by Heidi Meyers | Sep 24, 2026 | Articles
By Heidi J Meyers, copyright 2026 © all rights reserved.
THE GOOD NEWS, WAIVERS OF INADMISSIBILITY ARE STILL AVAILABLE!
As of this writing, January 18 2026, waivers of inadmissibility are still available and getting approved (who knows if this will change next week or next month).
The good news is, that waivers are still available and USCIS and DOS are still processing waiver applications. Our firm has had a number of I-212 and I-601A waivers approved and the clients departed the US for consular processing in various countries in Latin America and returned to the US with their immigrant visas as permanent residents, from the Summer 2025, up to this January 2026. Additionally an immigrant visa applicant with a long history of fraud in the US but with very sympathetic factors in his case, was also able to obtain his immigrant visa in South Asia and return to the US after being abroad for a number of years, with an approved I-601 waiver under INA 212(i). While there may now be more push-back by USCIS and reluctance, you may still have your waiver application approved if you have a strong case that is presented properly.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A WAIVER AND AN EXEMPTION.
Waivers in immigration law differ from exemptions. An exemption is written into the statute, the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and if you qualify, you are, well, exempted from whatever rule or ground of inadmissibility. You do not have to make a separate application to USCIS or DOS for an exemption.
EXAMPLES OF EXEMPTIONS FROM BARS IN THE STATUTE
An example of an exemption would be, that immediate relatives of US citizens are exempt from the statutory bars to adjustment of status to permanent residency if they have fallen out of status or worked without authorization. It is written into the statute, and is an exemption, see INA 245(c)(2), 8 USC 1255(c)(2). You do not need to file any form with USCIS or DOS. As long as you can prove that you were inspected by CBP and admitted or paroled into the US, you are eligible for approval of Form I-485 and adjustment to permanent resident as the immediate relative of a US citizen regardless of having overstayed or worked without a work permit.
Another exemption is INA 245(k), 8 USC 1255(k) for applicants adjusting with an approved I-140 employment petition, where the applicant has not continuously maintained their lawful nonimmigrant status or has worked without authorization, if you can prove that it was for 180 days or less, in the aggregate. There is no separate waiver application, but the applicant must extensively document that his or her violation of status or unauthorized work was for a brief period, 180 days or less in the aggregate (meaning USCIS adds up the total of separate periods of say, working without authorization). This documentation is included in the I-485 adjustment application.
Example: Jimmy Jamil has H-1B status through his employer, who has obtained an approved Form I-140 on his behalf. After the I-140 is approved, Jimmy decides to pick up some extra work on the side as an independent contractor, not through his employer. He does these side gigs for 60 days, and then files for adjustment. He has to report the additional income on his Forms 1040 income tax returns. He continues working without authorization on these side jobs and then receives his work permit, EAD card, 30 days after filing for adjustment. He has accumulated an aggregate of 90 days of working without authorization and is eligible for the 245(k) exemption.
EXAMPLES OF WAIVERS
Waivers differ from exemptions in that even if you qualify to apply for a waiver, you still must make an extensively-documented application with USCIS or DOS and the waiver may still be denied. Simply qualifying to apply for a waiver is no guarantee that the waiver will be approved. Unlike an exemption to a bar, USCIS or DOS may deny a waiver in the exercise of discretion.
There is no magic, each waiver application needs to be extensively documented. Also the standards and factors considered may differ depending upon the type of waiver.
For example, if you are in the US on a J-1 and are subject to INA 212(e), the two-year foreign residency requirement, you may apply for a waiver based on exceptional hardship to your US citizen or permanent resident spouse or child, or else based on persecution due to race, religion or political opinion, by filing the Form I-612 with USCIS, which will then send its recommendation to DOS (there are also other waivers available of the 212(e) requirement, such no objection, Conrad 30 etc, which we will not discuss). USCIS sends its waiver recommendation to the DOS Waiver Review Division. DOS then sends back its own recommendation to USCIS.
Since it is a waiver and not an exemption, you must file a Form I-612 waiver application, and then file for adjustment. They are two separate applications.
Similarly, with the Form I-601A provisional unlawful presence waiver, you will need an approval of your unlawful presence waiver prior to departing the US to attend your immigrant visa interview with the US Embassy or consulate abroad. The immigrant visa application, Form DS-260, I-864 and immigrant visa processing with CEAC of the State Dept is a separate process from applying for the I-601A waiver with USCIS.
