Why do remote US companies require working in the US? The Next CEO of Stack Overflowremote developer pay - carreers 2.0Working for two companies at the same timeHow to handle discussing working remote and the impending possibility of leaving for a new job?remote work - on which national laws the working contract will be based?Manager claims working remote is hindering my performanceBest way to convince boss remote working is the way to go?Childcare and remote workingHow should this type of remote work environment be handled?Can I get a job at remote job in phone service company with low english skill?Advocating for a freer “Remote Work” policy in the office

0 rank tensor vs 1D vector

Is a distribution that is normal, but highly skewed considered Gaussian?

Why did CATV standarize in 75 ohms and everyone else in 50?

Is it my responsibility to learn a new technology in my own time my employer wants to implement?

Why does standard notation not preserve intervals (visually)

Find non-case sensitive string in a mixed list of elements?

I believe this to be a fraud - hired, then asked to cash check and send cash as Bitcoin

What does "Its cash flow is deeply negative" mean?

INSERT to a table from a database to other (same SQL Server) using Dynamic SQL

Should I tutor a student who I know has cheated on their homework?

Is it ever safe to open a suspicious HTML file (e.g. email attachment)?

How to edit “Name” property in GCI output?

Why don't programming languages automatically manage the synchronous/asynchronous problem?

Chain wire methods together in Lightning Web Components

Can MTA send mail via a relay without being told so?

A Man With a Stainless Steel Endoskeleton (like The Terminator) Fighting Cloaked Aliens Only He Can See

What did we know about the Kessel run before the prequels?

Which one is the true statement?

Easy to read palindrome checker

Writing differences on a blackboard

Calculator final project in Python

How to invert MapIndexed on a ragged structure? How to construct a tree from rules?

Why do remote US companies require working in the US?

Example of a Mathematician/Physicist whose Other Publications during their PhD eclipsed their PhD Thesis



Why do remote US companies require working in the US?



The Next CEO of Stack Overflowremote developer pay - carreers 2.0Working for two companies at the same timeHow to handle discussing working remote and the impending possibility of leaving for a new job?remote work - on which national laws the working contract will be based?Manager claims working remote is hindering my performanceBest way to convince boss remote working is the way to go?Childcare and remote workingHow should this type of remote work environment be handled?Can I get a job at remote job in phone service company with low english skill?Advocating for a freer “Remote Work” policy in the office










70















Many of the high-tech opportunities for remote work require that you are working in the US. Why?



I am a US citizen, and I lived in the US until I graduated university. I am now living abroad. I have impeccable english, fully understand US culture, and I am willing to work american hours. I obviously would be responsible for managing my tax burden with my home country, and if travel to the US were required periodically, I would need to work it out.



Why should I be automatically disqualified for not residing in the US, if the entire company is composed of remote workers?










share|improve this question









New contributor




Shifra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • As a side note, is there an outsourcing firm you could team up with, so that instead of hiring you directly, the US company you want to work for could pay the firm an hourly rate? This might make the legalities simpler, at least from the US company's perspective.

    – Kyralessa
    2 days ago






  • 18





    "I obviously would be responsible for managing my tax burden with my home company," Definitely not universal that you can just do this. "if travel to the US was required periodically, I would need to work it out." Maybe they don't want to deal with flying you around?

    – Azor Ahai
    2 days ago











  • You're most likely not on the level where companies would want to bother employing a foreign candidate. Get more experience and try again later.

    – JonathanReez
    2 days ago






  • 4





    I'm surprised no one mentioned the difficulty with coordinating across time zones. A 5-hour span is a lot easier to coordinate across than a 10 hour span.

    – jpmc26
    yesterday






  • 2





    Presumably you specifically mean US companies? Can you clarify? Not all companies are in the US

    – Lightness Races in Orbit
    yesterday















70















Many of the high-tech opportunities for remote work require that you are working in the US. Why?



I am a US citizen, and I lived in the US until I graduated university. I am now living abroad. I have impeccable english, fully understand US culture, and I am willing to work american hours. I obviously would be responsible for managing my tax burden with my home country, and if travel to the US were required periodically, I would need to work it out.



Why should I be automatically disqualified for not residing in the US, if the entire company is composed of remote workers?










share|improve this question









New contributor




Shifra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • As a side note, is there an outsourcing firm you could team up with, so that instead of hiring you directly, the US company you want to work for could pay the firm an hourly rate? This might make the legalities simpler, at least from the US company's perspective.

    – Kyralessa
    2 days ago






  • 18





    "I obviously would be responsible for managing my tax burden with my home company," Definitely not universal that you can just do this. "if travel to the US was required periodically, I would need to work it out." Maybe they don't want to deal with flying you around?

    – Azor Ahai
    2 days ago











  • You're most likely not on the level where companies would want to bother employing a foreign candidate. Get more experience and try again later.

    – JonathanReez
    2 days ago






  • 4





    I'm surprised no one mentioned the difficulty with coordinating across time zones. A 5-hour span is a lot easier to coordinate across than a 10 hour span.

    – jpmc26
    yesterday






  • 2





    Presumably you specifically mean US companies? Can you clarify? Not all companies are in the US

    – Lightness Races in Orbit
    yesterday













70












70








70


5






Many of the high-tech opportunities for remote work require that you are working in the US. Why?



I am a US citizen, and I lived in the US until I graduated university. I am now living abroad. I have impeccable english, fully understand US culture, and I am willing to work american hours. I obviously would be responsible for managing my tax burden with my home country, and if travel to the US were required periodically, I would need to work it out.



Why should I be automatically disqualified for not residing in the US, if the entire company is composed of remote workers?










share|improve this question









New contributor




Shifra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












Many of the high-tech opportunities for remote work require that you are working in the US. Why?



I am a US citizen, and I lived in the US until I graduated university. I am now living abroad. I have impeccable english, fully understand US culture, and I am willing to work american hours. I obviously would be responsible for managing my tax burden with my home country, and if travel to the US were required periodically, I would need to work it out.



Why should I be automatically disqualified for not residing in the US, if the entire company is composed of remote workers?







telecommute remotework






share|improve this question









New contributor




Shifra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




Shifra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 10 hours ago







Shifra













New contributor




Shifra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 2 days ago









ShifraShifra

457124




457124




New contributor




Shifra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Shifra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Shifra is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • As a side note, is there an outsourcing firm you could team up with, so that instead of hiring you directly, the US company you want to work for could pay the firm an hourly rate? This might make the legalities simpler, at least from the US company's perspective.

    – Kyralessa
    2 days ago






  • 18





    "I obviously would be responsible for managing my tax burden with my home company," Definitely not universal that you can just do this. "if travel to the US was required periodically, I would need to work it out." Maybe they don't want to deal with flying you around?

    – Azor Ahai
    2 days ago











  • You're most likely not on the level where companies would want to bother employing a foreign candidate. Get more experience and try again later.

    – JonathanReez
    2 days ago






  • 4





    I'm surprised no one mentioned the difficulty with coordinating across time zones. A 5-hour span is a lot easier to coordinate across than a 10 hour span.

