The Questions HR Should Ask Before Hiring a U.S. Visa Lawyer

In possibly the most important assignment of your career in human resources, you’ve been tasked with facilitating the transfer of one of the company’s key employees to the U.S. to head up the new division.  

Over the past months, while the commercial agreements were being set in place and the employee selected, retaining legal counsel was of necessity deferred. Now, you’ve been informed, immigration has now become the make-or-break aspect of the deal.

From the numerous executive meetings in which you’ve been involved over the past months, you realize that cost comparisons should not be the major factor to consider in your search for the right law firm. Timing, meanwhile, is of high consequence, because there is urgency about getting the chosen employee on location.

Your preliminary online inquiries showed listings of U.S. legal firms, UK immigration firms, even ‘global mobility consultancies.’

You’re uncertain what questions to ask as you sift through the possibilities and determine who knows the work.

Before hiring a U.S. visa lawyer, HR should ask who will give the legal advice, which U.S. jurisdiction admits them, who will handle the matter day to day, which visa routes have been ruled out and why, what risks exist in the case, what the fee includes, what could increase the cost, and how the firm will keep HR informed.

The twelve questions to ask your U.S. immigration lawyer:

Who is advising us? The assumption that anyone selling U.S. immigration help is qualified to give U.S. immigration advice is not safe. Checking it out takes all of 90 seconds.

Question 1: “Which U.S. state bar are you admitted to?”

Why it matters: U.S. immigration law is federal. A lawyer handling a federal U.S. immigration matter may be admitted and in good standing in any U.S. state, the District of Columbia, or another qualifying U.S. jurisdiction; they do not have to be admitted in the state where your U.S. office is located. What matters is that the person giving you the legal advice is properly authorised to practise and is in good standing.

In the UK, the Immigration Advice Authority (IAA), formerly the Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner, regulates immigration advisers dealing with UK immigration matters. IAA registration is a UK immigration credential. It does not establish that the adviser is authorised or qualified to practise U.S. immigration law.

A strong answer sounds like: “I am admitted to practise law in Illinois and I am in good standing. Here is my registration information so you can verify my status with the relevant Illinois attorney regulator.”

A weak answer sounds like: “Our team includes U.S.-qualified attorneys”. “We are fully regulated in the UK.”(Neither statement answers the question, and the second answers a different question entirely.)  

Question 2: “Are you a law firm or an immigration consultancy?”

Why it matters: Both models exist, but the label alone does not tell you who is giving the U.S. legal advice. Ask who the responsible lawyer is, which U.S. jurisdiction admits them, whether they are in good standing, and who will formally represent you in any filing that requires representation. U.S. immigration law also permits certain Department of Justice-accredited representatives to provide immigration legal services through recognised nonprofit organisations, so the important question is who is legally authorised to advise and represent you.

Form G-28, Notice of Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Accredited Representative, is the form used by an eligible attorney or accredited representative to enter an appearance in a matter before USCIS, ICE or CBP, as applicable.

A strong answer sounds like: “We are a law firm. The lawyer responsible for your matter is admitted to practise in [jurisdiction] and is in good standing. Where we represent you before USCIS, the appropriate attorney will file Form G-28 as your representative of record.”

A weak answer sounds like: “We are a global immigration services provider.” That does not yet answer the question. Ask who will give the legal advice and what professional authorisation they hold.

Question 3: “Who will do the work on our file, and who do I call when something goes wrong?”

Why it matters: A partner sells the matter and someone else runs it. That is normal and often correct, because it keeps the cost down. What is not acceptable is not knowing who that person is. A recurring frustration is chasing an anonymous inbox for an update needed for a leadership meeting the next morning.

A strong answer includes a named person, a named supervising lawyer, and a stated escalation route. The answer also addresses what happens when that named person is out on leave.

A weak answer sounds like: “The team will look after you.” “You’ll have a dedicated case manager.” (with no name attached).   

• Do they know our case, or just their categories? Listing visa categories is easy; anyone can do it from a website. Ruling categories out requires knowing the rules well enough to apply them to facts.