Even if you meet the basic minimum eligibility requirements to file, i.e. you have an approved I-130, I-140 or I-360 petition, are not in removal proceedings, or removal proceedings have been administratively closed, and you have a qualifying family member, either a spouse or a parent who is a US citizen or permanent resident, that does not necessarily mean that you will be able to show extreme hardship to your qualifying family member or that USCIS will grant your waiver.
There are many different waivers of inadmissibility and exemptions to bars to immigration, these are just a few examples. These remain available to those who may have a ground of inadmissibility or a bar to adjustment or other immigration status.
by Heidi Meyers | Sep 24, 2026 | Articles
By Heidi J Meyers, [email protected]
Lessons from the Prince Harry case: FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) litigation over the decision to grant Prince Harry a visa.
After Prince Harry revealed his drug use in his book Spare, including cocaine, psychedelic mushrooms and pot, there was a brouhaha about whether he had revealed his extensive use of drugs in his visa application. The Heritage Foundation tried to find out if Prince Harry had concealed his drug use in his immigration applications or if he had received a waiver. We can learn from our opponent some important lessons re FOIA requests.
The case, Heritage Foundation v. DHS, 1:23-cv-01198-CJN (DDC, filed 05/01/2023), while brought by the anti-immigration Heritage Foundation, has helpful lessons for immigration attorneys filing FOIA requests and advocating for our clients in federal court.
First, request not only the A# file but also all records with the applicant’s name, including other applications and supporting documents that are not in the A# file. Make a detailed list.
The Prince Harry Complaint lays out the extensive FOIA request filed by the plaintiffs. This list is quite helpful to immigration attorneys. Request all records within the Alien File (A#-File), as well as any applications and supporting documents, and documents not included in the A# file, including but not limited to:
- Any and all applications for immigration benefits filed, whether or not adjudicated; ·
- Any and all Forms I-213;
- Any and all Forms I-275; and
- Any and all Forms I-877.
Id. You may use this high level of detail as a basis for your own FOIA requests, but modify it.
IRAP has found that certain applications and documents may not be included in the A file, such as Forms I-765, I-131 and stand-alone Forms I-130, so you may modify this language to include all applications and supporting documents related to the subject or with the subject’s name, even if not included in the A file.
Second, include a list of databases to be searched in your FOIA request, and various versions of your client’s name.
Their Prince Harry FOIA requests continued, listing various databases:
Section 2) All records pertaining to the Duke of Sussex in the following system of records maintained by CBP and DHS:
- Automated Targeting System (ATS, DHS/CBP-006);
- Advance Passenger Information System (APIS, DHS/CBP-005);
- Border Crossing Information System (BCIS, DHS/CBP-007);
- U.S. Customs and Border Protection TECS (DHS/CBP-011);
- Non-Federal Entity Data System (NEDS, DHS/CBP-008);
- DHS Use of the Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB) System of Records (DHS/ALL-030);
- CBP Intelligence Records System (CIRS, DHS/CBP-024);
- DHS Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT, DHS/USVISIT-004); · Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA, DHS/CBP-009);
- Non immigrant Information System (NIIS, DHS/CBP-016);
- Arrival and Departure Information System (ADIS, DHS/CBP-021);and
- Electronic Visa Update System (EVUS., DHS/CBP-022).
Section 3) All records relating to any requests for waiver pursuant to Section 212(d)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act including, but not limited to, email communications within the DHS Office of the Secretary, the USCIS Office of the Director, the CBP Office of the Commissioner, or any subordinate office within those named departments or agency or a record of any communication between any of those named entities…”
Id. This highly-detailed list of requests for FOIAs to DHS is extremely helpful if you are trying to obtain your clients’ files. Again, review IRAP’s helpful lists of databases the agencies use for searches.
Third, follow agency instructions, and submit the Form G-28, Form G-639 and/or notarized release from your client. If the agency claims they do not have any files, do not believe them, and do not get discouraged. File an administrative appeal, which is often helpful.
The Prince Harry complaint details all the expected high jinks and delays of the various agencies under DHS in responding to the FOIA request.
CBP denied the FOIA request because it was from a third-party with no signed G-28 or G-639 or notarized release. It issued a boilerplate denial that did not consider any of the reasons put forth by the Heritage Foundation. They promptly filed an administrative appeal with the CBP Appeal Office. While CBP is required to respond to a FOIA appeal in 20 business days. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(A)(ii); 6 C.F.R. § 5.8(d), CBP never responded. Paras 58-60.
