grupak
02-13 08:51 PM
Easy now!!! Simmer down.....
Its just that every time the VB comes out, we get a lot of posts from folks from India/China who want to remove country limits. And they talk about only removing the country limits, as if removing country limits is going to solve the problem.
You scare away ROW when you do that.
Those who talk about only removing the country cap have not thought through the problem carefully. It will only slow everybody down. At the same time only increasing the visa number by say a factor of 2 will not solve the problem either since majority of EB GC are from a few countries.
As paskal, others and I have been saying IV is for all EB GC, and we should look at solutions that help everyone.
Its just that every time the VB comes out, we get a lot of posts from folks from India/China who want to remove country limits. And they talk about only removing the country limits, as if removing country limits is going to solve the problem.
You scare away ROW when you do that.
Those who talk about only removing the country cap have not thought through the problem carefully. It will only slow everybody down. At the same time only increasing the visa number by say a factor of 2 will not solve the problem either since majority of EB GC are from a few countries.
As paskal, others and I have been saying IV is for all EB GC, and we should look at solutions that help everyone.
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
BharatPremi
07-13 11:49 AM
All I'm saying is, there's good and bad everywhere, and Canada, always rates highly.
Like you however, I'm here because I like it here. Frankly, after Canada, the weather in California is too hard to give up :)
In the end, as you say, it's all objective.
And who rates Canada highly? That requires a different forum for debating but I am just giving you the hint that it is international scam to rate it high.. That is the subject of politics and we would not start debating that at least on this forum..
Like you however, I'm here because I like it here. Frankly, after Canada, the weather in California is too hard to give up :)
In the end, as you say, it's all objective.
And who rates Canada highly? That requires a different forum for debating but I am just giving you the hint that it is international scam to rate it high.. That is the subject of politics and we would not start debating that at least on this forum..
soljabhai
12-13 10:43 AM
Hello All,
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
satyasaich
12-13 02:10 PM
Well, interesting topic and here are my 2 cents.
i just googled for a minute, for the definition of "Equal Employment Opportunity" by Federal Government and the result is as below
Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) :A term used by the federal government to refer to employment practices that ensure nondiscrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, color, national origin, physical or mental ability, medical condition, ancestry, or age.
The principle behind EEO is that everyone should have the same access to opportunities
AND Ethnic References are American Indians, Asians (Pakistani/East Indian: Persons having origins in any of the original
peoples of the Indian sub-continent), Black, Hispanic, Caucasian
The above definition itself speaks very loudly about access to opportunities, which if restricted due to another federal law or provision, then it is clearly a conflict within Constitution.
Consider a person with some skill set and born in Bangladesh or Pakistan working for Employer A
&
another person with exact skill set born in India working for same employer in the same capacity.
Assume that both have started the GC Process on the same day, but person from India is still waiting even after 5 or 7 years.
Where as the other person got the GC and no restrictions to accept a promotion and an increase in salary,based on the same skill set and experience.
Isn't that scenario defers the principle behind EEO which is everyone should have the same access to opportunities
and hence voilation of law?
There are thousands of glaring examples like these, and i'm wondering how this can not be considered as a good ground for challenging
(I do undersand the cost aspects of challenging and legal fees etc; and the hefty amount of funds needed)
by the way, i tried to find a federal government rationale for per country limit in current system (only from the EB Category perspective), but couldn't get a good answer
Satya
India / EB3/Nov2003/
--Any country's immigration policy has to have some control measures built into it. I cannot imagine any country opening its gates wide open for the entire world to migrate into her without any limitations. So the question is, whom to "restrict" and whom to allow? This leads to the same argument, do you see this "restriction" as discrimination? There are others who see as fair "reservation" for them.
there is no "reservation", the nature of the clause is a cap, it does not give another country a minimum quota, it is written as a restrictive provision. and again- just because it benefits someone else does not make discrimination "right", in the strictest sense. right and wrong when it comes to discrimination are not relative. and if you believe they are, it's mighty slippery slope my friend because it does not take time to find yourself on the other side.
--Good question. If we look at what qualifies a country to be included in the lottery program (oversubscription etc?), it would again lead to the "balancing" intent with regards to immigration.
so why the double dipping? if the balancing is done, why the country quota? the result is that as i said more bangladeshis come in than indians...so what does over subscription mean in the end? again...why the need for the diversity lottery? the country quota already balances things....or not?
"either it's wrong or right. the caste system is wrong, from every side of the fence. it may benefit some and hurt others. but it's wrong, wrong and wrong.
same for this country quota. sure it helps some, and looks good from "their side of the fence". that does not change the fact that it is wrong."
