News - Graham Adair, Inc.

International Residency Options for Investors and Global Families

For individuals and families looking to establish residency outside the United States, several countries offer immigration programs based on investment, financial resources, or other qualifying criteria. These programs can provide opportunities to live abroad, expand international mobility, and, depending on the country and program, establish long-term or permanent residence.

Graham Adair assists clients with global immigration matters and works with experienced local counsel in jurisdictions around the world. Below are four residency options currently available in Europe and Latin America.

Portugal Golden Visa

Portugal’s Golden Visa program provides a residence permit to qualifying non-EU/EEA/Swiss nationals who make and maintain an eligible investment in Portugal.

Current qualifying options include a €500,000 investment in certain non-real-estate collective investment funds, a €500,000 investment in qualifying scientific research, a €200,000 contribution supporting qualifying cultural activities, and certain business and job-creation alternatives. The program generally requires an average physical presence in Portugal of only seven days per year.

Qualifying family members may also be included under the program.

May be of interest to: Individuals and families seeking European residency while maintaining their primary residence elsewhere.

Malta Permanent Residence Programme

The Malta Permanent Residence Programme provides qualifying applicants with permanent residence in Malta. According to the program materials, residence under the program provides the right to reside, settle and stay in Malta, as well as visa-free travel within the Schengen Area for up to 90 days within a 180-day period.

Applicants must satisfy several financial requirements. These currently include a €60,000 administration fee, a €37,000 government contribution, a €2,000 philanthropic donation, and qualifying property. Applicants may purchase property for at least €375,000 or rent qualifying property for at least €14,000 annually. Applicants must also satisfy specified financial means requirements.

Eligible dependents can include a spouse or qualifying partner, children up to age 28, and parents and grandparents under certain conditions.

May be of interest to: Individuals and families considering permanent residence in an EU and Schengen country.

Panama Residency Options

Panama offers several residence categories with significantly different qualifying requirements.

Available options described in our current materials include the Friendly Nations residence program, Qualified Investor residence, Economic Solvency residence, and programs for pensioners and retired bondholders. There is also a residence option available to Italian nationals under the Panama-Italy Treaty.

Investment thresholds vary by category. For example, the Qualified Investor program includes a US$300,000 real estate investment option, while other qualifying investment categories have different minimum amounts. Panama also offers permanent residency to qualifying pensioners who receive a lifetime monthly retirement pension of at least US$1,000.

May be of interest to: Investors, retirees, and internationally mobile individuals looking for residence options in Latin America.

Costa Rica Investor Residency

Costa Rica offers temporary residency to qualifying foreign investors.

Under the current program materials, applicants must make a qualifying investment in Costa Rica of at least US$150,000. Eligible investments can include real estate or other registrable property, shares of a Costa Rican company, securities, certain productive or nationally significant projects, venture capital funds, and sustainable tourism infrastructure projects.

The materials indicate an approximate processing time of 10 to 14 months after filing and identify documentation requirements including an apostilled criminal record and birth certificate.

May be of interest to: Individuals looking to establish residence in Costa Rica through a relatively accessible investment-based pathway.

Choosing the Right Residency Program

There is no single residency program that is appropriate for everyone. Investment requirements, family eligibility, physical-presence requirements, processing procedures, and long-term immigration benefits vary substantially by jurisdiction.

Individuals considering an international residency program should also evaluate the potential tax, financial, and investment implications with appropriate advisers before proceeding.

Graham Adair can help clients understand available immigration options and coordinate with experienced local counsel in the relevant jurisdiction.

Considering residency outside the United States? Contact Graham Adair to discuss your objectives and learn more about residency options that may be available to you and your family.

This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, tax, financial, or investment advice. Immigration laws, government fees, investment requirements, processing times, and program availability are subject to change. Individual circumstances vary, and current requirements should be confirmed before taking action.

News & Updates USCIS

Client Alert: DHS Proposes New Fee for H-1B Cap Cases

Today, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a proposed rule that would impose a new $103,265 government filing fee on H-1B cap-subject petitions, including petitions filed under the regular H-1B cap and the U.S. master’s cap. The proposed fee would be in addition to all existing H-1B filing fees.

