#Minimum Salary Threshold

[lexlawuk]

Global Business Mobility: Guide to UK Specialist Worker Visa Application

The Senior or Specialist Worker visa allows you to come to or remain in the UK to undertake a qualifying job at your employer’s UK branch. This visa has replaced the Intra-company Transfer visa, which was previously known as the Tier 2 (Intra-company Transfer) Long-term Staff visa. In this comprehensive guide, we’ll explore the eligibility requirements, application process, and benefits of the…

[beardedmrbean]

A restaurant partially owned by California Governor Gavin Newsom is recruiting for a $16-per-hour role, despite a new state law guaranteeing a minimum wage of $20 per hour for fast-food workers. The restaurant appears not to meet the threshold for the new minimum wage, a law that Newsom himself signed to much fanfare in September.

The Context

On April 1, the new law guaranteeing a minimum wage of $20 per hour for fast-food workers employed in large chains took effect across California, up from the previous minimum of $16.

The law was passed by Democrats in the state legislature last year but has come under fire from some Republicans who claim it will cost jobs. A wage of $20 per hour for a full-time worker results in an annual salary of $41,600.

The new law applies to those restaurants that are part of a chain of 60 or more venues nationwide and which offer limited or no table service.

What We Know

PlumpJack Café in Olympic Valley, California, is seeking a part-time busser to "assist the food server in the restaurant to ensure guest satisfaction during all aspects of the dining experience."

The advert, placed on job posting website ZipRecruiter, says that the employee will be paid $16 per hour and their duties will include clearing dishes from tables, the preparation of caffeinated drinks and decorating tables prior to customer arrival.

The café is owned by the PlumpJack Group, a company founded by Newsom which specializes in wine and high-end dining. Its website says that PlumpJack Group operates four bars or restaurants, placing it well below the threshold for the $20 per hour minimum wage to take effect.

Newsom placed his ownership interests in the PlumpJack Group into a blind trust in 2018, and has had no day-to-day involvement in the running of the company since assuming office in January 2019.

Newsweek has contacted Newsom and the PlumpJack Group for comment outside of normal working hours.

The official PlumpJack Group website states: "In 1992, Gavin Newsom opened his first business, PlumpJack Wines, combining his passion for wine and his driving entrepreneurial spirit.

"Over the next decade, the PlumpJack Group began to grow under his leadership to include many of the restaurants, wineries, and retail establishments in the current portfolio."

Views

Republican State Assembly member Joe Patterson shared screenshots of the PlumpJack Café, PlumpJack Group website referring to Newsom as its founder and the rental cost of two properties in the area on X, formerly Twitter.

He added: "I wonder why @CAgovernor @GavinNewson's food businesses don't pay $20/hour? Live job posting at $16/hr in Olympic Valley. It's very, very expensive to live there... but he doesn't do as he tells others and doesn't pay a living wage."

The increased minimum wage for fast-food workers more generally has been criticized by some Republicans who warn it will reduce the number of jobs.

Speaking to DailyMail.com, Rep. Doug LaMalfa from California said: "As if prices in California aren't high enough. Fast food prices are already rising, and employees are being replaced by self-checkout kiosks and soon robot cooks.

"Nearly everyone will be worse off: higher prices, fewer jobs, fewer eating options as places close, and fewer small businesses. Ultimately this new $20 minimum wage will affect nearly every job, with similar results."

In an earnings call at the end of October, McDonald's CEO Chris Kempczinski said that "there is going to be a wage impact for our California franchisees," which he added would have to be partially "worked through with higher pricing."

In February, Newsom denied a report by Bloomberg News that he pushed for a separate exception to the new minimum wage law that benefits a campaign donor. The law exempts restaurants that have on-site bakeries and sell bread as a standalone menu item.

As a result, Greg Flynn, a billionaire and Newsom donor, could save hundreds of thousands of dollars at his Panera Bread outlets in California, according to Bloomberg.

A spokesman denied any connection, saying: "This story is absurd."

In January, a baseline minimum wage of $16 came into effect across California.

[allthebrazilianpolitics]

Brazil government gets real-ity check after cuts announcement

Brazil’s Finance Minister Fernando Haddad announced on Wednesday the government’s long-awaited plan for budget cuts, deemed necessary to meet the year’s fiscal targets.

The hope from the administration was that the announcement would reduce uncertainty and appease markets while remaining aligned with the Lula government’s goals, but instead the plan triggered frustration and market volatility.

Alongside spending cuts and caps on real minimum wage increases and public servant salaries, Mr. Haddad also announced a move to raise the tax threshold, meaning that anyone earning BRL 5,000 or less per month would be exempt from paying income tax. This was accompanied by an increase on taxes for those who earn more than BRL 50,000 a month, measures that, in themselves, make sense considering Brazil’s highly regressive tax apparatus.

Continue reading.

[alatariel-gildaen]

UK friends, if you can do me a favour, that'd be amazing.

I have a friend who moved to America to be with her then girlfriend, now wife. With the result of the election, they no longer want to stay there in case their marriage is annulled, however, because of a ridiculous policy that was set by the Tories, they may not actually be able to return, despite the fact she is a British citizen.

Basically, the policy requires a high salary be met by british citizens who wish to return to the UK with a foreign spouse. This is without regard to spouses' income, affidavits of support, and inconsiderate of geographical salary differences in the UK. The minimum salary threshold currently sits at £29,000 without dependents. The Tories had planned to increase this in January to £38,900, which would separate so many families that are unable to hit the threshold.

