dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: International Tax

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re : 11198715 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JUN. 8, 2021 
Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National 
Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an international tax advisor, seeks second preference immigrant classification as a 
member of the professions holding an advanced degree and as an individual of exceptional ability, as 
well as a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement attached to this EB-2 classification. See 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner qualified 
for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but that he had not 
established that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the 
national interest. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief asserting that he is eligible for a national interest waiver. 
In these proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit 
sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To establish eligibility for a national interest waiver, a petitioner must first demonstrate qualification 
for the underlying EB-2 visa classification , as either an advanced degree professional or an individual 
of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Because this classification requires that the 
individual's services be sought by a U.S. employer, a separate showing is required to establish that a 
waiver of the job offer requirement is in the national interest. 
Section 203 (b) of the Act sets out this sequential framework: 
(2) Aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of 
exceptional ability. -
(A) In general. - Visas shall be made available . .. to qualified immigrants who are 
members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or 
who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will 
substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or 
educational interests, or welfare of the United States, and whose services in the 
sciences, arts, professions, or business are sought by an employer in the United 
States. 
(B) Waiver of job offer-
(i) National interest waiver. ... [T]he Attorney General may, when the Attorney 
General deems it to be in the national interest, waive the requirements of 
subparagraph (A) that an alien's services in the sciences, arts, professions, or 
business be sought by an employer in the United States. 
Furthermore, while neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," 
we set forth a framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions in the precedent decision 
Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). 1 Dhanasar states that after a petitioner has 
established eligibility for EB-2 classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) 
may, as matter of discretion 2, grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates: (1) that 
the foreign national's proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; (2) that 
the foreign national is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and (3) that, on balance, it 
would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of a job off er and thus of a labor 
certification. 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake. The endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas 
such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. In 
determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential 
prospective impact. 
The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national. To determine 
whether he or she is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, we consider factors including, 
but not limited to: the individual's education, skills, knowledge and record of success in related or 
similar efforts; a model or plan for future activities; any progress towards achieving the proposed 
endeavor; and the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or 
individuals. 
The third prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate that, on balance, it would be beneficial to the 
United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. In performing 
this analysis, USCIS may evaluate factors such as: whether, in light of the nature of the foreign 
national's qualifications or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the foreign 
national to secure a job off er or for the petitioner too btain a labor ce1iification; whether, even assuming 
that other qualified U.S. workers are available, the United States would still benefit from the foreign 
1 In announcing this new framework, we vacated our prior precedent decision, Matter of New York State Department of 
Transportation, 22 I&NDec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) (NYSDOT). 
2 See also Poursina v. USCJS, No. 1 7-16579, 2019 WL 4051593 (Aug. 28, 2019) (finding USC IS' decision to grant or 
deny a nationalinterestwaiverto be discretionaiy in nature). 
2 
national' s contributions; and whether the national interest in the foreign national' s contributions is 
sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process. In each case, the factor(s) 
considered must, taken together, indicate that on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States 
to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. 3 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director found that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. The remaining issue to be determined is whether the Petitioner has established that a waiver of 
the requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest. For the 
reasons discussed below, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not sufficiently 
demonstrated eligibility under the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. 
The first prong relates to substantial merit and national importance of the specific proposed endeavor. 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. The Petitioner initially provided a statement indicating: 
I intend to continue my career as an International Tax Advisor, helping multinational U.S. 
companies, especially those companies moving into the Brazilian market. As an 
International Tax Advisor with a tax law and tax consultancy background, I will help 
business to detect pro bl ems, provide solutions, and optimize business results by educating 
executives in leading positions about the complexities of doing business in Brazil and 
Latin America. I will be able to utilize my solid experience gained in over 20 years, 
having worked as a Tax Advisor in Brazil. 
My presence in the U.S. will provide support to businesses moving into the Brazilian 
market, assisting them to navigate the complex business environment and avoid 
unnecessary fines and fees arising out of non-compliance with the complex tax, business, 
and labor relations .... My career plan in the United States is to work for and se1ve as a 
consultant and advisor for multinational companies doing business or planning on doing 
business in Brazil and Latin America. 
Since 2010, I have worked atl lin Brazil and the United States, holding the 
positions as Tax Executive Senior Manager and Senior Tax Manager Brazil Desk 
LATAM South. 
[ A ]s an International Tax Advisor, I will be able to provide a wide array of services in the 
U.S., contributing directly to facilitate U.S. companies to generate substantial revenues 
3 SccDhanasar, 26l&NDec. at 888-91, for elaboration onthesethreeprongs. 
3 
from the Brazilian market; while being fully compliant with the highly complex tax and 
business laws of the countty. 
In response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner offered an updated statement 
indicating: 
I will consult U.S. and foreign companies and individuals on important issues relating to 
cross-border activities, such as I) tax implications and tax treaties, 2) differing legal 
systems, 3) dispute resolution, 4) diplomacy, and 5) culture awareness. 