    – jpmc26
    yesterday






  • 2





    Presumably you specifically mean US companies? Can you clarify? Not all companies are in the US

    – Lightness Races in Orbit
    yesterday

















  • As a side note, is there an outsourcing firm you could team up with, so that instead of hiring you directly, the US company you want to work for could pay the firm an hourly rate? This might make the legalities simpler, at least from the US company's perspective.

    – Kyralessa
    2 days ago






  • 18





    "I obviously would be responsible for managing my tax burden with my home company," Definitely not universal that you can just do this. "if travel to the US was required periodically, I would need to work it out." Maybe they don't want to deal with flying you around?

    – Azor Ahai
    2 days ago











  • You're most likely not on the level where companies would want to bother employing a foreign candidate. Get more experience and try again later.

    – JonathanReez
    2 days ago






  • 4





    I'm surprised no one mentioned the difficulty with coordinating across time zones. A 5-hour span is a lot easier to coordinate across than a 10 hour span.

    – jpmc26
    yesterday






  • 2





    Presumably you specifically mean US companies? Can you clarify? Not all companies are in the US

    – Lightness Races in Orbit
    yesterday
















As a side note, is there an outsourcing firm you could team up with, so that instead of hiring you directly, the US company you want to work for could pay the firm an hourly rate? This might make the legalities simpler, at least from the US company's perspective.

– Kyralessa
2 days ago





As a side note, is there an outsourcing firm you could team up with, so that instead of hiring you directly, the US company you want to work for could pay the firm an hourly rate? This might make the legalities simpler, at least from the US company's perspective.

– Kyralessa
2 days ago




18




18





"I obviously would be responsible for managing my tax burden with my home company," Definitely not universal that you can just do this. "if travel to the US was required periodically, I would need to work it out." Maybe they don't want to deal with flying you around?

– Azor Ahai
2 days ago





"I obviously would be responsible for managing my tax burden with my home company," Definitely not universal that you can just do this. "if travel to the US was required periodically, I would need to work it out." Maybe they don't want to deal with flying you around?

– Azor Ahai
2 days ago













You're most likely not on the level where companies would want to bother employing a foreign candidate. Get more experience and try again later.

– JonathanReez
2 days ago





You're most likely not on the level where companies would want to bother employing a foreign candidate. Get more experience and try again later.

– JonathanReez
2 days ago




4




4





I'm surprised no one mentioned the difficulty with coordinating across time zones. A 5-hour span is a lot easier to coordinate across than a 10 hour span.

– jpmc26
yesterday





I'm surprised no one mentioned the difficulty with coordinating across time zones. A 5-hour span is a lot easier to coordinate across than a 10 hour span.

– jpmc26
yesterday




2




2





Presumably you specifically mean US companies? Can you clarify? Not all companies are in the US

– Lightness Races in Orbit
yesterday





Presumably you specifically mean US companies? Can you clarify? Not all companies are in the US

– Lightness Races in Orbit
yesterday










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















185















Why do remote companies require working in the US?




Those companies are likely based in the US and don't want to deal with the legal and tax complexities of having employees who live in multiple countries. It is complicated enough for some companies to deal with employees from various states within the US. Also having employees from around the world will further complicate legalities to the point that many companies would rather not deal with it.






share|improve this answer


















  • 68





    100% the correct answer. As someone who helped start up and run a US-based consulting operation that had a single foreign employee, I can absolutely say that it gets undesirably complicated very quickly. In most types of jobs, there are easily enough candidates in the US to fill any position, there's simply no need to introduce the complexity. Further, US-based employers who wish to take advantage of specific overseas employment pools will usually do so through an outsourcing vendor, not as direct employees, to make the relationship simpler.

    – dwizum
    2 days ago







  • 25





    Part of the difficulty is that employment and tax law in many jurisdictions involves employer obligations that cannot be waived or transferred to the employee, even with the employee's enthusiastic consent.

    – Patricia Shanahan
    2 days ago






  • 10





    @Shifra See, for example, Persons Employed by a Foreign Employer - FUTA. Although that is a US tax, other countries can and do have similar rules.

    – Patricia Shanahan
    2 days ago







  • 31





    It is not just taxes, but the whole of labor law. The employer would need to know things like the minimum annual vacation and holidays in each country.

    – Patricia Shanahan
    2 days ago






  • 8





    ...and now the employer who just wanted to simply hire someone has to deal with a (single!) employee they need to treat as a vendor, not an employee. That just substitutes one type of complexity for another. Who manages the interaction with that person - HR or vendor management? How do you pay them? Your payroll GL account is managed by your payroll staff, not your AP staff... etc. This would make sense if you wanted a large portion of your staff managed by an outsourcing firm, but for a company looking for a typical domestic workforce, it doesn't really make sense for a single person.

    – dwizum
    2 days ago


















82














There are many potential reasons for a company to discriminate based upon your country.



Tax Reasons



Taxes can get very complex, very quickly. Even if your country allows you to take on all of the tax responsibilities, which is relatively uncommon, the company will have to spend money even getting an expert on your country's laws to confirm this. Otherwise, the company will have to comply with tax laws of the US, the state the company is in, and your country. In some cases, it might even cost the company more money to comply with the tax laws of your parent country than your salary. It is not even that uncommon for smaller US companies hiring remote workers that must be based out of only one state, because it is costly to even comply with multiple US state tax and benefit rules.



This also raises issues with tax incentives that might be offered by the either the US federal or state governments. Some locations might provide tax breaks for employing local citizens.



Labor Laws



Labor laws vary even between different states, and vary drastically between different countries. There is a lot of cost involved with even identifying all of company's responsibilities to you—let alone complying with all of the applicable labor laws. How many days off a year do I have to give you? If you have a child, do I lose you as an employee for 6 months, but still have to pay you? What am I allowed to do with your employee data, and how am I required to store it?



Technology & Export Laws



There are laws that restrict the flow of technology from the US. Take for example, encryption export laws—although these have been greatly relaxed in recent years, there are still restrictions on what encryption algorithms are allowed to be used in products sold to a non-US country. This also leaves the potential for gray areas—it can be difficult to determine the legality of having someone who lives in country A working on technology X. In some cases, this could either be very expensive to figure out & keep track of, or the law might be ambiguous enough that it is easier to simply not have to worry about this becoming an issue at all.



Intellectual Property Concerns



Countries tend to have different laws dealing with IP, and some countries are known to ignore IP claims of other countries if doing so has the potential to benefit them (as an example, look at claims of IP theft in China for the last few years). It is potentially easier to protect your company's IP if both you and your employees are following the same rules. Also, if an employee steals a company's IP in the US, there is a clear path for the company to take legal action against that employee.



Marketing



Due to how many jobs have left the US to go overseas, it can be useful for marketing if companies are able to say that their products are fully made in the US, or that they only employ US citizens.



Government Contracts



Within the US, there are multiple levels of government, all of which have their own rules on who they allow to bid on and win contracts for government work. Government work is usually one of the most stable, and sometimes the most lucrative, sources of revenue for a lot of these companies. For example, if your US company has foreign-based employees, and is fulfilling a contract for the US Department of Defense, your US-based employees might not even be able to talk to non-US-based employees without extensively documenting every time they have a conversation. There might also be state or lower governments who require or give preference to companies who are employing people who work in their districts (in an attempt to keep taxes and jobs as local as possible).