As of right now, the Labour party have put this increase on hold, while the MAC further investigates how attainable this is based on average UK salaries. If this doesn't change, my friend and her wife will never be able to return to her home country.

They have a combined income of over $100,000 (around £80k) but as the majority of this is being made by her wife, they won't take it into consideration, as she herself doesn't hit the nearly £30k threshold.

Please, write to your local MP, and ask them to put pressure on the MAC to reduce the income threshold for British citizens who wish to return home.

Thank you 💖

[collapsedsquid]

Last September, Stanford acquired the 759-unit Oak Creek Apartments in Palo Alto in an effort to expand housing options for the Stanford community, especially postdoctoral scholars. Now, the University is facing criticism from postdocs who claim that their University-paid salaries fall short of the salary thresholds required to live in the apartments. [...] Oncology postdoc Ziwei Wang applied for housing at Oak Creek in order to be closer to work. After joining the waitlist in September, she was offered a one-bedroom apartment in March. Wang was given 24 hours to respond to her offer, which she quickly accepted.  When she began filling out the documents to accept the request, however, Wang says she realized she was ineligible for the housing due to a minimum income requirement. “One of the qualifications was that my salary had to be two and a half times more than the rent,” Wang said. “And apparently, even though the University is the one that pays me, my salary was not qualified for that.”

We must seize control of the university, dictatorship of the postdocs!

[droughtofapathy]

why is it you think caberet's revival will close soon-ish? would love to hear!

While I don't think they'll close up shop next week, I do have the utmost confidence that this won't be a long-running revival like the '98 production. If it finishes out its planned contract with the replacements, it'll be a small miracle. I might be on the record for how much I hated this show's direction, but I'm not saying this as a personal vendetta or anything. It all comes down to numbers, and this is a hugely expensive show to run week-to-week. The weekly operating cost is conservatively estimated to be about $825k-900k with the current replacement cast (word is that the current leads are making half as much as the former leads, which brings it under a million), and assuming 10-15% scraped off the weekly gross for credit card fees and what the theatre owners take, the show needs to gross ~$1.15M, minimum just to break even.

Every single week in November, and most of October, did not meet that threshold. While grosses have gone up during the holiday bump, as with (nearly) all Broadway shows, January is a notoriously dry time, and I predict a slide back to November numbers. Which means losing a significant amount of money every week. That can't happen if this show wants to stay afloat. But it's historically inevitable. We've already seen several shows close up shop within a few weeks (though those were MASSIVE flops). And this show capitalized at a whopping $26M, which is staggering considering they had the original leads slated for just half a year. The replacement leads haven't garnered the numbers they've hoped for, and it's a divisive show already.

I don't think closure will happen due to any pressure from the theatre owners. Even if it closed up in mid-January, it would be almost impossible for the theatre to be rerenovated in time for another show to open before the Tony cutoff, so that leaves them some breathing room on that front. The August Wilson is also now managed by ATG, a British-based company, so there's that in their favor.

But producers aren't going to keep a show this expensive going if profits are a few measly tens of thousands per week, if the odds are more likely that they see a loss of a few hundred thousand. At that rate, they'd need to keep their heads above water for a decade just to break even, and what's the point? Maybe they try one more stunt cast when the current contracts are up, but even then... Names would have to be big A-listers, and that means big A-lister salary. And they'd be fighting the 2024-2025 openings for space. With Sunset Boulevard and Gypsy pulling in big numbers, and the long-runners still booming, I'm sure they see the writing on the wall.

[etauk072]

UK Visa Types: A Complete Guide

Introduction

The UK offers a range of visas for travelers with different purposes, from tourism and business to study and long-term residency. Understanding UK visa types can help you determine which visa suits your needs, making the application process easier and faster. This guide outlines the various types of UK visas, eligibility requirements, and key details for each category.

UK Visa Categories

The main categories of UK visas include:

Visitor Visas

Tourist Visa: For those visiting the UK for tourism and leisure.

Business Visa: For attending meetings, conferences, or short-term business engagements.

Family Visit Visa: For visiting family members residing in the UK.

Short-Term Study Visa: For short courses or English language studies.

Eligibility: Proof of financial stability, purpose of visit, and ties to home country.

Duration: Generally, allows stays up to 6 months.

Work Visas

Skilled Worker Visa: For qualified professionals with a job offer from a UK employer.

Health and Care Worker Visa: For healthcare professionals filling roles in the NHS or care sector.

Temporary Worker Visa (Tier 5): For short-term work, including charity, creative, and religious workers.

Eligibility: Job offer, certificate of sponsorship, and minimum salary threshold.

Duration: Varies from 1 to 5 years, with potential for renewal or permanent residency.

Student Visas

Student Visa (Tier 4): For full-time studies at recognized UK institutions.

Child Student Visa: For minors (4–17) attending independent schools in the UK.

Short-Term Study Visa: For courses up to 11 months.

Eligibility: Acceptance at an accredited institution, proof of funds, and English language skills.

Duration: Based on the length of the course, typically up to 5 years for higher education.

Family Visas

Spouse or Partner Visa: For partners of UK citizens or permanent residents.

Parent Visa: For parents of dependent children living in the UK.

Child Dependent Visa: For children of individuals residing in the UK.

Eligibility: Proof of relationship, financial stability, and accommodation.

Duration: Usually up to 2.5 years, with options to renew.

Settlement and Long-Term Residency Visas

Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR): For those who have resided in the UK long-term.

Ancestry Visa: For Commonwealth citizens with UK ancestry.

