	Introduction

Four major principles currently underlie U.S. policy for admitting lawful permanent residents (LPRs): reunifying families, admitting individuals with needed skills, providing humanitarian assistance, and diversifying immigrant flows by country of origin. Origin-country diversity occurs primarily through the Diversity Immigrant Visa. Employment-based immigrants enter the United States through one of five preference categories, each with its own eligibility requirements and numerical limitations and, in some cases, different application processes. In addition to the numerical limits imposed upon each preference category, employment-based immigrants face a per-country ceiling, or "cap," that limits the number of immigrants from any single country of origin to 7% of the annual limit for each of the five preference categories. Some assert that the current numerical limits on employment-based LPRs are not working in the national economic interest and potentially lead to exploitation of foreign workers who are waiting to acquire LPR status. The Per-country Ceiling

The INA further specifies a "per-country ceiling," or "cap," limiting the number of family-sponsored preference immigrants and the number of employment-based immigrants from any single country to 7% of the limit in each preference category. While some prospective employment-based immigrants can self-petition, most require U.S. employers to petition on their behalf. DOS is also responsible for the allocation, enumeration, and assignment of all numerically limited "visa numbers" or slots, regardless of where prospective immigrants reside. The final stage in the employment-based immigration process is an interview with either a DOS consular official for foreign nationals residing abroad or a USCIS adjudicator for foreign nationals residing in the United States. In FY2017, these 137,855 employment-based immigrants represented 12% of the 1,127,167 foreign nationals who received LPR status. In FY2017, for example, 82% of employment-based LPRs adjusted to LPR status from within the United States; only 18% acquired LPR status as new arrivals from abroad. While the six distinct groups of petitions and applications discussed here illustrate the pools of prospective employment-based immigrants at different stages of administrative processing, only two pools represent applicants who are limited from advancing because of the INA's numerical limits. Those two pools (the third and the fourth) include those with approved employment-based immigrant petitions who are either waiting overseas to obtain a visa or waiting in the United States to adjust their status. Arguments In Favor

Those who favor raising or eliminating the employment-based per-country ceiling argue that the current employment-based immigration system makes prospective employment-based immigrants wait for excessively long periods to acquire LPR status. If the per-country ceiling is eliminated and the current queue of pending petitions and visas is processed, proponents argue, employers would have no incentive to sponsor employment-based immigrants from any one country over others except based on conventional labor market criteria. From a national interest perspective, many have argued that current circumstances discourage skilled foreign workers from countries such as India from seeking employment and immigration sponsorship in the United States. If Congress eliminated the per-country ceiling for employment-based immigrants, many expect that Indian and Chinese nationals would dominate the flow of new employment-based LPRs for as many years as needed to clear out the accumulated queue of prospective immigrants from those countries. For example, shorter wait times for LPR status might actually incentivize greater numbers of nationals from India, China, and the Philippines to seek employment-based LPR status.
The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) specifies a complex set of categories and numerical limits for admitting lawful permanent residents (LPRs) to the United States that includes economic priorities among the admission criteria. These priorities are addressed primarily through the employment-based immigration system, which consists of five preference categories. Each preference category has specific eligibility criteria; numerical limits; and, in some cases, distinct application processes. The INA allocates 140,000 visas annually for all five employment-based LPR categories, roughly 12% of the 1.1 million LPRs admitted in FY2017. The INA further limits each immigrant-sending country to an annual maximum of 7% of all employment-based LPR admissions, known as the per-country ceiling, or "cap."
Prospective employment-based immigrants follow two administrative processing trajectories depending on whether they apply from overseas as "new arrivals" seeking LPR status or from within the United States seeking to adjust to LPR status from a temporary status that they currently possess. While some prospective employment-based immigrants can self-petition, most require U.S. employers to petition on their behalf. In both cases, the Department of State (DOS) is responsible for allocating the correct number of employment-based immigrant "visa numbers" or slots, according to numerical limits and the per-country ceiling specified in the INA.
This report reviews the employment-based immigration process by examining six pools of pending petitions and applications, representing prospective employment-based immigrants and any accompanying family members at different stages of the LPR process. While four of these pools represent administrative processing queues, two result from the INA's numerical limitations on employment-based immigration and the per-country ceiling.
These latter two pools of foreign nationals, who have been approved as employment-based immigrants but must wait for statutorily limited visa numbers, totaled in excess of 900,000 as of mid-2018. Most originate from India, followed by China and the Philippines.
Some employers maintain that they continue to need skilled foreign workers to remain internationally competitive and to keep their firms in the United States. Proponents of increasing employment-based immigration levels argue that it is vital for economic growth. Opponents cite the lack of compelling evidence of labor shortages and argue that the presence of foreign workers can negatively impact wages and working conditions in the United States.
With this statutory and economic backdrop, the policy option of revising or eliminating the per-country ceiling on employment-based LPRs has been proposed repeatedly in Congress. Some argue that eliminating the per-country ceiling would increase the flow of high-skilled immigrants from countries such as India and China, who are often employed in the U.S. technology sector, without increasing the total annual admission of employment-based LPRs. Currently, nationals from India in particular, and to a lesser extent China and the Philippines, face lengthy queues and inordinately long waits to receive LPR status. Many of those waiting for employment-based LPR status are already employed in the United States on temporary visas, a potentially exploitative situation that some argue incentivizes immigrant-sponsoring employers to continue to recruit foreign nationals primarily from these countries for temporary employment. Others counter that the statutory per-country ceiling restrains the dominance of a handful of employment-based immigrant-sending countries and preserves the diversity of immigrant flows.