Security



Companies will generally want to vet that you are who you say you are, that you are not a criminal, and that you do not partake in illicit drugs. They will usually already have a partnership or contract with a company who can perform background checks on you. In the US, it is not uncommon for even retail style jobs to require you to undergo a background check and drug screening. If you are not US-based, the company might not be able to get a reliable, accurate background check done, or might not want to spend the time and money it will cost to find a company in your location to complete it.



This also concerns cyber security. Depending upon the security controls for a given company, they might not feel comfortable allowing VPN access to their internal network from a foreign country, or they might not want to face increased risk of the data you might have stored becoming compromised.



Conclusion



The US is a large country, and has a lot of highly skilled individuals. There are not too many remote jobs where it would not be possible to find a US worker who is able to complete that work. Given that it almost always possible to find a US-based worker to fulfill a role, and all of the potential pitfalls listed above when hiring a foreign worker, it makes sense that non-international US-based companies would primarily hire US-based workers.






share|improve this answer










New contributor




CobyCode is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.















  • 1





    +1 Only for the effort of thinking in so many reasons, well done!

    – Chococroc
    yesterday







  • 3





    Could be a social aspect too. As in, "let's support homegrown talent first and foremost" (more fundamentally than the ensuing marketing benefits)

    – Lightness Races in Orbit
    yesterday







  • 2





    Healthcare. Most countries don't charge citizens for their healthcare, they have some way of recovering it from the employers. That would get weird.

    – Harper
    yesterday






  • 1





    @Harper: "They have some way of recovering it from employers" falls under "Tax".

    – Ben Voigt
    22 hours ago











  • + for export laws

    – A.K.
    31 mins ago


















9














As a permanent employee, your employer will have tax and social security costs related to you, which would be complicated by your being in a different country.



Your employer would not necessarily know what these implications are, and there is no incentive for them to find out; they can generally get an equivalently qualified employee in the USA. The easy solution for them is to just recruit within the US, and preferably within the state where they are based.






share|improve this answer























  • The right way to handle these relationships is to have the foreign employee set up a self-employed legal business entity. Then there's absolutely no complications, you just pay a foreign business for their services.

    – JonathanReez
    2 days ago






  • 2





    @JonathanReez but at that point, do you "employ the non-US citizen", or do you just do business with an overseas company?

    – Patrice
    2 days ago







  • 5





    @JonathanReez Except that then you have to figure out the legal framework under which you'll deal with this foreign entity. And deal with the risk that comes with the difficulty of taking legal action in a foreign country. And the risk that the tax authorities will say, "So, er, that person who works for a single-employee corporation, and who spends 100% of their time working for you, under your day-to-day direction and management? That's a sham and we consider them to be your empoyee."

    – David Richerby
    2 days ago






  • 3





    @JonathanReez My point is that the legal agreements you need with an incorporated contractor are different to the ones you need with an employee. So you need (expensive) lawyer time to draw up those agreements. If the *cough* employee breaches those agreements, suing them in a foreign country is difficult and expensive. And classing somebody who is functionally an employee (works 100% for you and is under your day-to-day management) as an external contractor is a form of tax evasion that tax authorities are well aware of and often pursue.

    – David Richerby
    2 days ago






  • 2





    So setting up this arrangement as hiring an incorporated contractor might be the "best" way of employing somebody in a foreign country, but it's still a lot more hassle than hiring somebody domestically.

    – David Richerby
    2 days ago











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "423"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: false,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);






Shifra is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f132796%2fwhy-do-remote-us-companies-require-working-in-the-us%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown




















StackExchange.ready(function ()
$("#show-editor-button input, #show-editor-button button").click(function ()
var showEditor = function()
$("#show-editor-button").hide();
$("#post-form").removeClass("dno");
StackExchange.editor.finallyInit();
;

var useFancy = $(this).data('confirm-use-fancy');
if(useFancy == 'True')
var popupTitle = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-title');
var popupBody = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-body');
var popupAccept = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-accept-button');

$(this).loadPopup(
url: '/post/self-answer-popup',
loaded: function(popup)
var pTitle = $(popup).find('h2');
var pBody = $(popup).find('.popup-body');
var pSubmit = $(popup).find('.popup-submit');

pTitle.text(popupTitle);
pBody.html(popupBody);
pSubmit.val(popupAccept).click(showEditor);

)
else
var confirmText = $(this).data('confirm-text');
if (confirmText ? confirm(confirmText) : true)
showEditor();


);
);






3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes








3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









185















Why do remote companies require working in the US?




Those companies are likely based in the US and don't want to deal with the legal and tax complexities of having employees who live in multiple countries. It is complicated enough for some companies to deal with employees from various states within the US. Also having employees from around the world will further complicate legalities to the point that many companies would rather not deal with it.






share|improve this answer


















  • 68





    100% the correct answer. As someone who helped start up and run a US-based consulting operation that had a single foreign employee, I can absolutely say that it gets undesirably complicated very quickly. In most types of jobs, there are easily enough candidates in the US to fill any position, there's simply no need to introduce the complexity. Further, US-based employers who wish to take advantage of specific overseas employment pools will usually do so through an outsourcing vendor, not as direct employees, to make the relationship simpler.

    – dwizum
    2 days ago







  • 25





    Part of the difficulty is that employment and tax law in many jurisdictions involves employer obligations that cannot be waived or transferred to the employee, even with the employee's enthusiastic consent.

    – Patricia Shanahan
    2 days ago






  • 10





    @Shifra See, for example, Persons Employed by a Foreign Employer - FUTA. Although that is a US tax, other countries can and do have similar rules.

    – Patricia Shanahan
    2 days ago







  • 31





    It is not just taxes, but the whole of labor law. The employer would need to know things like the minimum annual vacation and holidays in each country.

    – Patricia Shanahan
    2 days ago






  • 8





    ...and now the employer who just wanted to simply hire someone has to deal with a (single!) employee they need to treat as a vendor, not an employee. That just substitutes one type of complexity for another. Who manages the interaction with that person - HR or vendor management? How do you pay them? Your payroll GL account is managed by your payroll staff, not your AP staff... etc. This would make sense if you wanted a large portion of your staff managed by an outsourcing firm, but for a company looking for a typical domestic workforce, it doesn't really make sense for a single person.

    – dwizum
    2 days ago















185















Why do remote companies require working in the US?




Those companies are likely based in the US and don't want to deal with the legal and tax complexities of having employees who live in multiple countries. It is complicated enough for some companies to deal with employees from various states within the US. Also having employees from around the world will further complicate legalities to the point that many companies would rather not deal with it.






share|improve this answer


















  • 68





    100% the correct answer. As someone who helped start up and run a US-based consulting operation that had a single foreign employee, I can absolutely say that it gets undesirably complicated very quickly. In most types of jobs, there are easily enough candidates in the US to fill any position, there's simply no need to introduce the complexity. Further, US-based employers who wish to take advantage of specific overseas employment pools will usually do so through an outsourcing vendor, not as direct employees, to make the relationship simpler.

    – dwizum
    2 days ago







  • 25





    Part of the difficulty is that employment and tax law in many jurisdictions involves employer obligations that cannot be waived or transferred to the employee, even with the employee's enthusiastic consent.