The proposal has generated significant attention throughout the immigration and business communities because of its potential impact on future H-1B filings. However, it is important to note that this is only a proposed rule and is not currently in effect. DHS must complete the rulemaking process, review public comments, and issue a final rule before any new fee could be implemented.

Under the proposal, the fee would apply to H-1B petitions that are subject to the annual H-1B cap, including petitions requesting either change of status or consular processing. The proposal would not apply to cap-exempt H-1B petitions, including change of employer and extension applications, as well as many university and nonprofit research organization filings.

At this stage, employers should view this as an early development rather than a change requiring immediate action. The proposal will be subject to a public comment period, and we expect significant legal challenges if a final rule is issued. Multiple organizations and stakeholders are already evaluating the proposal and its legal basis.

We recommend making no changes for now.

At this time, we recommend continuing with normal workforce planning and preparing for the FY 2028 H-1B cap season as usual.

There are several procedural and legal hurdles that remain before any new fee could affect H-1B filings, and we anticipate additional guidance and developments over the coming months.

Graham Adair is continuing to monitor this development closely and is actively reviewing the proposed rule and its potential impact on employers. We will provide updates as additional information becomes available.

If you have questions regarding your organization’s H-1B program or workforce planning, please contact your Graham Adair attorney.

Compliance News & Updates USCIS

The End of Duration of Status: What F, J, and I Visa Holders Need to Know

On Friday, July 17, 2026, the Department of Homeland Security published a final rule that eliminates “duration of status” (D/S) for international students (F), exchange visitors (J), and foreign media representatives (I). For decades, these nonimmigrants were admitted for as long as they maintained their status — no fixed end date. That’s gone. Starting September 15, 2026 (60 days after publication), F, J, and I visa holders will instead be admitted for a fixed period tied to their program, capped at four years.

This is one of the most significant structural changes to the F/J/I system in years, and it changes how status is tracked, extended, and lost.

What’s changing

What is changing?

First, extensions move from SEVIS to USCIS. Today, a Designated School Officer or Responsible Officer can extend a student’s program directly in SEVIS. Under the new rule, F-1 students needing more time to finish their program must instead file Form I-539 with USCIS — adding an adjudication step (and USCIS processing times) to what used to be an administrative, same-day fix.

That change extends to OPT and STEM OPT: students will eventually need to file both I-539 and I-765 for those applications. DHS is giving a six-month grace period on this specific piece, so it takes effect March 18, 2027 — not immediately with the rest of the rule.

Second, no more lateral or downward degree changes. F-1 students who finish one academic level can now only move up. A bachelor’s grad can start a master’s; a master’s grad can no longer pivot to a second bachelor’s or an equivalent-level program the way they could before. This closes off a fairly common path for students changing fields or schools.

Third, he post-completion grace period is cut in half. Students now have 30 days — down from 60 — after finishing their program to depart the U.S., transfer schools, or change status. That’s a meaningfully tighter window for a decision that already tends to be logistically messy.

How will the transition work?

How the transition works

Students already in the U.S. under D/S convert automatically. Their new authorized stay will mirror their current program or OPT end date, capped at four years from September 15, 2026 — no action required to get an initial status date.

Students traveling internationally and re-entering the U.S. on or after September 15 will be issued an I-94 with a specific expiration date at reentry, rather than the open-ended “D/S” notation.

Why this matters

The predictability cuts both ways. A fixed end date makes it easier to know exactly where you stand — but it also means routine situations (a delayed thesis, a change of major, a slow semester) can now trigger a status problem that used to resolve itself quietly through a school official. Students pursuing a second degree, especially at the same or a lower level, should plan well before September 15.

Please consult with your immigration counsel to evaluate how this affects your specific situation.

News & Updates USCIS

USCIS Signals Tougher Approach to Green Card Cases Filed in the U.S. – What Employers Should Know

Bottom Line: A new USCIS policy memo signals a stricter approach to green card applications filed inside the United States, but for most employer-sponsored employees in H-1B or L-1 status, we do not expect immediate disruption. Cases involving prior status complications or nontraditional immigration histories warrant closer attention.

On May 21, 2026, USCIS issued policy memorandum PM-602-0199, emphasizing that adjustment of status — the process by which foreign nationals apply for a green card from within the United States (Form I-485) — is a discretionary benefit, not an automatic grant, even when all eligibility requirements are met. The memo also characterizes consular processing abroad as the “ordinary” path to permanent residence, framing U.S.-based adjustment of status as a form of extraordinary relief.