Eligibility: Long-term residency, financial independence, and knowledge of life in the UK.

Duration: Permanent residency status, leading to UK citizenship eligibility.

Special and Temporary Visas

Start-up and Innovator Visas: For entrepreneurs looking to start a business in the UK.

Graduate Visa: For students who have completed a degree in the UK and wish to stay to work.

Youth Mobility Scheme Visa (Tier 5): For young people (18-30) from select countries.

Eligibility: Requirements vary by program, including age, funding, and business plans.

Duration: Generally 2 years, with options for renewal or transition to other visa types.

Choosing the Right Visa Type for Your Needs

To determine which visa suits your needs, consider the following:

Purpose of Visit: Is it for work, study, tourism, or family purposes?

Duration of Stay: Short-term visas are ideal for brief visits, while long-term visas are for those planning an extended stay.

Eligibility Criteria: Each visa has specific requirements, including financial stability, sponsorship, and proof of purpose.

Frequently Asked Questions About UK Visa Types

1. Can I switch between UK visa types? Some visas allow switching within the UK, such as moving from a Student Visa to a Skilled Worker Visa. Check individual visa guidelines.

2. What is the processing time for UK visas? Processing times vary by visa type, typically from 3 weeks for visitor visas to several months for settlement visas.

3. Do I need a visa to transit through the UK? Some travelers need a UK Transit Visa if passing through UK airports. Eligibility depends on nationality and travel itinerary.

Conclusion

Understanding UK visa types is crucial for a smooth application process. Whether you’re visiting for a short stay or planning to settle, knowing the right visa type ensures you’re well-prepared. For more detailed information, refer to the official UK government website or consult an immigration advisor.

[jjtax]

Understanding Tax Refunds: JJ Tax made it easy

Handling tax refunds can seem overwhelming, but having a clear grasp of the process can make it straightforward. This newsletter aims to demystify tax refunds by covering key aspects: eligibility criteria, claiming procedures and tracking your refund status.

What is a Tax Refund?

A tax refund represents the amount returned to taxpayers who have overpaid their taxes over the fiscal year. This situation arises when the total tax deducted or paid exceeds the actual tax liability determined based on their income.

In India, tax payments are made through TDS (Tax Deducted at Source), advance tax, or self-assessment tax. When the total tax paid or deducted surpasses your tax liability as calculated in your Income Tax Return (ITR), the excess amount is refunded. This mechanism ensures taxpayers are reimbursed for any overpayments.

Who is Eligible for a Tax Refund?

Eligibility for a tax refund depends on various factors:

Excess Tax Payments If your TDS or advance tax payments exceed your tax liability, you’re eligible for a refund. This often applies to salaried employees, freelancers, and individuals with taxable investment income.

Claiming Deductions If you claim deductions under sections like 80C, 80D, etc., and these deductions lower your tax liability below the total tax paid, a refund may be due.

Filing an Income Tax Return Only those who file their Income Tax Return can claim a refund. The return must accurately reflect your income, deductions, and tax payments to establish if a refund is warranted.

Losses to Set Off If you have losses from previous years or the current year that can be carried forward and set off against current year income, you might be eligible for a refund if these losses reduce your tax liability.

Who is Not Eligible for a Tax Refund?

Certain situations or individuals may not qualify for a tax refund:

Income Below Taxable Threshold If your total income is below the taxable limit, a refund may not be applicable.

Salary Below Government Criteria Individuals earning below the minimum threshold specified by the Government of India may not qualify for a refund.

No Overpayment If your tax payments match your tax liability or you haven’t overpaid, a refund will not be available.

Non-Filers or Incorrect Filers Those who fail to file their Income Tax Return or file it incorrectly will not be eligible for a refund. Proper filing is essential for initiating the refund process.

Invalid Deductions Claims for deductions that do not meet tax regulations or lack valid documentation may result in a refund rejection.

Incorrect Bank Details If the bank account information provided in your ITR is incorrect or incomplete, the refund may not be processed.

How to Claim Your Tax Refund

Here’s a step-by-step guide to claiming your tax refund:

File Your Income Tax Return (ITR) Access the Income Tax Department’s e-filing portal. Choose the correct ITR form based on your income sources and eligibility. Accurately complete all required details, including income, deductions, and tax payments.

Verify Your ITR Verify your ITR using Aadhaar OTP, net banking, or by sending a signed ITR-V to the Centralised Processing Centre (CPC). Verification must be completed within 120 days of filing your ITR.

ITR Processing The Income Tax Department will process your return, assess your tax liability, and determine the refund amount. This process can take a few weeks to several months.

Refund Issuance After processing, the refund will be credited directly to your bank account. Ensure your bank details are accurate and up-to-date in your ITR.

Update Bank Account Details (if needed) If your bank details change after filing your ITR, promptly update them on the e-filing portal to ensure correct refund crediting.

How to Check Your ITR Refund Status for FY 2024-2025

To check your refund status, follow these steps:

Visit the Income Tax E-Filing Portal Go to the official Income Tax Department e-filing website.

Access the 'Refund Status' Section Navigate to the ‘Refund Status’ page, typically under the ‘Services’ tab or a similar heading.

Enter Required Details Input your PAN (Permanent Account Number) and the assessment year for your filed return.

Review the Status The portal will show the status of your refund, including whether it has been processed, approved, or if further action is needed.

Track Refund Processing Keep an eye on any updates or notifications from the Income Tax Department regarding your refund.