Often FOIA administrative appeals can be helpful, but not in this case.
USCIS claimed that they had misplaced or lost Prince Harry’s file. Now, knowing how USCIS operates, it is not terribly surprising when they misplace Joe Shmo’s file. But Prince Harry? How could you lose Prince Harry’s file? Plaintiff then explained to USCIS Counsel that the file may be under several different versions of Prince Harry’s name. Paras 61-63.
The various DHS agencies failed to respond timely to Plaintiffs’ requests for expedite processing. Indeed, after emailing them with additional evidence in support of the expedite, CBP inexplicably claimed not receiving the email attachments and requested that they be re-sent. Paras 67-73.
Finally, plaintiffs received a letter from DHS, stating that plaintiffs had not described the records they were seeking: “After careful review of your FOIA request, we determined that your request is too broad in scope, did not specifically identify the records which you are seeking, or only posed questions to the agency. Records must be described in reasonably sufficient detail…” It was a form letter that did not reflect any consideration of the particular request.
Fourth, rather than be discouraged or exhausted by DHS’s dilatory and frustrating tactics, plaintiffs promptly filed in federal court.
Plaintiffs filed in federal court under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 USC §552 and federal question jurisdiction, 28 USC §1331, claiming the following causes of action:
- Failure to conduct adequate searches for responsive records;
- Wrongful withholding of non-exempt responsive records;
- Wrongful denial of fee waiver;
- Statutory bar against charging fees;
- And wrongful denial of expedited processing.
The federal suit over the FOIA for Prince Harry’s immigration records and decision to grant a visa are full of helpful lessons and nuggets of information for immigration attorneys advocating on behalf of their clients.
Copyright 2025 © Heidi J Meyers, all rights reserved. This article is for informational purposes only and is not meant as legal advice.
by Heidi Meyers | Sep 24, 2026 | Articles
By Heidi J Meyers
Immigrant entrepreneurs need to protect their IP, not just to fortify your immigration petitions but also for your future success in the U.S. For those in creative fields, your intellectual property (IP) may constitute almost the entire value of your business.
Trademarks, patents and copyrights are important not just for your immigration status, but for the success of your business and career. Employers who protect their intellectual property (IP) will have an edge in getting their immigration petitions on behalf of foreign employees approved.
Immigrants coming to the U.S. for work or business need to protect their intellectual property. A patent protects inventions. Inventions are technological advancements that are useful, new and not obvious. A copyright protects original works of authorship, including literary works, graphic, plastic, musical, dramatic, audio and visual creations. Computer programs can also be copyrighted. A trademark identifies your brand, and signifies the origin of the merchandise or services.
The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is the US government agency in charge of trademarks and patents. If you want to file a trademark on your own, without an attorney, you will have to prove your identity through ID.me. Foreign nationals who reside abroad must use a U.S. lawyer, and are prohibited from filing with the USPTO on their own. See, Examination Guide 4-19 (Revised) Requirement of U.S.-Licensed Attorney for Foreign-Domiciled Trademark Applicants and Registrants (September 2019).
Additionally, the trademark application form, at the beginning, asks if the owner of the mark is a U.S. citizen. Foreign nationals should generally use US lawyers to file their trademarks on their behalf. In order to register with the USPTO as an attorney, you must be admitted to practice and provide your bar registration number for the state you are licensed in. Thus, foreign lawyers with an LLM but no bar license will be unable to represent clients and file trademarks on their behalf.
The USPTO initiated an identity verification process in response to scammers from China, Pakistan and other countries filing numerous trademark applications using false information. See, https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/safeguarding-the-trademark-community-against. In order to file a trademark application with the USPTO, you must initially verify your identity with ID.me using a government-issued identity document and undergoing facial recognition. This only has to be done once.
Foreign nationals who want to start a business or work in the United States, increase their chances of getting their immigration application approved, and also increase the chances of success of their business and/or career by protecting their intellectual property. It is equally important for companies sponsoring foreign employees. For E-1 (treaty trader), E-2 (treaty investor), L-1A (managerial or executive transferee), L-1B (specialized knowledge), O-1 (alien of extraordinary ability) or H-1B (temporary professional), demonstrating that you have IP will help you get your E, L, O or H-1B petition approved. It is even more crucial when applying for the NIW (National Interest Waiver) or EB-1A (alien of extraordinary ability) for the green card.