The announcement has prompted concern and, in some cases, headlines suggesting that employment-based green card applicants will now be forced to complete processing abroad. At this stage, we believe those headlines overstate the immediate practical impact — particularly for most employer-sponsored populations.

What Actually Changed?

Importantly, the law governing employment-based green cards did not change, nor has adjustment of status been eliminated. Eligible individuals may still apply for permanent residence from within the United States.

What changed is how USCIS instructs officers to exercise discretion when reviewing adjustment applications. Under the new memo, officers are directed to:

Treat adjustment of status as a case-by-case discretionary benefit rather than a routine outcome;
Consider the “totality of the circumstances” in deciding whether to approve an application;
Weigh positive and negative factors more explicitly; and
View consular immigrant visa processing abroad as the default pathway

USCIS also signals that officers should place greater emphasis on whether applicants maintained lawful status, complied with visa requirements, and can demonstrate strong positive equities supporting approval.

What About Your Employees With Pending Cases?

Employers should anticipate questions from sponsored employees with I-485 applications already pending. This memo applies to cases at all stages of adjudication, including those filed before May 2026. While we do not expect officers to penalize applicants retroactively for conduct consistent with prior guidance, the memo may influence how officers evaluate cases going forward.

We recommend that HR and legal teams encourage employees with pending I-485 cases to direct their questions to their assigned attorney, rather than drawing conclusions from media coverage.

Which Employee Populations Are Most at Risk?

For most employer-sponsored employees maintaining H-1B or L-1 status, we currently expect limited immediate impact. The memo does not eliminate dual-intent protections, and individuals in valid H-1B or L-1 status pursuing permanent residence remain among the strongest candidates for adjustment of status. Underlying eligibility rules are unchanged.

That said, the memo creates greater risk for employees in non-routine or higher-discretion situations, including those with:

No underlying nonimmigrant status (work authorization based solely on EAD);
Prior immigration status gaps or violations;
Unauthorized employment history;
Inconsistent nonimmigrant intent (for example, certain F-1 or TN visa scenarios); or
Complex immigration histories or prior compliance concerns.

For these employees, USCIS may scrutinize more closely whether approval inside the United States is warranted, or whether consular processing abroad is the more appropriate path.

What We Are Watching Closely

Although the memo largely cites existing legal authority, its tone is notably more restrictive than prior USCIS guidance and could signal a meaningful shift in adjudication culture. Immigration practitioners nationwide have raised concerns that officers may begin applying discretion more aggressively in edge cases. Some commentators also anticipate legal challenges if USCIS implements the memo in ways that depart materially from longstanding practice.

Ultimately, the most important question is not what the memo says in theory — it is how USCIS officers apply it in practice over the coming months. We are monitoring adjudication trends closely and will provide updates as patterns emerge.

Recommended Employer Actions

We recommend that employers take the following steps now:

Continue normal green card planning for employees in H-1B and L-1 status.
Avoid unnecessary status gaps or lapses in employment authorization within your sponsored employee population.
Proactively identify higher-risk cases in your workforce — particularly employees with prior status complications, employment gaps, or complex immigration histories — and flag them for individualized review with counsel.
Maintain thorough immigration compliance records across your program, including status maintenance and work authorization history.
Direct employees with questions to their Graham Adair attorney rather than allowing anxiety to influence decisions.

Graham Adair Perspective

Graham Adair has represented employers and their employees in employment-based immigration matters for two decades. Our current assessment is that this memo will result in incremental tightening rather than immediate systemic disruption for most employer-sponsored populations.

For employees maintaining status and following conventional employment-based green card pathways, we remain cautiously optimistic that adjustment of status will continue to be a viable option. However, we expect closer scrutiny in discretionary and nontraditional cases, making individualized strategy increasingly important.

If you have questions about how this policy change may affect your workforce or immigration program, please contact your Graham Adair representative.

Compliance Immigration and Customs Enforcement News & Updates

ICE Significantly Expands “Substantive” I-9 Violations – Employer Action Recommended

Graham Adair Perspective

We are advising clients to treat this development as a meaningful tightening of I-9 enforcement standards rather than a routine policy update. While ICE has not issued entirely new regulations, its revised guidance signals a more aggressive posture in how existing rules will be applied during audits. Employers should assume that errors previously viewed as low-risk may now carry greater financial exposure and should prioritize proactive compliance accordingly.

