TN Management Consultant VISA Revoked due to corp structure

Hi. I have been approved for 3 TN Visa's and recently applied for my 4th, with a request for 3 years. I was denied, and my current one that I have and which was good until Dec 29th/09 was revoked. The first few years I was under one company, but since moved to a company that I am on the board of directors of, and which is an S Corp in California. All of my paperwork was in order, with the sufficient amount of experience, references, etc... I attempted in May to do an early application because of my travel schedule, with a request for additional info for the new VISA. I presented the new information and a small nightmare begun. They put me in a room and detained me for around 3 hours focused on the corporate structure, even though another port of entry stated it was alright, then worked hard to intimidate me, etc... They did not provide me with the exact details as to why I was refused, and when I requested additional information they continued to intimidate me to basically to not let me know the true reason. I have very serious sponsors, and letters of support and was basically thrown off by the treatment I received. I undertsand that things happen, but after reviewing the issue, there are many mistakes that were made on their side, but knowing you can not appeal a TN I am unclear on how best to move this process forward now. Any feedback or advice, or introductions to professionals in this field would be very appreciated.

Thanks.

Did you not get an official form or letter stating why you were denied another TN? It could be you applied for another one too early

Although port shopping is never the best option, I would try and figure out EXACTLY the reason for the denial. Then I would along with my employer correct any previous mishaps in the application in order to aviod another refusal.

Once all of my paperwork is in order, I would travel to another port of entry to avoid the nightmare you ensued during the peak TN visa processing times. Usually 8am-4pm.

Port shopping is never a good idea.

If you apply at another port of entry, the DHS will definitely know you got refused at another port and if you are not honest with them, that could create big problems.

It sounds like you only received a verbal denial and not an I-275 or formal withdrawal request.

You engage in a risk attempting at another port but you may succeed.

If you get denied again, you may receive an I-275 and then you really need legal assistance to get it rectified.

The risk is up to you.

There is nothing illegal about port shopping although I did mention its negative factors. A TN applicant that chooses another port to obtain their TN could be doing this based on circumstances such as vacationing in a different area, country or province or visitng family prior to applying at another POE.

The CBP officer may question the applicant as to why they are applying at another port and all they have to do is reveal the circumstances with all honesty. I had my F-1 (I-20) stamped between the peace bridge and pearson many times without any hassle, but then again it couldv'e been based on the fact that I'm strictly studying rather than applying for a work permit.

If they revoked your current status, perhaps CBP thought you had immigrant intent although you did not indicate the applicable port.

I never meant to imply port shopping was bad or illegal. But I would say if you were dishonest about disclosing that, the DHS could throw a lifetime bar at you for lying.

Often, a DHS Inspector can be reluctant to overturn another officer's decision so one should be forewarned about the inherent risks and possible consequences involved in deciding on subsequent attempts.

The problem is the sponsor is essentially yourself. The client should sponsor yoyu.

And port shoping will get you barred.

Port shopping will get you barred if the real intent is to port shop. Like I said, if you're situation is PURELY circumstantial whereas you need to enter another POE respectively to obtain your TN, there is nothing legally wrong with that providing you have proper evidence stating your claim while being asked questions by CBP.

I'm not a lawyer, but If I had to guess, the reason you've been denied is a failure to prove that your stay in the US is temporary.

Remember, when you show up at the border to get your TN, the base assumption is that you are trying to immigrate - that is you have immigrant intent. It is up to you to demonstrate that you in fact do not.

So looking at it from CBP's point of view - you've had 3 TNs - so we're looking at 3 years there, and you're after another 3 now... Things aren't looking very temporary are they?

To make matters worse, you probably have a great deal of difficulty demonstrating sufficient ties to Canada to prevent you from just staying in the US, since you've probably gone through some effort to break ties for tax reasons.

Every TN after the 2nd (unless you continue to live in Canada and just commute to the US... then you get a bit more slack at times) exponentially increases the chance of being rejected for immigrant intent.

The first few years I was under one company, but since moved to a company that I am on the board of directors of, and which is an S Corp in California.

Your paperwork wasn't in order - you can't do this, it's prohibited.

If you exert any sort of control over the sponsor or it's not arm's length then the application is not considered valid. Doesn't matter how complex the structure is, boils down to that factor alone. Had this thread on here several times, this is what it says in the CBP manual:

As with the CFTA, admission as a TN under section 214(e) of the INA does not imply that the citizen of Canada or Mexico would otherwise qualify as a professional under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) or section 203(b)(3) of the INA. Note too that Section D of Annex 1603 does not authorize a professional to establish a business or practice in the U.S. in which the professional will be self-employed. Section D of Annex 1603 is limited to the entry of a citizen of a Party country seeking to render professional-level services for an entity in another Party country.

Self-employment also clearly conflicts with the intent of the NAFTA Implementation Act and its accompanying Statement of Administrative Action, which states, at page 178, “Section D of Annex 1603 does not authorize a professional to establish a business or practice in the U.S. in which the professional will be self-employed.” In this regard, Section B of Annex 1603, which deals with “traders and investors,” establishes the appropriate category of temporary entry for a citizen of a Party country seeking to develop and direct investment operations in another Party country. Canadian or Mexican citizens seeking to engage in self-employment in trade or investment activities in the U.S., therefore, must seek classification under section 101(a)(15)(E) of the INA.

Although the issue of self-employment was never specifically addressed under the regulations promulgated by the INS pursuant to the CFTA Implementation Act, the bar on establishment of a business or practice in which the professional will be self-employed is consistent with the intent of the U.S. and Canada in entering into the CFTA. Since entry into NAFTA was not intended to substantively change the treatment of professionals, this explicit bar merely clarifies existing law.

Note that the bar on establishment of a business or practice in which the Canadian or Mexican citizen will be self-employed is in no way intended to preclude a Canadian or Mexican citizen who is self-employed abroad from seeking entry to the U.S. pursuant to a pre-arranged agreement with an enterprise owned by a person or entity other than him/herself located in the U.S. On the other hand, a Canadian or Mexican citizen is precluded from entering this country in TN classification for the purpose of rendering pre-arranged services for a U.S. corporation or entity of which he or she is the sole or controlling shareholder or owner or over which he or she holds de facto control.

Like it says, what you should do is apply for an E visa, probably E-2 from the sounds of it.

This requires a "substantial investment", which usually means at least $50,000, financial statements, business plan and so forth, it can help to use a consultant experienced in applying for them as the paperwork requirements are substantial. E is the most complex non-immigrant category and it actually requires a visa which means a consular appointment to get it.

http://www.consular.canada.usembassy.gov/evisa.asp

Right on Steven.

He is an exective with the company. He is not a management Consultant. The Officers were dead on right on this one. He is abusing the Mngt Consultant TN. This is another example of TN abuse. Port shopping on this one will result in an Expedited Removal.