160728_R42048_images_c910a3bd2ef9a65ac17290f0799fd499837201d4.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R42048_files&id=/6.png": "files/20160728_R42048_images_3fd23ccb743f54ea61865487d2501d317eb9a633.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R42048_files&id=/0.png": "files/20160728_R42048_images_81b1091e576028e0de9888a4d2896b89d72e61c8.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R42048_files&id=/1.png": "files/20160728_R42048_images_721ad15f90cc98dbf50897e66ffa285ff4aa7198.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R42048", "sha1": "bdf547547ec291e8843a77ebf5bb8aa0edebe5dd", "filename": "files/20160728_R42048_bdf547547ec291e8843a77ebf5bb8aa0edebe5dd.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 394565, "date": "2011-12-06", "retrieved": "2016-04-07T00:26:19.157509", "title": "Numerical Limits on Employment-Based Immigration: Analysis of the Per-Country Ceilings", "summary": "The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) specifies a complex set of numerical limits and preference categories that include economic priorities among the criteria for admission. The INA allocates 140,000 visas annually for employment-based legal permanent residents (LPRs), and they were 14.2% of the total 1.0 million LPRs in FY2010. The INA further specifies that each year, countries are held to a numerical limit of 7% of the worldwide level of U.S. immigrant admissions, known as per-country limits or country caps.\nEven as U.S. unemployment levels remain high, some employers assert that they continue to need the \u201cbest and the brightest\u201d workers, regardless of their country of birth, to remain competitive in a worldwide market and to keep their firms in the United States. While support for the option of increasing employment-based immigration may be dampened by economic conditions, proponents argue it is an essential ingredient for economic growth. Those opposing increases in employment-based LPRs assert that there is no compelling evidence of labor shortages and cite the rate of unemployment across various occupations and labor markets. \nWith this economic and political backdrop, the option of lifting the per-country caps on employment-based LPRs has become increasingly popular. Some theorize that the elimination of the per-country caps would increase the flow of high-skilled immigrants without increasing the total annual admission of employment-based LPRs. The presumption is that many high-skilled people (proponents cite those from India and China, in particular) would then move closer to the head of the line to become LPRs.\nTo explore this policy option, analyses of approved pending employment-based petitions are performed on two different sets of data: approved pending cases with the Department of State National Visa Center, and approved pending cases with U.S. Citizenship and Immigrant Services (USCIS). The overwhelming number of approved employment-based LPR visas pending at the National Visa Center at the close of FY2010 were those of professional and skilled workers\u2014102,395. There were also 16,788 approved visas pending for unskilled workers. In terms of those with advanced degrees, another 6,738 visas were pending. There were also 2,961 approved visas pending in the \u201cextraordinary\u201d category. In terms of the USCIS data, most of the approved I-485 petitions pending are professional, skilled, and unskilled workers (114,442). There were 7,545 approved I-485 petitions pending in the \u201cextraordinary\u201d category and 45,573 approved I-485 petitions pending in the \u201cadvanced degree\u201d category. The extent that these two sets of data overlap\u2014and thus may be counting the same petitions twice\u2014is not known, but substantial duplication is presumed to exist. \nThe top four countries in both the National Visa Center and USCIS data sets are (in rank order) India, the Philippines, the Peoples\u2019 Republic of China, and Mexico. The data analyses suggest that the vast number of Indians are waiting to adjust status in the United States, while the vast number of Filipinos are waiting to immigrate from abroad. Those with approved pending cases from China seem to be more evenly split among new arrivals and those seeking to adjust status. \nSome argue that the per-country ceilings are arbitrary and observe that employability has nothing to do with country of birth. Others maintain that the statutory per-country ceilings restrain the dominance of high-demand countries and preserve the diversity of the immigrant flows. Legislation to revise the per-country ceilings on LPRs passed the House (H.R. 3012) on November 29, 2011.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R42048", "sha1": "00beb7712d8f26ede61f41119cf66d914c8b713c", "filename": "files/20111206_R42048_00beb7712d8f26ede61f41119cf66d914c8b713c.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R42048", "sha1": "79140db8a2698d6346bcb6f012b5df96d26c527e", "filename": "files/20111206_R42048_79140db8a2698d6346bcb6f012b5df96d26c527e.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc821687/", "id": "R42048_2011Oct11", "date": "2011-10-11", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "Numerical Limits on Employment-Based Immigration: Analysis of the Per-Country Ceilings", "summary": "The report opens with brief explanations of the employment-based preference categories and the per-country ceilings governing annual admissions of LPRs. The focus is on the major employment-based preference categories. The report continues with a statistical analysis of the pending caseload of approved employment-based LPR petitions.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20111011_R42048_da1c9f84e652383126ff14a585b3c75e0e2b0eb9.pdf" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Immigration law", "name": "Immigration law" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Immigration policy", "name": "Immigration policy" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Alien labor", "name": "Alien labor" } ] } ], "topics": [ "Immigration Policy" ] }