--You are opining that it is wrong. You cannot state that it is a fact
you sound suspiciously supportive of the caste system. i will say it again. such a system is wrong. i do not care which side of the fence you are on. was depriving blacks from voting wrong? or was it ok from the white side of the fence? please think before you post.
there is a difference between "something benefiting me so i justify it and fight to keep it" and being right or fair. everyone fights to keep what they have. sorry, still not right. and if you still feel the caste system can be justified as right from your (or any) side of the fence then let's stop here, we have no common ground. and i speak as someone with sufficiently "high caste" to have not suffered from it (so you know my side of the fence).
one last thing, i find it hard to believe you are terming as "right" the idea that I as an individual should be held back 10 years longer than my colleague because of where i was born. any way i look at it...sorry...just not right.
i just googled for a minute, for the definition of "Equal Employment Opportunity" by Federal Government and the result is as below
Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) :A term used by the federal government to refer to employment practices that ensure nondiscrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, color, national origin, physical or mental ability, medical condition, ancestry, or age.
The principle behind EEO is that everyone should have the same access to opportunities
AND Ethnic References are American Indians, Asians (Pakistani/East Indian: Persons having origins in any of the original
peoples of the Indian sub-continent), Black, Hispanic, Caucasian
The above definition itself speaks very loudly about access to opportunities, which if restricted due to another federal law or provision, then it is clearly a conflict within Constitution.
Consider a person with some skill set and born in Bangladesh or Pakistan working for Employer A
&
another person with exact skill set born in India working for same employer in the same capacity.
Assume that both have started the GC Process on the same day, but person from India is still waiting even after 5 or 7 years.
Where as the other person got the GC and no restrictions to accept a promotion and an increase in salary,based on the same skill set and experience.
Isn't that scenario defers the principle behind EEO which is everyone should have the same access to opportunities
and hence voilation of law?
There are thousands of glaring examples like these, and i'm wondering how this can not be considered as a good ground for challenging
(I do undersand the cost aspects of challenging and legal fees etc; and the hefty amount of funds needed)
by the way, i tried to find a federal government rationale for per country limit in current system (only from the EB Category perspective), but couldn't get a good answer
Satya
India / EB3/Nov2003/
--Any country's immigration policy has to have some control measures built into it. I cannot imagine any country opening its gates wide open for the entire world to migrate into her without any limitations. So the question is, whom to "restrict" and whom to allow? This leads to the same argument, do you see this "restriction" as discrimination? There are others who see as fair "reservation" for them.
there is no "reservation", the nature of the clause is a cap, it does not give another country a minimum quota, it is written as a restrictive provision. and again- just because it benefits someone else does not make discrimination "right", in the strictest sense. right and wrong when it comes to discrimination are not relative. and if you believe they are, it's mighty slippery slope my friend because it does not take time to find yourself on the other side.
--Good question. If we look at what qualifies a country to be included in the lottery program (oversubscription etc?), it would again lead to the "balancing" intent with regards to immigration.
so why the double dipping? if the balancing is done, why the country quota? the result is that as i said more bangladeshis come in than indians...so what does over subscription mean in the end? again...why the need for the diversity lottery? the country quota already balances things....or not?
"either it's wrong or right. the caste system is wrong, from every side of the fence. it may benefit some and hurt others. but it's wrong, wrong and wrong.
same for this country quota. sure it helps some, and looks good from "their side of the fence". that does not change the fact that it is wrong."
--You are opining that it is wrong. You cannot state that it is a fact
you sound suspiciously supportive of the caste system. i will say it again. such a system is wrong. i do not care which side of the fence you are on. was depriving blacks from voting wrong? or was it ok from the white side of the fence? please think before you post.
there is a difference between "something benefiting me so i justify it and fight to keep it" and being right or fair. everyone fights to keep what they have. sorry, still not right. and if you still feel the caste system can be justified as right from your (or any) side of the fence then let's stop here, we have no common ground. and i speak as someone with sufficiently "high caste" to have not suffered from it (so you know my side of the fence).
one last thing, i find it hard to believe you are terming as "right" the idea that I as an individual should be held back 10 years longer than my colleague because of where i was born. any way i look at it...sorry...just not right.
more...
gcisadawg
06-12 10:54 AM
Dude... he is talking about the second best engineering college in India that is located in Rajasthan.. aka - BITS Pilani (my guess).
I think that is correct. As far as I know, during 80s and early 90s, BITS, Pilani was the second best after IITs.
I think that is correct. As far as I know, during 80s and early 90s, BITS, Pilani was the second best after IITs.
hindu_king
05-29 02:53 PM
I think as someone said this guy was randomly throwing numbers out there. How come his analysis does not account for remaining 36K EB1 and EB2 ROW applications. Is he suggesting that all EB1 and EB2 ROW are being used up also. Very hard to believe that for 2008 and 2009 with the way the economy is going. Lot of product companies where most of the ROW 485s would likely come from have stopped applying perm since last summer. There is a huge flaw in this analysis and its not as pessimistic as it seems.
BUT, then again we need legislation to wipe the slate clean and clear these 200K applications, so there is a new build up of visa demand and wait times are tolerable for current applicants and future applicants.