    – Patricia Shanahan
    2 days ago






  • 10





    @Shifra See, for example, Persons Employed by a Foreign Employer - FUTA. Although that is a US tax, other countries can and do have similar rules.

    – Patricia Shanahan
    2 days ago







  • 31





    It is not just taxes, but the whole of labor law. The employer would need to know things like the minimum annual vacation and holidays in each country.

    – Patricia Shanahan
    2 days ago






  • 8





    ...and now the employer who just wanted to simply hire someone has to deal with a (single!) employee they need to treat as a vendor, not an employee. That just substitutes one type of complexity for another. Who manages the interaction with that person - HR or vendor management? How do you pay them? Your payroll GL account is managed by your payroll staff, not your AP staff... etc. This would make sense if you wanted a large portion of your staff managed by an outsourcing firm, but for a company looking for a typical domestic workforce, it doesn't really make sense for a single person.

    – dwizum
    2 days ago













185












185








185








Why do remote companies require working in the US?




Those companies are likely based in the US and don't want to deal with the legal and tax complexities of having employees who live in multiple countries. It is complicated enough for some companies to deal with employees from various states within the US. Also having employees from around the world will further complicate legalities to the point that many companies would rather not deal with it.






share|improve this answer














Why do remote companies require working in the US?




Those companies are likely based in the US and don't want to deal with the legal and tax complexities of having employees who live in multiple countries. It is complicated enough for some companies to deal with employees from various states within the US. Also having employees from around the world will further complicate legalities to the point that many companies would rather not deal with it.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 2 days ago









sf02sf02

10.5k71941




10.5k71941







  • 68





    100% the correct answer. As someone who helped start up and run a US-based consulting operation that had a single foreign employee, I can absolutely say that it gets undesirably complicated very quickly. In most types of jobs, there are easily enough candidates in the US to fill any position, there's simply no need to introduce the complexity. Further, US-based employers who wish to take advantage of specific overseas employment pools will usually do so through an outsourcing vendor, not as direct employees, to make the relationship simpler.

    – dwizum
    2 days ago







  • 25





    Part of the difficulty is that employment and tax law in many jurisdictions involves employer obligations that cannot be waived or transferred to the employee, even with the employee's enthusiastic consent.

    – Patricia Shanahan
    2 days ago






  • 10





    @Shifra See, for example, Persons Employed by a Foreign Employer - FUTA. Although that is a US tax, other countries can and do have similar rules.

    – Patricia Shanahan
    2 days ago







  • 31





    It is not just taxes, but the whole of labor law. The employer would need to know things like the minimum annual vacation and holidays in each country.

    – Patricia Shanahan
    2 days ago






  • 8





    ...and now the employer who just wanted to simply hire someone has to deal with a (single!) employee they need to treat as a vendor, not an employee. That just substitutes one type of complexity for another. Who manages the interaction with that person - HR or vendor management? How do you pay them? Your payroll GL account is managed by your payroll staff, not your AP staff... etc. This would make sense if you wanted a large portion of your staff managed by an outsourcing firm, but for a company looking for a typical domestic workforce, it doesn't really make sense for a single person.

    – dwizum
    2 days ago












  • 68





    100% the correct answer. As someone who helped start up and run a US-based consulting operation that had a single foreign employee, I can absolutely say that it gets undesirably complicated very quickly. In most types of jobs, there are easily enough candidates in the US to fill any position, there's simply no need to introduce the complexity. Further, US-based employers who wish to take advantage of specific overseas employment pools will usually do so through an outsourcing vendor, not as direct employees, to make the relationship simpler.

    – dwizum
    2 days ago







  • 25





    Part of the difficulty is that employment and tax law in many jurisdictions involves employer obligations that cannot be waived or transferred to the employee, even with the employee's enthusiastic consent.

    – Patricia Shanahan
    2 days ago






  • 10





    @Shifra See, for example, Persons Employed by a Foreign Employer - FUTA. Although that is a US tax, other countries can and do have similar rules.

    – Patricia Shanahan
    2 days ago







  • 31





    It is not just taxes, but the whole of labor law. The employer would need to know things like the minimum annual vacation and holidays in each country.

    – Patricia Shanahan
    2 days ago






  • 8





    ...and now the employer who just wanted to simply hire someone has to deal with a (single!) employee they need to treat as a vendor, not an employee. That just substitutes one type of complexity for another. Who manages the interaction with that person - HR or vendor management? How do you pay them? Your payroll GL account is managed by your payroll staff, not your AP staff... etc. This would make sense if you wanted a large portion of your staff managed by an outsourcing firm, but for a company looking for a typical domestic workforce, it doesn't really make sense for a single person.

    – dwizum
    2 days ago







68




68





100% the correct answer. As someone who helped start up and run a US-based consulting operation that had a single foreign employee, I can absolutely say that it gets undesirably complicated very quickly. In most types of jobs, there are easily enough candidates in the US to fill any position, there's simply no need to introduce the complexity. Further, US-based employers who wish to take advantage of specific overseas employment pools will usually do so through an outsourcing vendor, not as direct employees, to make the relationship simpler.

– dwizum
2 days ago






100% the correct answer. As someone who helped start up and run a US-based consulting operation that had a single foreign employee, I can absolutely say that it gets undesirably complicated very quickly. In most types of jobs, there are easily enough candidates in the US to fill any position, there's simply no need to introduce the complexity. Further, US-based employers who wish to take advantage of specific overseas employment pools will usually do so through an outsourcing vendor, not as direct employees, to make the relationship simpler.

– dwizum
2 days ago





25




25





Part of the difficulty is that employment and tax law in many jurisdictions involves employer obligations that cannot be waived or transferred to the employee, even with the employee's enthusiastic consent.

– Patricia Shanahan
2 days ago





Part of the difficulty is that employment and tax law in many jurisdictions involves employer obligations that cannot be waived or transferred to the employee, even with the employee's enthusiastic consent.

– Patricia Shanahan
2 days ago




10




10





@Shifra See, for example, Persons Employed by a Foreign Employer - FUTA. Although that is a US tax, other countries can and do have similar rules.

– Patricia Shanahan
2 days ago






@Shifra See, for example, Persons Employed by a Foreign Employer - FUTA. Although that is a US tax, other countries can and do have similar rules.

– Patricia Shanahan
2 days ago





31




31





It is not just taxes, but the whole of labor law. The employer would need to know things like the minimum annual vacation and holidays in each country.

– Patricia Shanahan
2 days ago





It is not just taxes, but the whole of labor law. The employer would need to know things like the minimum annual vacation and holidays in each country.

– Patricia Shanahan
2 days ago




8




8





...and now the employer who just wanted to simply hire someone has to deal with a (single!) employee they need to treat as a vendor, not an employee. That just substitutes one type of complexity for another. Who manages the interaction with that person - HR or vendor management? How do you pay them? Your payroll GL account is managed by your payroll staff, not your AP staff... etc. This would make sense if you wanted a large portion of your staff managed by an outsourcing firm, but for a company looking for a typical domestic workforce, it doesn't really make sense for a single person.