Question 4: “Based on what I have told you, which visa categories are you ruling out and why?”

Why it matters: This question cannot be answered from a brochure. It requires the lawyer to hold your corporate structure, your employee’s history, and the intended U.S. activity in mind at once, then to reason to a negative.  Exclusion is harder than inclusion, so the answer tells you a great deal in seconds.

A strong answer sounds like: “An individual L-1 petition is not available yet because the employee has only seven months of qualifying employment abroad with the group. The employee generally needs at least one continuous year of full-time qualifying employment abroad with the petitioner or a qualifying parent, branch, affiliate or subsidiary within the relevant three-year period. If the qualifying employment continues, the employee may meet the one-year requirement in May.”

A weak answer sounds like: “We would probably look at an L-1 or an H-1B.” That is the list from the homepage; it is not analysis, and the answer has not touched a single fact you gave them. 

Question 5: “What is the weak point in our case, and what would you do about it?”

Why it matters: Every case has one: a newly incorporated U.S. entity, a job title that does not match the duties, a role that is hard to describe as management, an employee with a prior refusal, a worksite that belongs to a client rather than to you.

A lawyer who tells you there is no weak point has either not looked or has decided that reassurance sells better than accuracy.

A strong answer names the risk, pairing that with what they would do about it (honest rather than reassuring).

A weak answer sounds like: “You have nothing to worry about; this is very straightforward.”

Be wary of anyone guaranteeing approval. No lawyer controls the government’s decision, and absolute promises about the outcome can be misleading. A careful lawyer should explain the strengths, weaknesses and uncertainty in the case rather than promise a result.

Question 6: “Where does this case get decided, and what can you do at that stage?”

Why it matters:  People assume a U.S. visa is one process. It is usually two, run by two different agencies, and the split determines what your lawyer can and cannot control.

For petition-based cases such as H-1B, O-1 and individual L-1 petitions, a U.S. petitioner generally files Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) first. If USCIS approves the petition and the employee needs a visa to travel to the United States, the employee then applies separately for the visa through a U.S. embassy or consulate. Blanket L-1 cases follow a different procedure and use Form I-129S.

For an E visa application made through a U.S. embassy or consulate abroad, the applicant completes Form DS-160. Form DS-156E is also required for E-1 Treaty Trader applicants and for E-1 or E-2 executives, managers and essential employees. An E-2 principal treaty investor generally completes the DS-160 without a DS-156E.

At the interview itself, the decision belongs to the consular officer. Whether an attorney may attend a visa interview depends on the policy of the particular U.S. embassy or consulate. The lawyer should be able to explain what the relevant post permits and what representation will look like if counsel cannot attend the interview itself.

A strong answer includes an explanation of the two-stage split, telling you which stage your case turns on, and giving a straight response about what representation means: thorough preparation, correspondence with the section, and briefing the applicant (rather than advocacy in the interview room).

A weak answer implies they “will be there on the day to argue it”, or that they have a relationship at the embassy that will help. Neither is how consular adjudication works. 

• What will this cost? You’re concerned about telling your CFO one number and having to come back later with a bigger one.

Question 7: “What is the fixed fee, and what precisely is inside it?”

Why it matters: Most reputable firms in this market quote a fixed legal fee for a defined piece of work after an initial consultation, because once the facts are known, the scope is knowable. What varies wildly is what sits inside the fee. Ask whether it covers the initial strategy, preparation of the petition or application, supporting legal submissions, liaison with the relevant company entities, interview preparation where applicable, and whether responding to a Request for Evidence (RFE) or other additional government request is included or billed separately.

A strong answer includes a written scope, itemized, produced before work begins.

A weak answer sounds like: “It depends on the case.” True, but after a consultation, if they still cannot scope it, they should be able to say precisely which facts are missing.

Question 8: “What would cause the fee to increase, and will you tell me before it does?”

Why it matters: This is the question that prevents the conversation you dread from happening. Scope changes are normal in immigration work. Surprises are not. You want the triggers named in advance, plus a commitment to tell you about them before the work is done, not on the invoice.