First, if you are a foreign national seeking an NIW or EB-1A, protecting your IP will help you prove the innovations and contributions you have made in your field. For the NIW (National Interest Waiver), showing that you have patents, trademarks and copyrights helps to prove that you are well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor.
Second, if you have just started a new business, or you have an ongoing small business, you want to show USCIS that your business is sufficiently capitalized and has enough assets to continue operating and pay your future employee an appropriate wage. If you are sponsoring an H-1B, you must prove to USCIS that your company is able to pay the prevailing wage. For other work-related visas, such as Es, Ls, or Os, the employer needs to show that it has enough income and assets to be able to pay the employee for the full period of time requested.
For an E-2 (treaty investor), you have to show a substantial investment in the business, and IP can be included as part of your total investment in the business. Trademarks, patents and copyrights are assets and can be included when you are calculating the assets of your firm. For example, computer programs and databases can be copyrighted or patented, if you have your own proprietary software product. If you have a fashion design company, you can copyright your special and unique patterns and designs. Even though it may be difficult to prove the monetary value of your IP protected assets if they are new or you are just starting out, it creates the perception of value.
Third, in the case of H-1B or L-1B employees who will work at your client’s work site, and not at your own firm’s offices, you need to show that you, the petitioning employer, control your employee’s work and that your client is not directing your employee. If the employee is implementing the company’s own proprietary product, for which you have IP protection, be it copyright or patent, or even if you have trademarked the name of your product, then you can show that it is your firm that is supervising your employee, because it is your firm that has knowledge of its own proprietary product, and not the client.
Fourth, when sponsoring an employee as an L-1B (specialized knowledge worker), the company must show that the employee has special knowledge of the petitioning organization’s product, service, research, equipment, techniques, management, or other interests and its application in international markets, or an advanced level of knowledge or expertise in the organization’s processes and procedures. While USCIS keeps repeating that it is not necessary that the sponsoring company have proprietary products of which the employee has specialized knowledge, the fact of the matter is that a company with its own proprietary products protected by patents, copyright, trade secrets and trademarks, has a much better chance of getting its L-1B petition approved than a company which either does not bother to protect its IP or else does not have any proprietary products. For example, a fashion design company may sponsor for the L-1B an important designer who has been working for the company abroad and is responsible for many of its special designs to come to the U.S. If the fashion company has copyrighted its particular designs and patterns, has design patents for its shoes, handbags and jewelry, or has certain lines which have been trademarked or have a certain trade dress, the chances of having the case approved is higher. Another example would be an engineering company, which has its own patents for particular machinery it has developed, which wants to bring one of its engineers from abroad, who is highly experienced in the patented machinery.
A similar category to the L-1B specialized knowledge worker is the E-1 or E-2 essential skills worker, where the company has to show the employee has a certain expertise and unique skills. The employer has to show that US workers do not have these particular skills and expertise. An employee who has expertise and experience in proprietary products of the employer which are protected by copyright, patents, trademarks or as trade secrets, has a better chance of having their petition or visa application approved than does a similar application by a company which does not protect its intellectual property. E-1 includes trade in services, which may include for example, a fashion or creative company abroad, which licenses its copyrighted products, or brand of fashion and apparel in the U.S., for manufacturing, marketing and distribution.
Thus, both immigrants and their company sponsors stand a better chance of having their immigration petitions approved if they have protected their intellectual property. Moreover, for you and your business’s long-term success in the U.S., you need to register your trademarks, copyrights and patents, and protect them vigorously.
by Heidi Meyers | Dec 18, 2020 | Articles
Since Huawei and its non-U.S. affiliates were added to the US Dept of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)’s export controls entity list, the BIS has imposed additional restrictions on Huawei, making it difficult to do business with Huawei unless a company has a license.
Your U.S. company is not allowed to export, reexport or transfer (in-country) any items controlled by the EAR (Export Administration Regulations) to Huawei, unless you have a license. Even if the customer is a Huawei location within the U.S., your company would have to find out if the items are meant to be exported to Huawei and its listed entities abroad.
On the other hand, companies may be able to import Huawei goods into the U.S. However, your company would be prohibited from returning the phones to Huawei without a license.