– dwizum
2 days ago





...and now the employer who just wanted to simply hire someone has to deal with a (single!) employee they need to treat as a vendor, not an employee. That just substitutes one type of complexity for another. Who manages the interaction with that person - HR or vendor management? How do you pay them? Your payroll GL account is managed by your payroll staff, not your AP staff... etc. This would make sense if you wanted a large portion of your staff managed by an outsourcing firm, but for a company looking for a typical domestic workforce, it doesn't really make sense for a single person.

– dwizum
2 days ago













82














There are many potential reasons for a company to discriminate based upon your country.



Tax Reasons



Taxes can get very complex, very quickly. Even if your country allows you to take on all of the tax responsibilities, which is relatively uncommon, the company will have to spend money even getting an expert on your country's laws to confirm this. Otherwise, the company will have to comply with tax laws of the US, the state the company is in, and your country. In some cases, it might even cost the company more money to comply with the tax laws of your parent country than your salary. It is not even that uncommon for smaller US companies hiring remote workers that must be based out of only one state, because it is costly to even comply with multiple US state tax and benefit rules.



This also raises issues with tax incentives that might be offered by the either the US federal or state governments. Some locations might provide tax breaks for employing local citizens.



Labor Laws



Labor laws vary even between different states, and vary drastically between different countries. There is a lot of cost involved with even identifying all of company's responsibilities to you—let alone complying with all of the applicable labor laws. How many days off a year do I have to give you? If you have a child, do I lose you as an employee for 6 months, but still have to pay you? What am I allowed to do with your employee data, and how am I required to store it?



Technology & Export Laws



There are laws that restrict the flow of technology from the US. Take for example, encryption export laws—although these have been greatly relaxed in recent years, there are still restrictions on what encryption algorithms are allowed to be used in products sold to a non-US country. This also leaves the potential for gray areas—it can be difficult to determine the legality of having someone who lives in country A working on technology X. In some cases, this could either be very expensive to figure out & keep track of, or the law might be ambiguous enough that it is easier to simply not have to worry about this becoming an issue at all.



Intellectual Property Concerns



Countries tend to have different laws dealing with IP, and some countries are known to ignore IP claims of other countries if doing so has the potential to benefit them (as an example, look at claims of IP theft in China for the last few years). It is potentially easier to protect your company's IP if both you and your employees are following the same rules. Also, if an employee steals a company's IP in the US, there is a clear path for the company to take legal action against that employee.



Marketing



Due to how many jobs have left the US to go overseas, it can be useful for marketing if companies are able to say that their products are fully made in the US, or that they only employ US citizens.



Government Contracts



Within the US, there are multiple levels of government, all of which have their own rules on who they allow to bid on and win contracts for government work. Government work is usually one of the most stable, and sometimes the most lucrative, sources of revenue for a lot of these companies. For example, if your US company has foreign-based employees, and is fulfilling a contract for the US Department of Defense, your US-based employees might not even be able to talk to non-US-based employees without extensively documenting every time they have a conversation. There might also be state or lower governments who require or give preference to companies who are employing people who work in their districts (in an attempt to keep taxes and jobs as local as possible).



Security



Companies will generally want to vet that you are who you say you are, that you are not a criminal, and that you do not partake in illicit drugs. They will usually already have a partnership or contract with a company who can perform background checks on you. In the US, it is not uncommon for even retail style jobs to require you to undergo a background check and drug screening. If you are not US-based, the company might not be able to get a reliable, accurate background check done, or might not want to spend the time and money it will cost to find a company in your location to complete it.



This also concerns cyber security. Depending upon the security controls for a given company, they might not feel comfortable allowing VPN access to their internal network from a foreign country, or they might not want to face increased risk of the data you might have stored becoming compromised.



Conclusion



The US is a large country, and has a lot of highly skilled individuals. There are not too many remote jobs where it would not be possible to find a US worker who is able to complete that work. Given that it almost always possible to find a US-based worker to fulfill a role, and all of the potential pitfalls listed above when hiring a foreign worker, it makes sense that non-international US-based companies would primarily hire US-based workers.






share|improve this answer










New contributor




CobyCode is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.















  • 1





    +1 Only for the effort of thinking in so many reasons, well done!

    – Chococroc
    yesterday







  • 3





    Could be a social aspect too. As in, "let's support homegrown talent first and foremost" (more fundamentally than the ensuing marketing benefits)

    – Lightness Races in Orbit
    yesterday







  • 2





    Healthcare. Most countries don't charge citizens for their healthcare, they have some way of recovering it from the employers. That would get weird.

    – Harper
    yesterday






  • 1





    @Harper: "They have some way of recovering it from employers" falls under "Tax".

    – Ben Voigt
    22 hours ago











  • + for export laws

    – A.K.
    31 mins ago















82














There are many potential reasons for a company to discriminate based upon your country.



Tax Reasons



Taxes can get very complex, very quickly. Even if your country allows you to take on all of the tax responsibilities, which is relatively uncommon, the company will have to spend money even getting an expert on your country's laws to confirm this. Otherwise, the company will have to comply with tax laws of the US, the state the company is in, and your country. In some cases, it might even cost the company more money to comply with the tax laws of your parent country than your salary. It is not even that uncommon for smaller US companies hiring remote workers that must be based out of only one state, because it is costly to even comply with multiple US state tax and benefit rules.



This also raises issues with tax incentives that might be offered by the either the US federal or state governments. Some locations might provide tax breaks for employing local citizens.



Labor Laws



Labor laws vary even between different states, and vary drastically between different countries. There is a lot of cost involved with even identifying all of company's responsibilities to you—let alone complying with all of the applicable labor laws. How many days off a year do I have to give you? If you have a child, do I lose you as an employee for 6 months, but still have to pay you? What am I allowed to do with your employee data, and how am I required to store it?



Technology & Export Laws



There are laws that restrict the flow of technology from the US. Take for example, encryption export laws—although these have been greatly relaxed in recent years, there are still restrictions on what encryption algorithms are allowed to be used in products sold to a non-US country. This also leaves the potential for gray areas—it can be difficult to determine the legality of having someone who lives in country A working on technology X. In some cases, this could either be very expensive to figure out & keep track of, or the law might be ambiguous enough that it is easier to simply not have to worry about this becoming an issue at all.



Intellectual Property Concerns



Countries tend to have different laws dealing with IP, and some countries are known to ignore IP claims of other countries if doing so has the potential to benefit them (as an example, look at claims of IP theft in China for the last few years). It is potentially easier to protect your company's IP if both you and your employees are following the same rules. Also, if an employee steals a company's IP in the US, there is a clear path for the company to take legal action against that employee.



Marketing



Due to how many jobs have left the US to go overseas, it can be useful for marketing if companies are able to say that their products are fully made in the US, or that they only employ US citizens.



Government Contracts



Within the US, there are multiple levels of government, all of which have their own rules on who they allow to bid on and win contracts for government work. Government work is usually one of the most stable, and sometimes the most lucrative, sources of revenue for a lot of these companies. For example, if your US company has foreign-based employees, and is fulfilling a contract for the US Department of Defense, your US-based employees might not even be able to talk to non-US-based employees without extensively documenting every time they have a conversation. There might also be state or lower governments who require or give preference to companies who are employing people who work in their districts (in an attempt to keep taxes and jobs as local as possible).