What will happen to the 30k or so unused ROW EB1/EB2 numbers? Typically they trickle down to EB2 India in the last 3 months of FY. I still think this will happen in the next 3 months. Somehow USCIS overreacted and retrogressed EB2 India to 2000 and I think they are going to have to correct it to use all unused ROW numbers.
BUT, then again we need legislation to wipe the slate clean and clear these 200K applications, so there is a new build up of visa demand and wait times are tolerable for current applicants and future applicants.
What will happen to the 30k or so unused ROW EB1/EB2 numbers? Typically they trickle down to EB2 India in the last 3 months of FY. I still think this will happen in the next 3 months. Somehow USCIS overreacted and retrogressed EB2 India to 2000 and I think they are going to have to correct it to use all unused ROW numbers.
more...
nozerd
05-11 04:34 PM
Depends on your income and number of kids. Check http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/benefits/cctb/faq_payments-e.html for more info. Some details below.
CCTB: Calculation and payment information
When are Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB) payments made?
I did not receive my CCTB payment this month. What should I do?
How do I tell the CRA about my change of address?
Can I start getting my CCTB payments by direct deposit?
How do I change my banking information if I receive my payments by direct deposit?
What happens to CCTB payments if the recipient dies?
When do we recalculate your CCTB?
What happens if you owe money for CCTB?
How are the Canada Child Tax Benefit and the National Child Benefit Supplement calculated?
What determines the maximum payment for the National Child Benefit Supplement (NCBS)?
Do the Child Care Expenses that I claim on my 2005 income tax return affect my CCTB?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. When are Canada Child Tax Benefit payments made?
Benefits are paid over a 12-month period from July of one year to June of the next year. Generally, payments are made on the 20th of each month or, if your annual entitlement is less than $120, we will send it all in one payment on July 20th.
CCTB and integrated payment* dates
July 20th, 2006
August 18th, 2006
September 20th, 2006
October 20th, 2006
November 20th, 2006
December 13th, 2006
January 19th, 2007
February 20th, 2007
March 20th, 2007
April 20th, 2007
May 18th, 2007
June 20th, 2007
* Note: Integrated payments include the BC Family Bonus, the New Brunswick Child Tax Benefit, the Newfoundland and Labrador Child Benefit, the Northwest Territories Child Benefit, the Nova Scotia Child Benefit, the Nunavut Child Benefit, the Saskatchewan Child Benefit, and the Yukon Child Benefit.
The Alberta Family Employment Tax Credit is issued twice a year, in July and January. The payments will be issued on July 27, 2005, and January 27, 2006, for the 2004 base year.
For more information regarding our benefit programs, please visit the Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB) page.
2. I did not receive my Canada Child Tax Benefit payment this month. What should I do?
We generally pay your benefit on the 20th of each month. If your payment does not arrive on that day, please wait five working days before calling us at 1-800-387-1193.
3. How do I tell the CRA about my change of address?
See How to change your address.
Top of page4. Can I start getting my Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB) payments by direct deposit?
You can have your CCTB payments deposited directly into your account at a financial institution. To start direct deposit, complete the "Direct deposit" section on Form RC66, Canada Child Tax Benefit Application, or send us a completed Form T1-DD(1), Direct Deposit Request - Individuals. If you get your payments by direct deposit and your banking information changes, send us a completed Form T1-DD(1), Direct Deposit Request - Individuals. You cannot change your banking information by calling us unless you have other CRA products deposited into that same account.
If for any reason we cannot deposit a payment into your account, we will mail a cheque to you at the address we have on file.
5. How do I change my banking information if I receive my payments by direct deposit?
If you get your payments by direct deposit and your banking information changes, send us a completed Form T1-DD(1), Direct Deposit Request - Individuals. You cannot change your banking information by calling us unless you have other CRA products deposited into that same account.
6. What happens to Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB) payments if the recipient dies?
If an individual dies who was receiving CCTB payments for a child, the child's new caregiver should contact us and give us the date of the recipient's death.
We may still send out a payment after the date of death because we are not aware of the death. If this happens, please return the payment to us with a brief letter of explanation. See our listing of CRA offices for the one nearest you.
If you are the surviving spouse or common-law partner of the deceased individual and you lived with that person at the time of his or her death, in most cases you won't have to complete a new CCTB application. If certain requirements have been met, the children will be automatically transferred to your account.
If you are any other caregiver (such as grandparent or guardian), you will have to complete Form RC66, Canada Child Tax Benefit Application, and send it to us.
Note
If you are the new caregiver and the deceased individual was receiving payments under provincial or territorial child benefit programs that we administer, you do not have to apply separately to qualify for these payments. We will use the information from Form RC66 to determine if you are eligible for these programs.
Top of page7. When do we recalculate your CCTB?