Understanding the tax refund process can simplify the experience. By following these steps and staying informed about your eligibility, you can make sure that you have a smooth process and quickly receipt of any excess tax payments. For expert guidance and personalized assistance, consult with JJ Tax. Visit our website or contact us today to get the support you need for all your tax-related queries.

JJ Tax

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Dave Whammond

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

April 23, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

APR 24, 2024

In the past two days, the Biden-Harris administration has announced a wide range of new rules to protect ordinary Americans. 

Yesterday, Vice President Kamala Harris announced that the administration has finalized two new rules affecting patients in nursing homes and receiving home care, as well as the workers who care for them. The first sets minimum staffing requirements for facilities funded by Medicare and Medicaid, and the second concerns how home healthcare companies account for Medicaid funding. 

In a speech at the Hmong Cultural and Community Agency in La Crosse, Wisconsin, Harris noted the extraordinary value of healthcare workers. She also explained that about 1.2 million Americans live in federally funded nursing homes, which make up about four fifths of the nursing homes in the country. But the majority of those homes—about 75% of them—are understaffed. This is dangerous and isolating for patients and demoralizing for workers, who have high rates of burnout and turnover.  

Now, nursing homes that receive federal funding will have to provide at least 3.48 hours of nursing care per resident every day, less than the 4.1 hours the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services advocate but enough to require the hiring of about 12,000 registered nurses and 77,000 aides, at an annual cost of almost $7 billion. 

Consumer organizations and labor unions pushed for the new rule, but nursing home operators strongly oppose the new mandate, saying it will force facilities to close because of a shortage of nurses. In response, Health and Human Services secretary Xavier Becerra told Tami Luhby of CNN that no one should live in facilities that are unsafe or should receive inferior care. Luhby noted that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in September launched a $75 million campaign to increase the number of nurses in nursing homes.

The second rule the vice president announced had to do with home health aides. Medicaid currently pays about $125 billion a year to home healthcare companies, which employ hundreds of thousands of workers providing services for elderly and disabled Americans. These companies have never been required to report how that money was being spent. Now they will be required to spend 80% of the federal dollars they receive on workers’ salaries rather than administrative overhead.

Also yesterday, the Office for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced a final rule that strengthens the HIPAA medical privacy rule for people from states that ban abortions who seek reproductive health care in states that permit them. In response to threats by Republican state officials to charge women who cross state lines to obtain abortion, contraception, or fertility treatments, the new rule prohibits health care providers, health plans, and other entities from disclosing patients’ reproductive health care records to state officials when they are being sought to investigate or charge patients, doctors, or others.  

Today, the Labor Department announced a new rule that would guarantee that salaried workers who make less than $59,000 a year are compensated fairly for overtime work. The Trump administration set the salary threshold for those who did not have overtime protections at $35,568. As of July 1, 2024, the threshold will be $43,888, and on January 1, 2025, it will rise to $58,656. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), former chair of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, said the change could affect 4 million workers.

“Too often, lower-paid salaried workers are doing the same job as their hourly counterparts but are spending more time away from their families for no additional pay,” acting secretary of the Department of Labor Julie Su said. “That is unacceptable. The Biden-Harris administration is following through on our promise to raise the bar for workers who help lay the foundation for our economic prosperity.”

Also today, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) voted 3–2 along party lines to ban the noncompete agreements that prevent workers from minimum-wage earners to top executives from changing jobs within the industry in which they work; senior executives can still be bound by such agreements. Initially used to protect trade secrets, noncompete clauses have expanded to cover what the FTC estimates to be 30 million people—one in five U.S. workers. They take away workers’ ability to improve their wages and conditions by quitting their jobs and moving to another company or starting their own. The FTC estimates that the end of such clauses could add almost $300 billion a year to workers’ wages. 

“Robbing people of their economic liberty also robs them of all sorts of other freedoms,” FTC Chair Lina Khan said. Neil Bradley, head of strategic advocacy for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, countered: “If they can issue regulations with respect to unfair methods of competition, then there’s really no aspect of the U.S. economy they couldn’t regulate.” The U.S. Chamber of Commerce plans to sue over the rule. 

A CBS News/YouGov poll released Monday found that, although Biden and Harris have made addressing climate change a centerpiece of their administration, only 10% of the people who say they think climate change is a very important issue had heard or read a lot about what the administration has accomplished, and 49% said they had read not much or nothing about it. When told some of the things the administration has done, a strong majority of those who care about addressing climate change support those policies. 

“Even people who feel the administration has done too little on climate change support these policies,” reporters for CBS News note. They conclude that the disconnect “may be more about Mr. Biden needing to get his message out there than having to convince this ‘climate constituency’—those who call the climate issue very important—of the substance of his policies.” 

Meanwhile, today is the fourth anniversary of the press conference in which former president Donald Trump suggested injecting disinfectant to get rid of Covid, prompting the maker of Lysol to warn people not to use their disinfectant cleaning products internally. Four years later, Trump spent the day in a Manhattan courtroom, where his former friend David Pecker, who ran the company that published the National Enquirer tabloid magazine, testified for the prosecution. 

Legal analyst Lisa Rubin summarized Pecker’s testimony, noting that the big takeaways were that Trump and Pecker were transactional friends for decades and that “the agreement they struck in 2015 went way beyond the ‘catch and kill’ aspect of the scheme that has been known for years.” Together, they not only killed stories damaging to Trump, but also pushed fake stories about Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, and Marco Rubio, who were running against him for the 2016 Republican nomination, as well as Democratic rival Hillary Clinton.