Overview

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has issued updated guidance that may increase employer risk during Form I-9 inspections. In March 2026, ICE revised its long-standing inspection fact sheet and clarified its interpretation of what constitutes “substantive” violations—meaning certain errors may be treated as immediately subject to monetary penalties rather than eligible for correction. This development represents a meaningful shift in I-9 compliance enforcement and raises the stakes for employers across all industries.

Background: The Prior Framework

Since the 1990s, I-9 violations have generally been divided into two categories:

Substantive violations – serious errors potentially impacting employment eligibility and subject to fines;
Technical or procedural violations – administrative errors that employers are typically permitted to correct within at least 10 business days after notice of an inspection.

This distinction has historically provided employers with a limited opportunity to cure certain deficiencies identified during an audit.

What Changed

ICE’s revised guidance narrows the scope of what may be considered a “technical” violation. As a result, certain errors that were treated as correctable may now be treated as substantive violations, depending on the circumstances. This shift increases the likelihood that employers could face monetary penalties without an opportunity to cure certain deficiencies identified during an inspection. Examples of errors that may be treated as substantive include:

Missing key data fields such as date of birth or date of hire;
Failure to properly complete or date required sections of the form;
Incomplete preparer/translator certification (where applicable);
Missing employer representative information in Section 2;
Improper use of the Spanish-language form outside Puerto Rico;
Failure to record required document information in Section 2;
Missing rehire dates or certification details, where required.

Importantly, ICE continues to emphasize that Form I-9 must be complete and accurate on its face, and the presence of corrected information in supporting documents does not necessarily cure deficiencies on the form itself.

Expanded Risk Areas

The updated guidance also increases exposure in several evolving compliance areas:

Remote Verification Procedures: Errors related to remote document inspection procedures, such as failure to properly follow DHS-authorized alternative procedures or related E-Verify requirements, may increase compliance risk and could be treated as substantive violations in certain cases.
Electronic I-9 Systems: ICE continues to scrutinize electronic I-9 systems. Deficiencies in audit trails, electronic signatures, or system integrity may result in violations, including potentially substantive violations depending on the severity.
Documentation Accuracy Over Time: ICE has reinforced that compliance is assessed based on the form as completed at the time of hire. While corrections are still permitted in appropriate circumstances, errors may not be fully mitigated if the original form was materially deficient.

Enforcement Environment and Penalties

These changes come amid continued federal worksite enforcement activity, with I-9 inspections remaining a primary enforcement tool. Current civil penalties (adjusted annually) generally include:

Approximately $288 to $2,861 per Form I-9 for paperwork violations;
Up to approximately $28,619 per violation for knowingly employing unauthorized workers.

Because penalties are assessed on a per-form basis, even routine errors can result in significant aggregate exposure.

Key Takeaways for Employers

First, the margin for error in I-9 compliance is narrowing. Second, errors previously viewed as minor may carry increased enforcement risk. Third, employers should not rely on post-inspection correction opportunities as a primary compliance strategy. In short, accuracy at the time of I-9 completion is increasingly critical.

Recommended Next Steps

Employers should consider taking the following actions:

Conduct a proactive internal I-9 audit to identify and address errors, with particular focus on completeness and accuracy;
Retrain HR personnel and hiring managers to reinforce proper completion of all required fields, dates, and certifications;
Review electronic I-9 systems and confirm compliance with DHS requirements for audit trails, signatures, and recordkeeping;
Evaluate remote verification procedures to ensure alignment with DHS-authorized alternative procedures and E-Verify requirements;
Strengthen onboarding controls and implement standardized processes to improve accuracy at the point of hire.

Conclusion

ICE’s updated guidance reflects a stricter enforcement posture with respect to Form I-9 compliance. Employers that have historically relied on the ability to correct minor errors after an inspection may face increased exposure under this updated framework. Given the current enforcement environment, organizations should prioritize proactive compliance efforts to mitigate risk. If an I-9 audit is conducted, fines can add up fast.

1 2 3 … 75 Next page

Immigration law for the modern world.

World News