We will recalculate your benefit and send you a Canada Child Tax Benefit Notice showing our revised calculation:
every July based on the returns that you and your spouse or common-law partner filed for the previous year;
after each reassessment of either your or your spouse or common-law partner's return that affects the calculation of your benefit;
after a child for whom you receive the CCTB turns 18 (the last payment you will receive will be for the month of his or her birthday); and
after you tell us about changes to your situation that could affect your benefit (see When to contact us about your CCTB).
8. What happens if you owe money for CCTB?
If a recalculation shows that you were overpaid CCTB, we will send you a notice to advise you of the balance owing. We may keep all or a portion of future CCTB payments, income tax refunds, or goods and services/harmonized tax credit (GST/HST) credits until the balance is repaid.
9. How are the Canada Child Tax Benefit and the National Child Benefit Supplement calculated?
You can use our new online service to get an estimate of your benefits.
Your CCTB payments for the 12 - month period of July 2006 to June 2007 are calculated using the following information:
The number of children you have;
Your province or territory of residence;
Your 2005 family net income;
Your or your spouse or common-law partner's claim for child care expenses for 2005; and
Your child's eligibility for the Child Disability Benefit.
Basic benefit:
The basic benefit is $1,255 ($104.58 a month) for each child under age 18 (the basic benefit is different for residents of Alberta, see the note below).
There is a supplement of $88 ($7.33 a month) for your third and each additional child.
There is a supplement of $249 ($20.75 a month) for each child who is six years of age. This supplement is reduced by 25% of any amount you or your spouse or common-law partner claimed for child care expenses on your income tax return. Eligible families with children under six years of age will receive the new Universal Child Care Benefit.
We subtract a benefit reduction from this amount if your family net income is more than $36,378. For a one-child family, the reduction is 2% of the amount of your family net income that is more than $36,378. For families with two or more children, the reduction is 4%.
Note
The Alberta provincial government has chosen to vary the amount of the basic benefit that its residents receive. The basic benefit is:
$1,147 ($95.58 a month) for children under 7;
$1,225 ($102.08 a month) for children 7 to 11;
$1,373 ($114.41 a month) for children 12 to 15; and
$1,452 ($121.00 a month) for children 16 or 17.
National Child Benefit Supplement (NCBS):
One-child family: $1,945 a year ($162.08 a month). This amount is reduced by 12.2% of the amount of family net income that is more than $20,435.
Two-child family: $1,720 a year ($143.33 a month). This amount is reduced by 22.9% of the amount of family net income that is more than $20,435.
Three-or-more-child family: $1,637 a year ($136.41 a month). The total will be reduced by 33.2% of the amount of family net income that is more than $20,435.
Note
If you are on social assistance, the NCBS may affect the amount of your social assistance payments. Many provinces and territories will consider the NCBS you get as income and will adjust your basic social assistance by this amount.
Thanks for the response. Govt sends a check for each child every month ! Thats too good to be true. How much is the check for.
CCTB: Calculation and payment information
When are Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB) payments made?
I did not receive my CCTB payment this month. What should I do?
How do I tell the CRA about my change of address?
Can I start getting my CCTB payments by direct deposit?
How do I change my banking information if I receive my payments by direct deposit?
What happens to CCTB payments if the recipient dies?
When do we recalculate your CCTB?
What happens if you owe money for CCTB?
How are the Canada Child Tax Benefit and the National Child Benefit Supplement calculated?
What determines the maximum payment for the National Child Benefit Supplement (NCBS)?
Do the Child Care Expenses that I claim on my 2005 income tax return affect my CCTB?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. When are Canada Child Tax Benefit payments made?
Benefits are paid over a 12-month period from July of one year to June of the next year. Generally, payments are made on the 20th of each month or, if your annual entitlement is less than $120, we will send it all in one payment on July 20th.
CCTB and integrated payment* dates
July 20th, 2006
August 18th, 2006
September 20th, 2006
October 20th, 2006
November 20th, 2006
December 13th, 2006
January 19th, 2007
February 20th, 2007
March 20th, 2007
April 20th, 2007
May 18th, 2007
June 20th, 2007
* Note: Integrated payments include the BC Family Bonus, the New Brunswick Child Tax Benefit, the Newfoundland and Labrador Child Benefit, the Northwest Territories Child Benefit, the Nova Scotia Child Benefit, the Nunavut Child Benefit, the Saskatchewan Child Benefit, and the Yukon Child Benefit.
The Alberta Family Employment Tax Credit is issued twice a year, in July and January. The payments will be issued on July 27, 2005, and January 27, 2006, for the 2004 base year.
For more information regarding our benefit programs, please visit the Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB) page.
2. I did not receive my Canada Child Tax Benefit payment this month. What should I do?
We generally pay your benefit on the 20th of each month. If your payment does not arrive on that day, please wait five working days before calling us at 1-800-387-1193.
3. How do I tell the CRA about my change of address?
See How to change your address.
Top of page4. Can I start getting my Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB) payments by direct deposit?