As the trial grabs headlines, Trump’s power seems to be diminishing. He is demonstrably not in power in the courtroom, where he must do as the judge tells him and reporters say he has often fallen asleep, and none of his family members have shown up to support him.

Trump seems aware that his power is waning. Early yesterday, he called for supporters to “RALLY BEHIND MAGA,” but only a handful of people gathered outside the courthouse. Today he claimed that the turnout was low because police had “completely CLOSED DOWN” the streets around the courthouse. That was a lie: the streets, the sidewalk, even the courthouse have remained open to the public. 

Pennsylvania’s primary election today revealed Trump’s real electoral weakness. He won about 83.5% of the Republican votes, but Nikki Haley, who dropped out of the race in early March and has not campaigned since, won 16.5%. In the suburbs of Philadelphia, the so-called “collar counties,” Haley won closer to 25% of the Republican vote. 

Biden, meanwhile, took the fight against MAGA Republicans to Trump’s home state of Florida. There, an extreme abortion ban signed into law by Republican Governor Ron DeSantis will take effect on May 1, but in November, Florida voters will have the option to add protections for abortion before fetal viability to the state constitution, returning the state to the standards it had before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. That measure is expected to energize Democrats in the state.

And then, tonight, by a vote of 79–18, the Senate passed the $95 billion national security supplemental bill that provides funding, mostly for military supplies, to Ukraine, Israel, and the Indo-Pacific and humanitarian aid for war-torn countries; requires the sale of TikTok; and permits confiscating Russian assets. MAGA Republicans are still adamantly opposed to aid for Ukraine, but a strong bipartisan majority has finally gotten the chance to weigh in.

As soon as the measure passed, Biden issued a statement, saying: “Tonight, a bipartisan majority in the Senate joined the House to answer history’s call at this critical inflection point. Congress has passed my legislation to strengthen our national security and send a message to the world about the power of American leadership: we stand resolutely for democracy and freedom, and against tyranny and oppression.”

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[lexlawuk]

Your Guide to the Skilled Worker Visa in the UK

The Skilled Worker Visa serves as a gateway to the United Kingdom for individuals worldwide, offering a pathway to secure employment and potential settlement. Embracing diversity and talent, this visa route welcomes skilled professionals from diverse backgrounds, fostering growth and innovation within the UK workforce. Let’s explore the Skilled Worker Visa in detail, from eligibility requirements…

[mythologeekwriter]

God this is horrifying

[Note: I am not copying the whole of these articles, please do read them, I'm just sharing the bits that I think illustrate why you should in fact read them.]

Five-point plan to cut UK immigration raises fears of more NHS staff shortages | Immigration and asylum | The Guardian

Cleverly told MPs on Monday that “migration is far too high and needs to come down … enough is enough”. He added: “Today I can announce that we will go even further than those provisions already in place, with a five-point plan to further curb immigration abuses that will deliver the biggest ever reduction in net migration. “In total, this package, plus our reduction in student dependants, will mean about 300,000 fewer people will come in future years than have come to the UK last year.” Along with raising the salary threshold and scrapping the “shortage occupation list”, Cleverly announced that social care workers would no longer be allowed to bring their dependants when they came to work in the UK. He also said people living in the UK – including British citizens – would now be allowed to sponsor family members to move to the UK only if the person living in the UK earned £38,700, up from £18,600 currently. Finally, the government is asking the Migration Advisory Committee to review the rules for those who have completed undergraduate degrees in the UK. A spokesperson for Downing Street called the package “the biggest clampdown on legal migration ever”. They added: “We believe this is a package which will enable us to significantly reduce numbers whilst achieving economic growth.” It forms one part of a two-part plan to reduce the numbers of people coming into Britain legally and illegally. This week Cleverly is likely to fly to Kigali to sign a new asylum treaty with Rwanda, with ministers ready to bring forward new legislation in an effort to finally kickstart the government’s Rwanda plan.

Families face being split up by UK plan to cut legal migration, lawyers say | Migration | The Guardian

Data suggests this could make it impossible for between 60 and 70% of workers to bring their family into the UK. The crackdown has caused concern among some senior Tory MPs. Alicia Kearns, the chair of the foreign affairs select committee, said on Tuesday she was worried the package as a whole risked dividing families. She told LBC: “It risks being very unconservative”. Madeleine Sumption, the director of the Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford, said: “This is definitely completely different to what any other high income country does.” Under the new rules, someone will be able to bring a family member into the country if they earn £38,700 year. If the partner is already in the UK, both people’s incomes will be taken into account. If someone does not qualify under those rules, they will still be allowed to bring in family members if they have sufficient savings. Under current rules that figure is £62,500, but the government is consulting over whether to increase it.

Lawyers and applicants say, however, that it has led to distress and confusion, with many families already in the process of applying for visas now unsure of what the changes will mean for them. Kelly Robinson, an American PhD student living in Norwich with her partner, Owen Sennitt, had applied for her spousal visa last week, confident Sennitt’s job as a local journalist would be enough to qualify for it. Now she believes she may have to return to the US after eight years living in Britain. “It is a real shock,” she said. “The entire life we have built is being taken away from us overnight.” Nick Gore, a partner at Carter Thomas solicitors, said: “This is devastating for many people that just about meet the existing financial requirements. There is a huge spectrum of people who are affected – some are on minimum wage jobs, others have started their own businesses. This will split families up.”