I intend to open a business in the U.S. to can-y out consultations for my clients, which, by 
my goals and plans, should generate at least 2 more jobs. Conservatively, at least 8 to 10 
more jobs will be needed, to fulfill my 3-4yearplan by working in the U.S. 
My plan is to work with U.S. companies that have a high volume of business with Brazil 
in order to contribute my Brazilian legal knowledge and my analytical and consulting 
skills to help their businesses avoid unnecessary risks, comply with Brazilian tax law and 
set to correct tone of dialogue with Brazilian authorities. 
The Petitioner maintains on appeal: 
[ A ]s a well-rounded legal counsel and a tax law specialist who possesses an intimate 
knowledge of the business environment and complex legal landscape in Brazil, and who 
is uniquely well-positioned to guide companies that desire to engage in cross-border 
transactions and foreign investment-there is no doubt that [his] proposed endeavor to 
advise U.S. companies doing business or planning to do business in Brazil is not only 
meritorious, but nationally important, when considered how much benefit he can generate 
to the economy through his in depth expertise in the fields of business law, corporate law, 
tax law, and environmental law in Brazil. 
The record includes documentation relating to United States and international tax laws, including 
Brazil; the complexities of tax laws and codes; the impact of tax reform on the accounting industty; 
the global outlook of tax policy; the effects of foreign direct investment on the U.S. economy; 
strategies for companies conducting international business; and implications of investment in Latin 
American and Brazilian companies. As such, the record shows that the Petitioner's proposed work 
as an international tax advisor has substantial merit. 
On appeal, the Petitioner contends that: his "proposed endeavor is unquestionably of national 
importance, given the significant impact to the United States on international trade with Latin 
American countries, and particularly Brazil," "the legal industry plays an integral part in the U.S 
economy," "international real estate is moving into the mainstream," and "the trend toward greater 
cross-border movement of real estate capital-specifically in the U.S.-is as unmistakable as the growing 
4 
volume of world trade." In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the 
importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work ; instead we focus on the 
"the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhana sar, 26 I&N Dec. 
at 8 89. Here, the Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of his providing international 
tax law services rather than the national importance of the trade , legal, tax , and real estate fields or 
industries. In Dhana sar, we further noted that "we look for broader implications" of the proposed 
endeavor and that "[ a ]n undertaking may have national importance for example , because it has national 
or even global implications within a particular field." Id. We also stated that "[a]n endeavor that has 
significant potential to employ U.S. workers or has other substantial positive economic effects, 
particularly in an economically depressed area , for instance , may well be understood to have national 
importance." Id. at 890. 
In his appeal brief, the Petitioner emphasizes his "over 21 years of progressive experience in the field of 
tax law, handling a variety of complex business legal matters for multinational enterprises , and devising 
highly sophisticated solutions in such efforts ." The Petitioner's experience, education, and training in his 
field relates to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework , which "shifts the focus from the proposed 
endeavor to the foreign national." Id. at 890. The issue here is whether the specific endeavor that he 
proposes to undertake has national importance under Dhanasar's first prong . 
To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement 
we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of his work. As indicated above, 
the Petitioner initially proposed to provide consulting and advising services for multination al 
companies. In response to the Director 's RFE, the Petitioner then claimed that he intended to open a 
business to carry out consultations with his clients. Although the Petitioner's statements reflect his 
intention to off er advising and consult ing serv ices in internation al tax law, he has not submitted 
sufficient, specific information and evidence to demon strate that the pro specti ve impact of his 
proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance. In Dhana sar, we determined that the 
petitioner ' s teaching activities did not rise to the level of having national importance because they 
would not impact his field more broadly . Id. at 893 . Here, we find the record does not show that the 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to suffi ciently extend beyond his potential customers , either as 
a private contractor or as part of his busin ess, to impact the tax field or U.S. economy more broadly at 
a level commensurate with national importance . 
Furthennore , the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake 
offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation or has significant potential to employ U.S. 
workers . He did not, for instance , show any credible business revenue projections to substantiate that 
his company 's future business activity stands to provide substantial economic benefits to specific 
regions or the United States as contemplated by Dhanasar,ld . at 890.4 In addition, although he claimed 
that his business would initially require two more jobs and then would require eight to ten more jobs in 
three to four years, the Petitioner has not offered evidence , for instance , that the unidentified area where 
his company would operate is economically depressed, that he would utilize a significant population 
of workers in that area , or that his endeavor would offer the region or its population a substantial 
economic benefit through employment levels or business activity. Nor has the Petitioner established 
that any increases in employment or investment attributable to his company's operations stand to 
4 The Petitioner 's stat ement does not identify where his business would be located. 
5 
substantially affect economic activity or tax revenue in a state, region , or nationally. Accordingly, the 
Petitioner ' s proposed work does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of his proposed 
endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhana sar precedent decision , the Petitioner has not 
demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Further analysis of his eligibility under the second 
and third prongs outlined inDhanasar, therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose. 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not metthe requisite first prong of theDhanasar analytical frameworl<:, we conclude 
that he has not demonstrated that he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a 
matter of discretion. The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons , with each considered 
as an independent and alternate basis for the decision. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
6