Security



Companies will generally want to vet that you are who you say you are, that you are not a criminal, and that you do not partake in illicit drugs. They will usually already have a partnership or contract with a company who can perform background checks on you. In the US, it is not uncommon for even retail style jobs to require you to undergo a background check and drug screening. If you are not US-based, the company might not be able to get a reliable, accurate background check done, or might not want to spend the time and money it will cost to find a company in your location to complete it.



This also concerns cyber security. Depending upon the security controls for a given company, they might not feel comfortable allowing VPN access to their internal network from a foreign country, or they might not want to face increased risk of the data you might have stored becoming compromised.



Conclusion



The US is a large country, and has a lot of highly skilled individuals. There are not too many remote jobs where it would not be possible to find a US worker who is able to complete that work. Given that it almost always possible to find a US-based worker to fulfill a role, and all of the potential pitfalls listed above when hiring a foreign worker, it makes sense that non-international US-based companies would primarily hire US-based workers.






share|improve this answer










New contributor




CobyCode is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.















  • 1





    +1 Only for the effort of thinking in so many reasons, well done!

    – Chococroc
    yesterday







  • 3





    Could be a social aspect too. As in, "let's support homegrown talent first and foremost" (more fundamentally than the ensuing marketing benefits)

    – Lightness Races in Orbit
    yesterday







  • 2





    Healthcare. Most countries don't charge citizens for their healthcare, they have some way of recovering it from the employers. That would get weird.

    – Harper
    yesterday






  • 1





    @Harper: "They have some way of recovering it from employers" falls under "Tax".

    – Ben Voigt
    22 hours ago











  • + for export laws

    – A.K.
    31 mins ago













82












82








82







There are many potential reasons for a company to discriminate based upon your country.



Tax Reasons



Taxes can get very complex, very quickly. Even if your country allows you to take on all of the tax responsibilities, which is relatively uncommon, the company will have to spend money even getting an expert on your country's laws to confirm this. Otherwise, the company will have to comply with tax laws of the US, the state the company is in, and your country. In some cases, it might even cost the company more money to comply with the tax laws of your parent country than your salary. It is not even that uncommon for smaller US companies hiring remote workers that must be based out of only one state, because it is costly to even comply with multiple US state tax and benefit rules.



This also raises issues with tax incentives that might be offered by the either the US federal or state governments. Some locations might provide tax breaks for employing local citizens.



Labor Laws



Labor laws vary even between different states, and vary drastically between different countries. There is a lot of cost involved with even identifying all of company's responsibilities to you—let alone complying with all of the applicable labor laws. How many days off a year do I have to give you? If you have a child, do I lose you as an employee for 6 months, but still have to pay you? What am I allowed to do with your employee data, and how am I required to store it?



Technology & Export Laws



There are laws that restrict the flow of technology from the US. Take for example, encryption export laws—although these have been greatly relaxed in recent years, there are still restrictions on what encryption algorithms are allowed to be used in products sold to a non-US country. This also leaves the potential for gray areas—it can be difficult to determine the legality of having someone who lives in country A working on technology X. In some cases, this could either be very expensive to figure out & keep track of, or the law might be ambiguous enough that it is easier to simply not have to worry about this becoming an issue at all.



Intellectual Property Concerns



Countries tend to have different laws dealing with IP, and some countries are known to ignore IP claims of other countries if doing so has the potential to benefit them (as an example, look at claims of IP theft in China for the last few years). It is potentially easier to protect your company's IP if both you and your employees are following the same rules. Also, if an employee steals a company's IP in the US, there is a clear path for the company to take legal action against that employee.



Marketing



Due to how many jobs have left the US to go overseas, it can be useful for marketing if companies are able to say that their products are fully made in the US, or that they only employ US citizens.



Government Contracts



Within the US, there are multiple levels of government, all of which have their own rules on who they allow to bid on and win contracts for government work. Government work is usually one of the most stable, and sometimes the most lucrative, sources of revenue for a lot of these companies. For example, if your US company has foreign-based employees, and is fulfilling a contract for the US Department of Defense, your US-based employees might not even be able to talk to non-US-based employees without extensively documenting every time they have a conversation. There might also be state or lower governments who require or give preference to companies who are employing people who work in their districts (in an attempt to keep taxes and jobs as local as possible).



Security



Companies will generally want to vet that you are who you say you are, that you are not a criminal, and that you do not partake in illicit drugs. They will usually already have a partnership or contract with a company who can perform background checks on you. In the US, it is not uncommon for even retail style jobs to require you to undergo a background check and drug screening. If you are not US-based, the company might not be able to get a reliable, accurate background check done, or might not want to spend the time and money it will cost to find a company in your location to complete it.



This also concerns cyber security. Depending upon the security controls for a given company, they might not feel comfortable allowing VPN access to their internal network from a foreign country, or they might not want to face increased risk of the data you might have stored becoming compromised.



Conclusion



The US is a large country, and has a lot of highly skilled individuals. There are not too many remote jobs where it would not be possible to find a US worker who is able to complete that work. Given that it almost always possible to find a US-based worker to fulfill a role, and all of the potential pitfalls listed above when hiring a foreign worker, it makes sense that non-international US-based companies would primarily hire US-based workers.






share|improve this answer










New contributor




CobyCode is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.










There are many potential reasons for a company to discriminate based upon your country.



Tax Reasons



Taxes can get very complex, very quickly. Even if your country allows you to take on all of the tax responsibilities, which is relatively uncommon, the company will have to spend money even getting an expert on your country's laws to confirm this. Otherwise, the company will have to comply with tax laws of the US, the state the company is in, and your country. In some cases, it might even cost the company more money to comply with the tax laws of your parent country than your salary. It is not even that uncommon for smaller US companies hiring remote workers that must be based out of only one state, because it is costly to even comply with multiple US state tax and benefit rules.



This also raises issues with tax incentives that might be offered by the either the US federal or state governments. Some locations might provide tax breaks for employing local citizens.



Labor Laws



Labor laws vary even between different states, and vary drastically between different countries. There is a lot of cost involved with even identifying all of company's responsibilities to you—let alone complying with all of the applicable labor laws. How many days off a year do I have to give you? If you have a child, do I lose you as an employee for 6 months, but still have to pay you? What am I allowed to do with your employee data, and how am I required to store it?



Technology & Export Laws



There are laws that restrict the flow of technology from the US. Take for example, encryption export laws—although these have been greatly relaxed in recent years, there are still restrictions on what encryption algorithms are allowed to be used in products sold to a non-US country. This also leaves the potential for gray areas—it can be difficult to determine the legality of having someone who lives in country A working on technology X. In some cases, this could either be very expensive to figure out & keep track of, or the law might be ambiguous enough that it is easier to simply not have to worry about this becoming an issue at all.



Intellectual Property Concerns



Countries tend to have different laws dealing with IP, and some countries are known to ignore IP claims of other countries if doing so has the potential to benefit them (as an example, look at claims of IP theft in China for the last few years). It is potentially easier to protect your company's IP if both you and your employees are following the same rules. Also, if an employee steals a company's IP in the US, there is a clear path for the company to take legal action against that employee.



Marketing



Due to how many jobs have left the US to go overseas, it can be useful for marketing if companies are able to say that their products are fully made in the US, or that they only employ US citizens.