Thanks to James Cleverly, I may never live in the same country as my kids again | Claire Armitstead | The Guardian

When I mentioned their predicament to a lawyer friend he was dismissive, saying that middle-class families always found a way round these problems. Other friends suggested we remortgage our house to raise the £62,500 capital that was the alternative route to a spousal visa. But it would have to have been in their bank account for a minimum of six months before they even reapplied; this was time their soaring stress levels meant they didn’t have. And anyway, they wanted to pay their own way. The Home Office said any change to the capital threshold would be announced in due course. At the old salary rate, they probably would eventually have worked something out, but at the new one there is no chance. Their relationship will always be based on them both working, and while their combined income would very probably exceed £38,700 a year, neither is going to make that much on their own. My eldest and his partner are now happily settled, so wouldn’t want to move back anyway. The sort of social care work she does is more highly valued in Spain. Meanwhile, my Australian daughter-in-law is in the crazy bind facing citizens of so many of the UK’s former colonies: expected to bend the knee to the monarch of a British state that doesn’t want them. Australia asks the foreign partners of its citizens only to prove their relationship is genuine.

[mariacallous]

Turkey’s pollsters, including me, got it wrong. In the election held on the centennial of the Turkish Republic, incumbent President Recep Tayyip Erdogan got 49.5 percent in the first-round vote on May 14 despite polls suggesting he would get around 46 percent. Two weeks later, he took 52 percent of the popular vote in the second round of the presidential election, and his governing People’s Alliance secured 323 of the 600 seats in the parliament, allowing a handsome margin over the simple-majority threshold of 301. Come 2028, Erdogan will have been essentially leading the country for 25 uninterrupted years as either president or prime minister—an unprecedented reign.

The elections were free but far from fair. In a deeply polarized society, Erdogan has control over vast amounts of state resources as well as media that clearly provided an edge. Two days before the first round of the presidential election, Erdogan had a TV appearance that was broadcast simultaneously by 18 different TV stations, including the state broadcasting company, TRT. In contrast, his rival, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, was largely excluded from TRT—or covered unfairly—and did most of his communication through social media—most notably using iconic videos he recorded in his kitchen.

Sixteen ministers of his cabinet were nominated for the parliament, and they ran their campaigns with the full force of their ministries. However, the uneven playing field alone is not enough to explain the loss of the six-party opposition in the face of almost 50 percent inflation and an increasingly one-man rule that is failing to deliver in governance like it used to. Noteworthy is the fact that not only did Erdogan not lose, but his support seems to have remained solid over the past decade: In the presidential elections of 2014, 2018, and 2023, he got 51.8, 52.6, and 52.2 percent of the popular vote, respectively

An analysis of 680,000 smart TVs across Turkey revealed that in the fall of 2022, 89 percent of TVs that watched a show where Erdogan made an appearance did not tune into any show where an opposition leader was present. The same ratio for Kilicdaroglu was 33 percent. A disgruntled Justice and Development Party (AKP) supporter would not have a chance to hear what Kilicdaroglu had to say.

Clearly, yet not surprisingly, the Erdogan supporters had very little interest in what the opposition had to say. It was the conviction of the opposition and experts at large that the failing economy would render Erdogan supporters more amenable to opposition policies. Two findings seem to explain best why that was not the case.

First is the geographical divide that appeared in political inclinations after the election. In the rural parts of the country that represent roughly 20 percent of the population, Erdogan managed to get 65 percent of the popular vote against Kilicdaroglu’s 35 percent. In the remaining 80 percent that represents the urban parts, Kilicdaroglu surpassed Erdogan by getting 51 percent of the popular vote. In other words, in places where life is relatively simple and the increasing cost of living is not felt as ferociously, Erdogan performed much better.

Second is the unprecedented fiscal expansion that the government opted for in the lead-up to the election. The minimum wage was raised to $455 per month in December 2022, the highest real value since 2019. In addition, a bill eliminating age limits on retirement and offering early retirement to millions of citizens was ratified in the parliament.

Those who retired could be rehired by their current employers to enjoy a second salary, thereby significantly increasing monthly household income. Finally, the value of the U.S. dollar was kept below 20 lira at the expense of central bank reserves. Turkish people use the price of the dollar as a yardstick to measure the health of the economy, like Americans do with gas prices and Germans with inflation. As a result, economic sentiment turned positive. Perceived improvement was an illusion as it was caused by reckless fiscal expansion and not by resolving the root causes of macroeconomic vulnerabilities. The most notable illusion was a heavy discount on natural gas bills for households for the month of the election. Now that the party is over, the new government will have to pick up the bill. In our own polling at Turkiye Raporu, the share of respondents with a positive outlook of the economy surpassed the negative in March 2023. The improvement in consumer sentiment was well reflected in the polls prior to the election as support for the AKP.

The fiscal expansion indeed helped mitigate the discontent of Erdogan supporters. However, it was the polarizing identity politics that carried him over the 50 percent threshold into a third-term victory. Erdogan’s identity pitch had two main pillars. First was the rhetoric that suggested association of the opposition with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a listed terrorist organization. The pro-Kurdish HDP (rebranded as Green Left) not nominating a presidential candidate in support of Kilicdaroglu was presented as evidence. To this end, an altered video including PKK leaders in an opposition propaganda clip was shown at Erdogan’s Istanbul rally on May 7, a week before the first-round election. Even Erdogan accepted on national television that the video was altered. This was a first as far as Turkish political competition goes. It was done in the last week before the first round, and the opposition had no time to reverse the impact.

Second was the anti-LGBT, anti-Western, pro-conservative family values propaganda. Then-Interior Minister Suleyman Soylu went as far as to suggest that if the opposition won, the LGBT, which he portrayed as an organization, would allow for marriages between humans and animals. The opposition dismissed these as nonsense, although it should not have. The opposition should have recognized the misinformation trend earlier and focused on prebunking these claims.