You can have your CCTB payments deposited directly into your account at a financial institution. To start direct deposit, complete the "Direct deposit" section on Form RC66, Canada Child Tax Benefit Application, or send us a completed Form T1-DD(1), Direct Deposit Request - Individuals. If you get your payments by direct deposit and your banking information changes, send us a completed Form T1-DD(1), Direct Deposit Request - Individuals. You cannot change your banking information by calling us unless you have other CRA products deposited into that same account.
If for any reason we cannot deposit a payment into your account, we will mail a cheque to you at the address we have on file.
5. How do I change my banking information if I receive my payments by direct deposit?
If you get your payments by direct deposit and your banking information changes, send us a completed Form T1-DD(1), Direct Deposit Request - Individuals. You cannot change your banking information by calling us unless you have other CRA products deposited into that same account.
6. What happens to Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB) payments if the recipient dies?
If an individual dies who was receiving CCTB payments for a child, the child's new caregiver should contact us and give us the date of the recipient's death.
We may still send out a payment after the date of death because we are not aware of the death. If this happens, please return the payment to us with a brief letter of explanation. See our listing of CRA offices for the one nearest you.
If you are the surviving spouse or common-law partner of the deceased individual and you lived with that person at the time of his or her death, in most cases you won't have to complete a new CCTB application. If certain requirements have been met, the children will be automatically transferred to your account.
If you are any other caregiver (such as grandparent or guardian), you will have to complete Form RC66, Canada Child Tax Benefit Application, and send it to us.
Note
If you are the new caregiver and the deceased individual was receiving payments under provincial or territorial child benefit programs that we administer, you do not have to apply separately to qualify for these payments. We will use the information from Form RC66 to determine if you are eligible for these programs.
Top of page7. When do we recalculate your CCTB?
We will recalculate your benefit and send you a Canada Child Tax Benefit Notice showing our revised calculation:
every July based on the returns that you and your spouse or common-law partner filed for the previous year;
after each reassessment of either your or your spouse or common-law partner's return that affects the calculation of your benefit;
after a child for whom you receive the CCTB turns 18 (the last payment you will receive will be for the month of his or her birthday); and
after you tell us about changes to your situation that could affect your benefit (see When to contact us about your CCTB).
8. What happens if you owe money for CCTB?
If a recalculation shows that you were overpaid CCTB, we will send you a notice to advise you of the balance owing. We may keep all or a portion of future CCTB payments, income tax refunds, or goods and services/harmonized tax credit (GST/HST) credits until the balance is repaid.
9. How are the Canada Child Tax Benefit and the National Child Benefit Supplement calculated?
You can use our new online service to get an estimate of your benefits.
Your CCTB payments for the 12 - month period of July 2006 to June 2007 are calculated using the following information:
The number of children you have;
Your province or territory of residence;
Your 2005 family net income;
Your or your spouse or common-law partner's claim for child care expenses for 2005; and
Your child's eligibility for the Child Disability Benefit.
Basic benefit:
The basic benefit is $1,255 ($104.58 a month) for each child under age 18 (the basic benefit is different for residents of Alberta, see the note below).
There is a supplement of $88 ($7.33 a month) for your third and each additional child.
There is a supplement of $249 ($20.75 a month) for each child who is six years of age. This supplement is reduced by 25% of any amount you or your spouse or common-law partner claimed for child care expenses on your income tax return. Eligible families with children under six years of age will receive the new Universal Child Care Benefit.
We subtract a benefit reduction from this amount if your family net income is more than $36,378. For a one-child family, the reduction is 2% of the amount of your family net income that is more than $36,378. For families with two or more children, the reduction is 4%.
Note
The Alberta provincial government has chosen to vary the amount of the basic benefit that its residents receive. The basic benefit is:
$1,147 ($95.58 a month) for children under 7;
$1,225 ($102.08 a month) for children 7 to 11;
$1,373 ($114.41 a month) for children 12 to 15; and
$1,452 ($121.00 a month) for children 16 or 17.
National Child Benefit Supplement (NCBS):
One-child family: $1,945 a year ($162.08 a month). This amount is reduced by 12.2% of the amount of family net income that is more than $20,435.
Two-child family: $1,720 a year ($143.33 a month). This amount is reduced by 22.9% of the amount of family net income that is more than $20,435.
Three-or-more-child family: $1,637 a year ($136.41 a month). The total will be reduced by 33.2% of the amount of family net income that is more than $20,435.
Note
If you are on social assistance, the NCBS may affect the amount of your social assistance payments. Many provinces and territories will consider the NCBS you get as income and will adjust your basic social assistance by this amount.
Thanks for the response. Govt sends a check for each child every month ! Thats too good to be true. How much is the check for.
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
samay
07-15 05:19 PM
Hi there,
Here is my situation, any help to resolve this is appreciated.
- My self (primary) & my wife's(derivative) I-485's (PD June 2002) were filed in March 2007.