Government Contracts



Within the US, there are multiple levels of government, all of which have their own rules on who they allow to bid on and win contracts for government work. Government work is usually one of the most stable, and sometimes the most lucrative, sources of revenue for a lot of these companies. For example, if your US company has foreign-based employees, and is fulfilling a contract for the US Department of Defense, your US-based employees might not even be able to talk to non-US-based employees without extensively documenting every time they have a conversation. There might also be state or lower governments who require or give preference to companies who are employing people who work in their districts (in an attempt to keep taxes and jobs as local as possible).



Security



Companies will generally want to vet that you are who you say you are, that you are not a criminal, and that you do not partake in illicit drugs. They will usually already have a partnership or contract with a company who can perform background checks on you. In the US, it is not uncommon for even retail style jobs to require you to undergo a background check and drug screening. If you are not US-based, the company might not be able to get a reliable, accurate background check done, or might not want to spend the time and money it will cost to find a company in your location to complete it.



This also concerns cyber security. Depending upon the security controls for a given company, they might not feel comfortable allowing VPN access to their internal network from a foreign country, or they might not want to face increased risk of the data you might have stored becoming compromised.



Conclusion



The US is a large country, and has a lot of highly skilled individuals. There are not too many remote jobs where it would not be possible to find a US worker who is able to complete that work. Given that it almost always possible to find a US-based worker to fulfill a role, and all of the potential pitfalls listed above when hiring a foreign worker, it makes sense that non-international US-based companies would primarily hire US-based workers.







share|improve this answer










New contributor




CobyCode is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 2 days ago









CodeSeeker

2,16611124




2,16611124






New contributor




CobyCode is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









answered 2 days ago









CobyCodeCobyCode

68114




68114




New contributor




CobyCode is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





CobyCode is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






CobyCode is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







  • 1





    +1 Only for the effort of thinking in so many reasons, well done!

    – Chococroc
    yesterday







  • 3





    Could be a social aspect too. As in, "let's support homegrown talent first and foremost" (more fundamentally than the ensuing marketing benefits)

    – Lightness Races in Orbit
    yesterday







  • 2





    Healthcare. Most countries don't charge citizens for their healthcare, they have some way of recovering it from the employers. That would get weird.

    – Harper
    yesterday






  • 1





    @Harper: "They have some way of recovering it from employers" falls under "Tax".

    – Ben Voigt
    22 hours ago











  • + for export laws

    – A.K.
    31 mins ago












  • 1





    +1 Only for the effort of thinking in so many reasons, well done!

    – Chococroc
    yesterday







  • 3





    Could be a social aspect too. As in, "let's support homegrown talent first and foremost" (more fundamentally than the ensuing marketing benefits)

    – Lightness Races in Orbit
    yesterday







  • 2





    Healthcare. Most countries don't charge citizens for their healthcare, they have some way of recovering it from the employers. That would get weird.

    – Harper
    yesterday






  • 1





    @Harper: "They have some way of recovering it from employers" falls under "Tax".

    – Ben Voigt
    22 hours ago











  • + for export laws

    – A.K.
    31 mins ago







1




1





+1 Only for the effort of thinking in so many reasons, well done!

– Chococroc
yesterday






+1 Only for the effort of thinking in so many reasons, well done!

– Chococroc
yesterday





3




3





Could be a social aspect too. As in, "let's support homegrown talent first and foremost" (more fundamentally than the ensuing marketing benefits)

– Lightness Races in Orbit
yesterday






Could be a social aspect too. As in, "let's support homegrown talent first and foremost" (more fundamentally than the ensuing marketing benefits)

– Lightness Races in Orbit
yesterday





2




2





Healthcare. Most countries don't charge citizens for their healthcare, they have some way of recovering it from the employers. That would get weird.

– Harper
yesterday





Healthcare. Most countries don't charge citizens for their healthcare, they have some way of recovering it from the employers. That would get weird.

– Harper
yesterday




1




1





@Harper: "They have some way of recovering it from employers" falls under "Tax".

– Ben Voigt
22 hours ago





@Harper: "They have some way of recovering it from employers" falls under "Tax".

– Ben Voigt
22 hours ago













+ for export laws

– A.K.
31 mins ago





+ for export laws

– A.K.
31 mins ago











9














As a permanent employee, your employer will have tax and social security costs related to you, which would be complicated by your being in a different country.



Your employer would not necessarily know what these implications are, and there is no incentive for them to find out; they can generally get an equivalently qualified employee in the USA. The easy solution for them is to just recruit within the US, and preferably within the state where they are based.






share|improve this answer























  • The right way to handle these relationships is to have the foreign employee set up a self-employed legal business entity. Then there's absolutely no complications, you just pay a foreign business for their services.

    – JonathanReez
    2 days ago






  • 2





    @JonathanReez but at that point, do you "employ the non-US citizen", or do you just do business with an overseas company?

    – Patrice
    2 days ago







  • 5





    @JonathanReez Except that then you have to figure out the legal framework under which you'll deal with this foreign entity. And deal with the risk that comes with the difficulty of taking legal action in a foreign country. And the risk that the tax authorities will say, "So, er, that person who works for a single-employee corporation, and who spends 100% of their time working for you, under your day-to-day direction and management? That's a sham and we consider them to be your empoyee."

    – David Richerby
    2 days ago






  • 3





    @JonathanReez My point is that the legal agreements you need with an incorporated contractor are different to the ones you need with an employee. So you need (expensive) lawyer time to draw up those agreements. If the *cough* employee breaches those agreements, suing them in a foreign country is difficult and expensive. And classing somebody who is functionally an employee (works 100% for you and is under your day-to-day management) as an external contractor is a form of tax evasion that tax authorities are well aware of and often pursue.

    – David Richerby
    2 days ago






  • 2





    So setting up this arrangement as hiring an incorporated contractor might be the "best" way of employing somebody in a foreign country, but it's still a lot more hassle than hiring somebody domestically.

    – David Richerby
    2 days ago















9














As a permanent employee, your employer will have tax and social security costs related to you, which would be complicated by your being in a different country.



Your employer would not necessarily know what these implications are, and there is no incentive for them to find out; they can generally get an equivalently qualified employee in the USA. The easy solution for them is to just recruit within the US, and preferably within the state where they are based.






share|improve this answer























  • The right way to handle these relationships is to have the foreign employee set up a self-employed legal business entity. Then there's absolutely no complications, you just pay a foreign business for their services.

    – JonathanReez
    2 days ago






  • 2





    @JonathanReez but at that point, do you "employ the non-US citizen", or do you just do business with an overseas company?

    – Patrice
    2 days ago







  • 5





    @JonathanReez Except that then you have to figure out the legal framework under which you'll deal with this foreign entity. And deal with the risk that comes with the difficulty of taking legal action in a foreign country. And the risk that the tax authorities will say, "So, er, that person who works for a single-employee corporation, and who spends 100% of their time working for you, under your day-to-day direction and management? That's a sham and we consider them to be your empoyee."