These two pillars were supported by the achievements of the Turkish military-industrial complex that managed to produce the drones, aircraft carriers, and national tanks along with the national car project Togg. It did not help that the opposition appeared to be belittling these achievements during the campaign. These achievements were the promise of the new “Turkish century”—the overarching theme of Erdogan’s campaign.

The opposition is, of course, not without fault. The disorganized appearance of its leaders and a campaign that completely missed out on the rising nationalistic sentiment caused the disgruntled Erdogan supporters to stay on the other side of the aisle. The country was in bad shape, but they were told repeatedly that only Erdogan could put it back together. So much so that even in the earthquake zone, ravaged by the recent disasters, Erdogan dominated, although he proposed new houses to be built and sold, whereas Kilicdaroglu promised them to be built for free. The opposition did not manage to overcome the distrust created by the Erdogan campaign.

Having won the presidency and the majority in the parliament, Erdogan’s new government will face a number of challenges caused by poor economic management and the irresponsible fiscal pre-election expansion. The appointment of Mehmet Simsek, a former finance minister, to lead the economy potentially signals a change to rational economic policies. However, it remains to be seen how much leeway Erdogan will provide Simsek in the lead-up to the municipal elections. A tightening may not be in the books. Indeed, investors at home and abroad are weary. After all, they had seen signs of change with the appointment of Lutfi Elvan as head of the treasury and Naci Agbal as head of the central bank in hopes for normalization, only to see the two removed from duty abruptly back in 2021.

The opposition, on the other hand, now must reinvent itself and find ways to overcome the big split that for the past decade has kept it below the 50 percent threshold. The 48 percent it won is no small feat, but in an executive presidential system, it is simply not enough.

[allthebrazilianpolitics]

Lula pledges to raise minimum wage and income tax threshold

President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva on Thursday pledged to raise Brazil’s minimum wage by 1.38 percent to BRL 1,320 (USD 251) in May. He also promised to raise the income tax threshold by almost 39 percent, to twice the new minimum wage.

Lula told CNN Brasil anchor Daniela Lima that his administration will reinstate the rule by which the minimum wage is adjusted annually according to both inflation and GDP growth. The same rule was enforced during the Lula, Dilma Rousseff, and Michel Temer administrations to make sure minimum salaries would increase above inflation. The custom was struck down by Jair Bolsonaro between 2019 and 2022.

Raising the minimum wage and reinstating a new annual adjustment rule were among Lula’s campaign promises in 2022. Since taking office, he suggested that possibility on multiple occasions but had fallen short of giving himself a deadline until today.

Continue reading.

[cyypress]

hey yeah so as a few people have pointed out you are comparing the minimum wage to the average rent which is super disingenuous.

also according to forbes the average annual salary nationwide is $59,428. that’s a monthly take-home of about $4,950. they have average rent at $1,372. and yes the general rule of thumb is that your rent should be 30% of your monthly income, which means that the average rent is actually below the threshold (30% of $4,950 is $1,485, which is 27%)

this person made a great point:

so let’s look at the lower end in our states with the lowest income:

the minimum wage rates are $7.25 for MS, $11 in AR, and $8.75 in WV. if we look at the low end for these states we have the following rents for studio apartments; $640, $581, and $621 respectively (per rentdata.org). this would be 14-17% of monthly income, which is super low.

ALL of this data is assuming someone works full time, which is a huge assumption as i'm pretty sure only a third of americans work full time (and only a third of americans rent). unfortunately due to the housing market being booty, it's currently cheaper to rent than to buy a home.

let's be pessimistic in every regard and say that renters on both ends of the spectrum are spending 50% of their income on rent. this is obviously not ideal but WHY is rent so high? the simple answer is because there are people who are able to pay it. supply and demand, baby. people in my age group (gen Z and millennials) don't need houses, so we stick with apartments, even though historically renting was more expensive than owning a home in the long run; you are basically throwing money away as opposed to investing in something you can sell at a later time. there are more renters than there are rental units, which decreases the demand for houses, which in turn increases the price. so if someone were looking to rent a house, that is going to be a crazy number because of inflation. maintenance, mortgages, repairs, and taxes are all up for homeowners and landlords. not to mention LLs got fucked by covid eviction moratoriums. they are still making up for that. even if they wanted to be super generous and charge lower rents, they will be fucked in 6 months and either be forced to raise the rent or be bought out by someone who understands math.

yeah, i don’t have a closing statement or anything. sincerely, take an entry-level economics class.

sauce: [x] [x] [x] [x]

[datajournalismntu]

The Policy of Quasi-public Preschool：While Increasing Affordable Childcare Services, There May be a Risk of Overlooking Quality Regulation

By Xing-Hui Huang, Po-Ying Chan, Tzu-En Chou and Yun-Yin Chen

To address the issue of Taiwan's declining birthrate and reduce the childcare burden on parents, the Executive Yuan established the quasi-public preschool system in August 2018. 

Private preschools that meet six criteria—maximum tuition fees, minimum salaries for teaching staff, basic evaluations, land and building usage, quality of educational services, and administrative management—can transition into "quasi-public preschools" after passing an assessment by local governments.

To make the tuition cheaper for parents, the government covered the difference between the original private preschool fees and the reduced quasi-public preschool fees. Furthermore, each quasi-public preschool will receive an annual subsidy of approximately NT$1,000,000.