- My I-485 was approved in July 2007, my wife's was pending due to NC.
- My wife's employer filed PERM (PD June 2007) & then filed I-140 in March 2008.
- We recently contacted NSC regarding my wife's case status, we received a letter from them stating that, her I485 is waiting for I-140 to get approved.
They linked her new I-140 to her pending I-485 that was filed as derivative.Is this USCIS error?.How to correct this error and have them consider her I-485 application as a derivative application?.
Thanks for your help.
[COLOR="Blue"]Your attorney should get in touch with the USCIS.This situation can be sorted out with informing the USCIS. In case you require any assistance please get in touch with me.
Here is my situation, any help to resolve this is appreciated.
- My self (primary) & my wife's(derivative) I-485's (PD June 2002) were filed in March 2007.
- My I-485 was approved in July 2007, my wife's was pending due to NC.
- My wife's employer filed PERM (PD June 2007) & then filed I-140 in March 2008.
- We recently contacted NSC regarding my wife's case status, we received a letter from them stating that, her I485 is waiting for I-140 to get approved.
They linked her new I-140 to her pending I-485 that was filed as derivative.Is this USCIS error?.How to correct this error and have them consider her I-485 application as a derivative application?.
Thanks for your help.
[COLOR="Blue"]Your attorney should get in touch with the USCIS.This situation can be sorted out with informing the USCIS. In case you require any assistance please get in touch with me.
more...
lahiribaba
09-30 08:53 PM
The naysayers saying that all assets backed by mortgage by securities are worthless. How can a freaking house become worthless? Yes its market value may have fallen but it is quite possible to increase the market value of houses by increasing demand. And how one can increase demand of houses? Simply by welcoming more skilled and educated foreign workers and making US immigration system more friendly to the immigrants who wants to stay here, buy a house here and raise a family. USA needs fresh blood not protectionist measures that will simply make it a country with huge tracts of land , low population density and constantly outmaneuvered in the international market by other economic superpowers like China.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
sri1309
09-23 05:53 PM
I am titled towards this idea. We can say its hard to get a mortgage with the status pending..
But nobody likes my idea ? Premium processing @$10K. I am sure there will many who would like to do it, but based on response I got, I am doubting now.. Anyone who thinks this can be proposed too?
But pls keep calling on 5882.. I still feel there is a chance..
But nobody likes my idea ? Premium processing @$10K. I am sure there will many who would like to do it, but based on response I got, I am doubting now.. Anyone who thinks this can be proposed too?
But pls keep calling on 5882.. I still feel there is a chance..
more...
yvjoshi100
07-10 05:28 PM
Hi,
My appeal against EB2 I140 denial on Chartered Accountant degree issue was recently turned down by AAO. Can I any how contest this decision further without getting my employer involved. They are not interested in pursuing this further. Can I file any type of appeal before BAI or any other court on personal basis ?
Thanks.
My appeal against EB2 I140 denial on Chartered Accountant degree issue was recently turned down by AAO. Can I any how contest this decision further without getting my employer involved. They are not interested in pursuing this further. Can I file any type of appeal before BAI or any other court on personal basis ?
Thanks.
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
lazycis
02-12 10:33 PM
Educate yourself, check these out:
http://www.ailf.org/lac/asylee_adjustment.asp
http://www.uscis.gov/vgn-ext-templating/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=1dc6aca797e63110VgnVCM10000047 18190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=1dc6aca797e63110VgnVCM1000004718190a RCRD
http://www.ailf.org/lac/asylee_adjustment.asp
http://www.uscis.gov/vgn-ext-templating/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=1dc6aca797e63110VgnVCM10000047 18190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=1dc6aca797e63110VgnVCM1000004718190a RCRD
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
sriramkalyan
01-13 07:58 PM
My suggestion is, people who are not with Direct vendor, they should try get the H1B transferred ASAP. Existing companies cant put any hold on it!!
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
unseenguy
05-29 11:50 AM
Yeah, but your 60k only includes AOS, not CP, right?
There are very very few CP applicants from India.
There are very very few CP applicants from India.
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
PlainSpeak
01-13 03:16 PM
Calm down Girl. relax. atleast you called me your friend. freinds dont fight. just take it easy and relax. take a nap, you will feel better.
Sorry if i said some thing wrong.
Your friend
MC
Mr Michael chertoff - do you know what happens when you act fresh with a gal.
You either get a slap or a kiss. I have not made up my mind about either way but you need to keep on your toes
You know i think i can see you as a friend (And no i donot need your support in becoming an EB3 representative gosh gc_dreams needsa smoke or coffe or something) and as a friend i will say something
Please do not patronize me by asking me to take a nap.
Other than that you are one person on this forum who lets just say has my respect
Sorry if i said some thing wrong.
Your friend
MC
Mr Michael chertoff - do you know what happens when you act fresh with a gal.