The Commerce Dept has expanded the foreign-made direct product rule to prevent Huawei from subverting US export controls. Even items manufactured outside the U.S. may be subject to export control restrictions, and your company may be forbidden from selling through a third party, to Huawei and its affiliates these items if they use US technology or software controlled by the EAR or produced in a manufacturing plant or by equipment that is the direct product of controlled US technology or software. You may also be prohibited from providing foreign-made items that include US technology or software to a customer who in turn re-sells it to Huawei. Thus, even though your direct customer is not on the entity list, if the customer in turn re-sells the controlled technology to Huawei or another company or person on the Commerce Dept’s entity list, that is a violation of the export controls regulations.
See: https://www.commerce.gov/news/press-releases/2020/05/commerce-addresses-huaweis-efforts-undermine-entity-list-restricts.
While a violation of the export controls on Huawei requires the US government to show that the company had “knowledge” of the violation, company officers cannot just look the other way and pretend they did not know a violation was occurring. Any U.S. company doing business in China needs to have sophisticated “Know Your Customer” (KYC) procedures and a compliance program in place. BIS has a helpful list of “Red Flag” indicators, see
https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/all-articles/23-compliance-a-training/51-red-flag-indicators
In general, you need to know your customer’s customer and suppliers. Your company cannot just ignore any red flags. For example, if the customer does not want to provide information on their own customers (the end-user) and is vague and evasive, that is a red flag. Or if the customer does not know anything about the product they are purchasing, and declines routine installation and maintenance, these are all red flags.
Your company needs to protect its entire supply chain, and ensure consistent export and economic sanctions compliance at all steps in the process. The company must be vigilant about what its branches, offices abroad and affiliates are doing. Also, with any mergers and acquisitions, the company should follow-up and ensure the newly acquired subsidiary or affiliate is following all the rules. You must provide ongoing training to your employees. You need an effective communication process for employees to communicate red flags and other negative information up the company’s hierarchy. Top management must be on board with export and economic sanctions compliance and keep updated on the issues. Internal audits are important to uncover inadvertent or intentional subverting of the policies by employees down the line.
If your company wishes to do business with Huawei in any EAR-controlled items or technology, you need to apply to BIS for a license. Unfortunately, the US government has a presumption of denial when reviewing license applications. However, Intel and AMD received some licenses from BIS to supply chips for Huawei’s PCs and servers. Samsung Display of South Korea also succeeded in getting a license from BIS to provide its panels to Huawei Technologies.
In addition to the export control regulations, your company also must be concerned with economic sanctions issues if dealing with Huawei, as the Chief Financial Officer Wanzhou Meng and the company are currently facing an indictment charging criminal violations of the IEEPA and economic sanctions against Iran and North Korea. See, https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-telecommunications-conglomerate-huawei-and-subsidiaries-charged-racketeering
Huawei is not the only company you need to be worried about if doing business in China. This applies to any industry seeking to export to China or Chinese companies, as now many Chinese and Hong Kong companies and persons are not only on the export controls Entity List, but also OFAC’s Specially Designated National (SDN) list which are subject to economic sanctions. For example, Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps (XPCC), certain of its officials, and its multitudinous subsidiaries are subject to US economic sanctions for violating the human rights of the Uyghurs. See my video on Youtube, on OFAC’s 50 percent rule and XPCC, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SeohBca0jo&t=324s.
Plus, contrary to the export controls issues, any violation of the economic sanctions rules is generally considered to be strict liability (i.e., the government does not have to prove that you or your company knew or realized there was a violation).
Thus, doing business not only with Huawei but also with a myriad of other Chinese companies, officials, and Hong Kong officials, may expose your company to violations of the export controls and economic sanctions regulations. Any company wishing to pursue the Chinese market or supply chain must have stringent compliance, KYC and due diligence procedures in place.
Copyright 2020 © Heidi J Meyers, all rights reserved.
by Heidi Meyers | Dec 18, 2020 | Articles
Recently, there have been many issues regarding delays in work permits. Over the summer, USCIS accumulated a backlog of 75,000 cases in which the work authorization card was approved, but the physical card itself had not been produced. So many people were in the unfortunate position of having an approved work permit, but no actual card, and so not able to work.
As a result of a case in federal court, Subramanya et al., v. USCIS, et al., 2:20-cv-03707 (S.D. of Ohio) the federal court in Ohio has now forced USCIS to agree to produce the work permit cards, or EADs (Employment Authorization Documents), and given USCIS a schedule by which they must be produced and mailed out.