A strong answer includes named triggers, a Request for Evidence, a change in the employee’s role, salary, or worksite after filing, adding dependents, a refusal and the need for re-application, a restructure of the U.S. entity mid-case. The answer should include a stated commitment to seek approval before exceeding scope.

A weak answer sounds like: “We will let you know.” 

Question 9: “What will we pay that is not your fee?”

Why it matters: The legal fee may be only one part of the total budget. Depending on the visa route and the engagement, additional costs can include government filing or visa application fees, premium processing where available, VAT, translations and courier charges. Ask which costs are included in the quoted fee and which will be paid separately.

A strong answer includes a full list of cost categories, a note on which are optional, and a caution that U.S. government fees change. For eligible Form I-129 cases, premium processing generally requires USCIS to take specified adjudicative action within 15 business days. That action may be an approval or denial, but it can also be a Request for Evidence, Notice of Intent to Deny or certain other agency action. Premium processing speeds USCIS action; it does not improve the merits of the case or guarantee approval.

A weak answer quotes a legal fee in isolation, with outside costs mentioned only when they arrive.

• Will they make my job easier?

 Question 10: “What do you need from us, and by when?” 

Why it matters: A firm that has done this many times can hand you a document schedule at the outset. A firm that has not will request documents in waves, each wave arriving after you thought you were finished. That pattern is the single biggest source of the chaos you are trying to avoid, and it is entirely predictable from the first call.

A strong answer gives you a written document list with clear owners and dates: what HR needs to provide, what comes from the employee, what is needed from the U.S. entity, and when each item is required. It should also tell you which documents are critical before work can begin and which can follow later.

Question 11: “How often will you update me, and what happens if I hear nothing?”

Why it matters: Long silences in an immigration matter are usually normal.  Agree on the frequency of updates in advance, and the silence stops being frightening.

A strong answer includes a stated frequency, a named person, a response-time commitment, and an explicit statement that they will tell you when nothing has happened.

A weak answer sounds like: “We’ll be in touch when there’s news.” In a process with eight-week silent stretches, that guarantees you will be chasing.

Question 12: “Will you give me something I can take to my CFO and my CEO?”

Why it matters: This is the question almost nobody asks, yet it is the one that matters most to you. You’re buying the ability to walk into a leadership meeting and explain, accurately and precisely, what route the company is taking, what it costs, what could go wrong, and why this particular law firm was chosen. Most of what a lawyer sends you is written for you, not for the people you have to persuade.

A strong answer sounds like: “Yes. After the consultation, we will give you a written summary you can use internally, setting out the recommended route, relevant alternatives and why they were ruled out, the expected process and timing, costs, key risks and what happens next.”

A weak answer sounds like they are surprised you asked. 

Three answers that should give you pause

These answers are signs that the conversation has not yet gone deep enough: 

“Yes, we can definitely get this done.”

No one can promise a U.S. visa. On petition-based routes, USCIS decides the petitions.  On any route requiring a visa, a consular officer decides the visa application, and that decision is not open to ordinary appeal.

Certainty offered before anyone has examined your corporate structure is not an expertise signal.

“Let’s just do an H-1B.” 

H-1B may be the right visa category, but many first-time H-1B cases are subject to the annual numerical cap and the cap registration process. Other H-1B cases may be cap-exempt. That means the lawyer needs to establish whether the employer and proposed filing are cap-subject before treating H-1B as a visa that can be started on demand.

If it is the first answer, and the only answer offered, before anyone has looked at whether your two entities are related for immigration purposes, you are being sold a category rather than advised on your case. 

“We can start straight away.”

Speed and sequence are not the same thing. Moving too quickly before the corporate relationship, employee history, proposed role, worksite and other relevant facts are properly established can create avoidable gaps or inconsistencies in the filing. Those gaps can increase the risk of a Request for Evidence or other adverse action. Careful preparation cannot eliminate every RFE, but it can reduce problems that were avoidable from the outset.

This post is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. If you require further assistance or advice relating to the above, please contact janice@flynnhodkinson.com.