Following the establishment of the quasi-public preschool system in 2018, the number of quasi-public preschools in Taiwan has grown rapidly to almost 2000 preschools in 2023.

According to a survey conducted by the Child Welfare League Foundation (1), parents’ satisfaction score on quasi-public preschools is the lowest among four different types of preschools.

(1) The "2023 Taiwan Parenting Status Survey – Preschool Edition," conducted by the Taiwan Children’s Welfare Alliance, collected 1,532 valid responses through an online questionnaire distributed between March 16 and April 10, 2023. The survey targeted parents of children aged 0-6, focusing on their perspectives about their children’s preschools and the quasi-public preschool policy.

According to the survey, over 95% parents agree that quasi-public preschools’ quality should be supervised by the government, while less parents agree with the current quality of quasi-public preschools.

This indicates that, despite quasi-public preschools being under government contracts and receiving subsidies, many parents do not see this as a guarantee of quality and still  have concerns.

Compared to public and non-profit preschools, which undergo assessments every six months, quasi-public preschools face no further evaluations after being approved by local governments, while private preschools have none at all.

Although all types of preschools are required to undergo a basic evaluation every five years, such a lenient audit system has led to significant issues for quasi-public and private preschools.

Because the audits of private and quasi-public preschools are not as strict as those of public and non-profit preschools, among all penalty cases nationwide over the years, as much as 93%, or over 1,108 penalty cases, occurred in private or quasi-private preschools.

The 1,108 penalty cases from  private or quasi-private preschools can be broadly categorized into six types, with "illegal teacher employment" and "improper treatment of children" being the most prevalent.

Even though the government is promoting a policy requiring at least one teacher in classes for children aged five and above, a goal public preschools have mostly reached, quasi-public preschools still lag behind with the lowest teacher-student ratio. This indicates that quasi-public preschools still depend heavily on educare givers to provide services.

Under Taiwanese law, preschool educators consist of teachers, educare givers, and educare assistants. Teachers are required to graduate from university-level early childhood education programs, pass a qualification exam, complete teaching internships, and obtain a teaching certificate. Thus, they can be seen as most qualified in early childhood education with the highest entry threshold.

These issues underscore a key flaw in the "quasi-public preschool" policy: while tuition matches that of public preschools, other aspects lag significantly behind, making it hard for parents to feel assured.

Although quasi-public preschools benefit from generous government subsidies, their quality of care has yet to win parents' trust. To address this, local governments must oversee quasi-public preschools as rigorously as public ones and focus on raising their standards. Strict evaluations are essential, as parents prioritize their children's proper care over simply low-cost tuition.

[wavevisa001]

Germany Aims to Issue 40,000 Citizenship Applications in 2025 – Apply Now!

Table of Contents:

Introduction to Germany's Citizenship Goals for 2025

Key Highlights of Germany’s Citizenship Plan

Minimum Salary Requirement for Finland Residence Permit 2025

German Citizenship Trends for 2024-2025

The Impact of the New Citizenship Law (June 2024)

How Wave Visas Can Assist in Citizenship and Residence Permit Applications

Conclusion

Germany’s Citizenship Goals for 2025Germany is setting ambitious goals to grant citizenship to 40,000 applicants in 2025. The Head of the Naturalisation Department aims to process 3,000 applications monthly to meet this target. This initiative aligns with Germany's broader efforts to streamline its immigration and citizenship processes, creating opportunities for eligible foreign workers and residents.

Key Highlights of Germany’s Citizenship Plan

Germany plans to naturalize 40,000 citizens in 2025 by processing 3,000 applications per month.

Berlin alone welcomed 21,000 naturalized citizens in 2024, showcasing its dedication to integration.

The introduction of the New Citizenship Law in June 2024 has reduced the waiting period for applicants.

Applicants may now retain their original nationality under specific conditions.

Minimum Salary Requirement for Finland Residence Permit 2025In parallel, Finland has updated its residence permit requirements:

The minimum monthly salary for residence permit eligibility is set at €1,600 starting January 1, 2025.

This salary threshold applies to primary employment of foreign skilled workers from third countries.

This change emphasizes Finland’s commitment to attracting skilled workers while maintaining a balanced economic structure.

German Citizenship Trends for 2024-2025

Germany’s capital, Berlin, played a pivotal role by naturalizing 21,000 citizens in 2024.

The Department of State Office for Immigration (LEA) has allocated 40 additional employees to speed up citizenship applications.

These measures aim to meet the growing demand for naturalizations and align with Germany’s focus on retaining skilled foreign talent.

The Impact of the New Citizenship LawThe New Citizenship Law introduced in June 2024 has made acquiring German citizenship more accessible:

Applicants benefit from shortened processing times.

The law allows individuals to retain their original nationality, fostering inclusivity and diversity.

Reports indicate that 6,000 naturalization applications were received in the latter half of 2024 alone, showcasing the law’s impact.

How Wave Visas Can Assist YouWave Visas Immigration Consulting specializes in guiding applicants through complex immigration processes, including:

German citizenship applications under the New Citizenship Law.

Finnish residence permits adhering to the updated salary requirements.

Comprehensive support for document preparation and application submission.

Our team ensures your immigration journey is seamless and compliant with the latest regulations.

ConclusionGermany’s focus on streamlining citizenship processes and Finland’s updated residence permit requirements reflect their efforts to attract and integrate skilled workers. With the right guidance from Wave Visas, you can navigate these opportunities successfully and secure a brighter future in Europe.

Contact Wave Visas today and make your dream of European migration a reality!