You either get a slap or a kiss. I have not made up my mind about either way but you need to keep on your toes
You know i think i can see you as a friend (And no i donot need your support in becoming an EB3 representative gosh gc_dreams needsa smoke or coffe or something) and as a friend i will say something
Please do not patronize me by asking me to take a nap.
Other than that you are one person on this forum who lets just say has my respect
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
hpandey
05-01 04:59 PM
Who told you this...do you know the history and are you sure the tamils are not opressed by the SL govt. Read the history before you make the comments.
By the way I am not supporting the LTTE. Here the question is should Indian govt support the civilions or not. Given a chance the SL govt wants to wipe out the entire tamil community. Do not think it will not happen to you/us here tomorrow.
And who told you that they are being opressed - have you been to Sri Lanka and if yes which places did you visit to see the Tamils being opressed .
The terrorists who come to fight in J&K from Pak say they are fighting because Indian Army and govt is opressing the Muslims . Is that true also ?
Seriously I don't care - my personal opinion that in this particular case it is none of our ( India's ) business to meddle in Sri Lankan affairs when they are on the verge of getting rid of a menace they have . Terrorism is not a solution of anything . Only peaceful times can bring happiness and prosperity.
By the way I am not supporting the LTTE. Here the question is should Indian govt support the civilions or not. Given a chance the SL govt wants to wipe out the entire tamil community. Do not think it will not happen to you/us here tomorrow.
And who told you that they are being opressed - have you been to Sri Lanka and if yes which places did you visit to see the Tamils being opressed .
The terrorists who come to fight in J&K from Pak say they are fighting because Indian Army and govt is opressing the Muslims . Is that true also ?
Seriously I don't care - my personal opinion that in this particular case it is none of our ( India's ) business to meddle in Sri Lankan affairs when they are on the verge of getting rid of a menace they have . Terrorism is not a solution of anything . Only peaceful times can bring happiness and prosperity.
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
snram4
01-15 05:48 PM
For the past 2 years there were so many RFEs and denials and no body knew what basis. But if they bring a regulation and follow that everybody can prepare ahead and no surprises. It is not a question of making profit. They have to make profit by following law and ethics and not by using loopholes. The regulations will make the companies to follow the rules of the game. If bodyshoppers follow the law and ethics without any fraud they will become reputed companies and the regulations will not destroy them. But their profit may go down but good for everyone. Inspite of insane rules annual cap is reached even unemployment is decade high. I would term protectionist if annual cap is reduced or they make restrictions such that h1b cap usage is so low. In India best persons are available and whatever restrictions they put Indian techies will overcome unless they block it completely. 65k H1b is attached to WTO and no way they can reduce that.
snram4,
It seems you are concerned about companies making profit than what happens to you. That is a typical socialist/communist thought process. Communists/socialists are worried/jealous about companies making profit rather than their own well being. Ironically you are in the capitalist meca of the world.
If you are not fine with companies making profit, you shouldn't be here in the first place.
H1B rules are on the slavery lines already. Think about all the restrictions we have to undergo just because of H1B. Irrespective of whether H1B is allowed on consulting, consulting is here to stay in US and all over the world. If not H1B, Citizens and GC holders will do the consulting.
The only thing many of us are good at is screwing our own countrymen and colleagues. Did it ever come to your thought that existing H1B rules are insane already ?
snram4,
It seems you are concerned about companies making profit than what happens to you. That is a typical socialist/communist thought process. Communists/socialists are worried/jealous about companies making profit rather than their own well being. Ironically you are in the capitalist meca of the world.
If you are not fine with companies making profit, you shouldn't be here in the first place.
H1B rules are on the slavery lines already. Think about all the restrictions we have to undergo just because of H1B. Irrespective of whether H1B is allowed on consulting, consulting is here to stay in US and all over the world. If not H1B, Citizens and GC holders will do the consulting.
The only thing many of us are good at is screwing our own countrymen and colleagues. Did it ever come to your thought that existing H1B rules are insane already ?
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
gagbag
07-03 09:56 PM
http://news.google.com/news?tab=wn&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGIH_enUS219US220&ncl=1117797588&hl=en&scoring=n
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
samay
07-21 08:30 PM
My dependents are out of US for almost 5 months for now and they have AP approved before they left US and they are planning to come to US in couple of weeks from now on AP. Our PD is going to be current in Aug08. Is this OK to be out of US for this much time when AOS is pending? Staying out of US for this long would effect their AOS processing in any way?
Its fine so long as they are back before their AP expires.
Its fine so long as they are back before their AP expires.
chanduv23
07-07 10:25 AM
My question is same as saileshdude. What is the trend USCIS follows when previous employer withdraws the 140 petition 180 days after applying AOS?
(1) Does AC21 letter really go into your file?
(2) What is the trend that is usualy followed ? RFE? or NOID or Straight denial? - I have seen some posts on forums where USCIS sends denials when previous employer withdraws the 140 petition.
Thanks in advance
(1) Does AC21 letter really go into your file?