    – David Richerby
    2 days ago






  • 3





    @JonathanReez My point is that the legal agreements you need with an incorporated contractor are different to the ones you need with an employee. So you need (expensive) lawyer time to draw up those agreements. If the *cough* employee breaches those agreements, suing them in a foreign country is difficult and expensive. And classing somebody who is functionally an employee (works 100% for you and is under your day-to-day management) as an external contractor is a form of tax evasion that tax authorities are well aware of and often pursue.

    – David Richerby
    2 days ago






  • 2





    So setting up this arrangement as hiring an incorporated contractor might be the "best" way of employing somebody in a foreign country, but it's still a lot more hassle than hiring somebody domestically.

    – David Richerby
    2 days ago













9












9








9







As a permanent employee, your employer will have tax and social security costs related to you, which would be complicated by your being in a different country.



Your employer would not necessarily know what these implications are, and there is no incentive for them to find out; they can generally get an equivalently qualified employee in the USA. The easy solution for them is to just recruit within the US, and preferably within the state where they are based.






share|improve this answer













As a permanent employee, your employer will have tax and social security costs related to you, which would be complicated by your being in a different country.



Your employer would not necessarily know what these implications are, and there is no incentive for them to find out; they can generally get an equivalently qualified employee in the USA. The easy solution for them is to just recruit within the US, and preferably within the state where they are based.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 2 days ago









PeteConPeteCon

17.2k74667




17.2k74667












  • The right way to handle these relationships is to have the foreign employee set up a self-employed legal business entity. Then there's absolutely no complications, you just pay a foreign business for their services.

    – JonathanReez
    2 days ago






  • 2





    @JonathanReez but at that point, do you "employ the non-US citizen", or do you just do business with an overseas company?

    – Patrice
    2 days ago







  • 5





    @JonathanReez Except that then you have to figure out the legal framework under which you'll deal with this foreign entity. And deal with the risk that comes with the difficulty of taking legal action in a foreign country. And the risk that the tax authorities will say, "So, er, that person who works for a single-employee corporation, and who spends 100% of their time working for you, under your day-to-day direction and management? That's a sham and we consider them to be your empoyee."

    – David Richerby
    2 days ago






  • 3





    @JonathanReez My point is that the legal agreements you need with an incorporated contractor are different to the ones you need with an employee. So you need (expensive) lawyer time to draw up those agreements. If the *cough* employee breaches those agreements, suing them in a foreign country is difficult and expensive. And classing somebody who is functionally an employee (works 100% for you and is under your day-to-day management) as an external contractor is a form of tax evasion that tax authorities are well aware of and often pursue.

    – David Richerby
    2 days ago






  • 2





    So setting up this arrangement as hiring an incorporated contractor might be the "best" way of employing somebody in a foreign country, but it's still a lot more hassle than hiring somebody domestically.

    – David Richerby
    2 days ago

















  • The right way to handle these relationships is to have the foreign employee set up a self-employed legal business entity. Then there's absolutely no complications, you just pay a foreign business for their services.

    – JonathanReez
    2 days ago






  • 2





    @JonathanReez but at that point, do you "employ the non-US citizen", or do you just do business with an overseas company?

    – Patrice
    2 days ago







  • 5





    @JonathanReez Except that then you have to figure out the legal framework under which you'll deal with this foreign entity. And deal with the risk that comes with the difficulty of taking legal action in a foreign country. And the risk that the tax authorities will say, "So, er, that person who works for a single-employee corporation, and who spends 100% of their time working for you, under your day-to-day direction and management? That's a sham and we consider them to be your empoyee."

    – David Richerby
    2 days ago






  • 3





    @JonathanReez My point is that the legal agreements you need with an incorporated contractor are different to the ones you need with an employee. So you need (expensive) lawyer time to draw up those agreements. If the *cough* employee breaches those agreements, suing them in a foreign country is difficult and expensive. And classing somebody who is functionally an employee (works 100% for you and is under your day-to-day management) as an external contractor is a form of tax evasion that tax authorities are well aware of and often pursue.

    – David Richerby
    2 days ago






  • 2





    So setting up this arrangement as hiring an incorporated contractor might be the "best" way of employing somebody in a foreign country, but it's still a lot more hassle than hiring somebody domestically.

    – David Richerby
    2 days ago
















The right way to handle these relationships is to have the foreign employee set up a self-employed legal business entity. Then there's absolutely no complications, you just pay a foreign business for their services.

– JonathanReez
2 days ago





The right way to handle these relationships is to have the foreign employee set up a self-employed legal business entity. Then there's absolutely no complications, you just pay a foreign business for their services.

– JonathanReez
2 days ago




2




2





@JonathanReez but at that point, do you "employ the non-US citizen", or do you just do business with an overseas company?

– Patrice
2 days ago






@JonathanReez but at that point, do you "employ the non-US citizen", or do you just do business with an overseas company?

– Patrice
2 days ago





5




5





@JonathanReez Except that then you have to figure out the legal framework under which you'll deal with this foreign entity. And deal with the risk that comes with the difficulty of taking legal action in a foreign country. And the risk that the tax authorities will say, "So, er, that person who works for a single-employee corporation, and who spends 100% of their time working for you, under your day-to-day direction and management? That's a sham and we consider them to be your empoyee."

– David Richerby
2 days ago





@JonathanReez Except that then you have to figure out the legal framework under which you'll deal with this foreign entity. And deal with the risk that comes with the difficulty of taking legal action in a foreign country. And the risk that the tax authorities will say, "So, er, that person who works for a single-employee corporation, and who spends 100% of their time working for you, under your day-to-day direction and management? That's a sham and we consider them to be your empoyee."

– David Richerby
2 days ago




3




3





@JonathanReez My point is that the legal agreements you need with an incorporated contractor are different to the ones you need with an employee. So you need (expensive) lawyer time to draw up those agreements. If the *cough* employee breaches those agreements, suing them in a foreign country is difficult and expensive. And classing somebody who is functionally an employee (works 100% for you and is under your day-to-day management) as an external contractor is a form of tax evasion that tax authorities are well aware of and often pursue.

– David Richerby
2 days ago





@JonathanReez My point is that the legal agreements you need with an incorporated contractor are different to the ones you need with an employee. So you need (expensive) lawyer time to draw up those agreements. If the *cough* employee breaches those agreements, suing them in a foreign country is difficult and expensive. And classing somebody who is functionally an employee (works 100% for you and is under your day-to-day management) as an external contractor is a form of tax evasion that tax authorities are well aware of and often pursue.

– David Richerby
2 days ago




2




2





So setting up this arrangement as hiring an incorporated contractor might be the "best" way of employing somebody in a foreign country, but it's still a lot more hassle than hiring somebody domestically.

– David Richerby
2 days ago





So setting up this arrangement as hiring an incorporated contractor might be the "best" way of employing somebody in a foreign country, but it's still a lot more hassle than hiring somebody domestically.

– David Richerby
2 days ago










Shifra is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









draft saved

draft discarded


















Shifra is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












Shifra is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











Shifra is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














Thanks for contributing an answer to The Workplace Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f132796%2fwhy-do-remote-us-companies-require-working-in-the-us%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown











Popular posts from this blog

Sum ergo cogito? 1 nng

419 nièngy_Soadمي 19bal1.5o_g

Queiggey Chernihivv 9NnOo i Zw X QqKk LpB