Additionally, because of the huge number of people with EAD approval notices but no physical card, on August 19, 2020, USCIS announced that employers can accept the USCIS approval notice in lieu of the physical EAD card for USCIS approvals dated on or after December 1, 2019 through December 1, 2020. Thus, the USCIS approval notice will count as a List C document for purposes of the Form I-9. See, https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/form-i-9-verification-during-ead-production-delays-due-to-covid-19.
Aside from not producing EAD cards, USCIS has been sitting on work authorization applications for many months. Many applications are taking five to six and a half months to process. Meanwhile, many hard-working, honest immigrants are left without their work permit, and employers can be subject to penalties if they keep their immigrant workers on payroll. These are folks who qualify for work permits, but because USCIS is just sitting on their applications, many find themselves out of a job, and employers out of valued, skilled, and reliable employees.
The situation is even worse for asylum applicants, as USCIS recently came out with a new rule. Rather than having to wait 150 days after filing your asylum application in order to apply for work authorization, as of August 25, 2020, you now have to wait at least 365 days, a whole year, before you can apply for work authorization. Also, up until now, USCIS was required to adjudicate work permits for asylum applicants within 30 days. With the new DHS rule, the USCIS can sit upon work permit applications for months before issuing an approval. Not only that, but those asylum applicants who are applying for their work permit for the first time will now have to pay a $580 USCIS fee, whereas previously for asylum applicants their first work permit was free. Additionally, those asylum applicants who did not apply for asylum within one year of their arrival into the U.S. will be barred from applying at all until their case is granted. These new rules that harm asylum applicants are currently being challenged in the federal court in Maryland, in the case Casa de Maryland v. Wolf, 8:20-cv-02118 (Dt of Maryland, Southern Div).
If your work permit application has been unreasonably delayed, or you are an employer whose employee has a delayed EAD application, you may contact our office if you are interested in filing in federal court. Law Office of Heidi J Meyers, 11 Broadway, Suite 925 New York NY 10004 [email protected], 212-791-4007 or 646-508-5225.
Copyright 2020 © Heidi J Meyers, all rights reserved.
by Heidi Meyers | Dec 18, 2020 | Articles
It might seem like a strange time to start a business, in the midst of a pandemic, economic downturn and period of de-globalization. But in the midst of adversity, there are opportunities, if you take a fresh look, re-assess and examine. While others are going bankrupt and out of business, you can establish a firm foundation for the future.
This will be a weekly series on practical legal issues when coming from abroad to start a business in the U.S., or if you are an immigrant already in the U.S. who wants to start a new business.
While we will focus on very practical legal issues, I will start with a tip that is not legal in nature, but will definitely help you. So, first is to learn about American business culture before you come to the U.S. Or, if you are already here, to not just stay within your own community, but to get out and learn about American entrepreneurial and business culture from other groups or persons not like yourself.
Why am I starting with culture when I am writing a blog on legal issues? Because certain business norms and practices, culture, are reflected in US laws and legal standards. Do not assume what you regularly do in your home country will work or will be legal when operating a business in the U.S.
There are many online resources to help you as you plan your future business. In terms of acquainting yourself with U.S. business culture, there is a plethora of resources. Simply as an example, Gary Vaynerchuk, “Gary Vee”, https://www.youtube.com/user/GaryVaynerchuk, on how to develop your business using social media and EntreLeadership, https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOwu527B6ufdcVl8l0VYqtQ on the qualities you need to be a leader, and how to motivate your team. Each of these examples come from totally different perspectives – Gary Vee curses a lot, while EntreLeadership comes from a Christian perspective, but both are instructive for entrepreneurs. Both come from a uniquely American perspective, especially if you are coming from abroad and want exposure to various American business outlooks. If you prefer the written word, Harvard Business Review is a great resource, full of good advice. Even though it is written from the perspective of running a large corporation, there is still plenty of insight and good advice for running a small business. You don’t need to agree with everything said. You need to listen to a range of different perspectives. Don’t just listen to those who think like you.
The above are just a few examples which I personally have found helpful. Do not limit yourself, there are numerous resources out there. Next, week we will address a common legal issue affecting many immigrants as they try to establish a business in the U.S. Stay tuned!
Copyright 2020 © Heidi J Meyers, all rights reserved.