(2) What is the trend that is usualy followed ? RFE? or NOID or Straight denial? - I have seen some posts on forums where USCIS sends denials when previous employer withdraws the 140 petition.
Thanks in advance
django.stone
06-15 02:12 PM
i like this idea and you have my support.
People need to understand that you need to give some to win some. I would like to propose to IV a kind of proposal that would be a win win for both the immigrants and the US.
1. It is meaningless to fight for the rights of ALL the visa holders. Any such attempts would always be resisted by the anti immigrant lobby.
2. Acknowledge their fundamental point of view that jobs are being stolen due to wage destruction and perpetual visa fraud by these outsourcing companies. Of course resist all these racist BS types. They are the just the noise in the immigration debate.
My Proposal
1. Support the Grassley bill in its entirety. If you notice it is those outsourcing companies that are making all the noise but not the genuine companies that use H1B for innovation purposes. These outsourcing neither follow the rules or spirit of the H1B/L1 visas nor provide much of innovation to the market place. There is no point in expecting them to police themselves. We have tried this and they are not here to play by the rules.
2. In fact, provide the concessions to eliminate the H1/L1 visas for these outsourcers. In return, request visa number recapture for the H1Bs who are employed directly by the companies. I strongly believe that if you are a H1B employed directly by the company (not outsourcing cos), it is unlikely that you would be underskilled or underpaid. A few minor expections may be there but we can safely ignore these exceptions.
3. Again, people may argue that some of the consultants are highly skilled too. If that were the case, they would have been or would be hired into a permenant position soon once the Grassley bill passes. No company would like to let go of a good performer irrespective of whether they are permenant employees or contractors.
If you notice, some people echo the sentiment that the Grassley bill would lead to more offshoring. That in my opinion is absolute BS. Only low level jobs would be offshored and in my opinion a h1b visa should not be used for these low level jobs. The high skilled jobs would always stay here and they would not be under wage pressure. The best and the fittest would survive and get the same.
I strongly believe that by providing these concessions, atleast the skilled immigrants would be sparred the trauma of this mindless wait for a GC. I wish to reiterate here that I am neither anti immigration nor anti any ethnicity. I am simply trying to reiterate that we need to lose some to win some. There is no point in the Indian style of negotiations of win all or win none. Let us adapt to the give some take some style of concession building. In this process, it is okay to give up on the interests of those blood sucking outsourcers. For this, I am willing to provide financial, logistical and intellectual support.
By following this route, we prevent wage destruction which is what the anti immigrant lobby is clamouring about. It is a win win for all and a lose situation for the blood suckers
People need to understand that you need to give some to win some. I would like to propose to IV a kind of proposal that would be a win win for both the immigrants and the US.
1. It is meaningless to fight for the rights of ALL the visa holders. Any such attempts would always be resisted by the anti immigrant lobby.
2. Acknowledge their fundamental point of view that jobs are being stolen due to wage destruction and perpetual visa fraud by these outsourcing companies. Of course resist all these racist BS types. They are the just the noise in the immigration debate.
My Proposal
1. Support the Grassley bill in its entirety. If you notice it is those outsourcing companies that are making all the noise but not the genuine companies that use H1B for innovation purposes. These outsourcing neither follow the rules or spirit of the H1B/L1 visas nor provide much of innovation to the market place. There is no point in expecting them to police themselves. We have tried this and they are not here to play by the rules.
2. In fact, provide the concessions to eliminate the H1/L1 visas for these outsourcers. In return, request visa number recapture for the H1Bs who are employed directly by the companies. I strongly believe that if you are a H1B employed directly by the company (not outsourcing cos), it is unlikely that you would be underskilled or underpaid. A few minor expections may be there but we can safely ignore these exceptions.
3. Again, people may argue that some of the consultants are highly skilled too. If that were the case, they would have been or would be hired into a permenant position soon once the Grassley bill passes. No company would like to let go of a good performer irrespective of whether they are permenant employees or contractors.
If you notice, some people echo the sentiment that the Grassley bill would lead to more offshoring. That in my opinion is absolute BS. Only low level jobs would be offshored and in my opinion a h1b visa should not be used for these low level jobs. The high skilled jobs would always stay here and they would not be under wage pressure. The best and the fittest would survive and get the same.
I strongly believe that by providing these concessions, atleast the skilled immigrants would be sparred the trauma of this mindless wait for a GC. I wish to reiterate here that I am neither anti immigration nor anti any ethnicity. I am simply trying to reiterate that we need to lose some to win some. There is no point in the Indian style of negotiations of win all or win none. Let us adapt to the give some take some style of concession building. In this process, it is okay to give up on the interests of those blood sucking outsourcers. For this, I am willing to provide financial, logistical and intellectual support.
By following this route, we prevent wage destruction which is what the anti immigrant lobby is clamouring about. It is a win win for all and a lose situation for the blood suckers
