"Well-established" criterion for applying for EP?

[jpatokal]

My one-man consultancy may soon find itself in the position of hiring its first full-time employee, and I already know who -- but he needs an EP. MOM's website states:

- The applicant must be sponsored by a well-established Singapore-registered company, normally the applicant's employer.

Any idea how "well-established" is interpreted? My Pte Ltd has been up and running two years now. I've posted only one set of financial results to ACRA, but they were pretty healthy, and the paperwork for the second FY will be out soon.

My plan is to do the paperwork for the EP, contracts etc myself, but if forum members can recommend someone who could advise on the tax/legal aspects of how to eg. best structure heavily commission-based compensation, I'd appreciate it.

[Strong Eagle]

I think you'll have no problem. My company (private limited) was formed in June, 2004 and we spnsored EP's less than 6 months later without issue.

I think the 'well established' clause is in there to weed out those who would avoid filing for an Entrepass by forming a company and then filing for an EP with no plan, no record, no nothing. This clearly aint you.

Applying for an EP is truly a piece of cake. We paid to have a series of contracts drawn up (employment, work for hire, master services agreement, etc). I am glad we spent this money. An attorney out of HK, known to us for many years. Email or PM me for his contact info.

[ksl]

I am presently giving a contract to an Indian, that must show MOM, he has enough contracts in hand, for 3 months or 15k, to apply for a new employee on EP from India, he must convince them of the speciality of the guy, over the Singaporean, which doesn't seem to be a problem. The guy also wants his family over here, so the minimum i believe is 2500$ a month for the EP to be successful. That's all I can tell you at this time, until it's approved or not!

[jpatokal]

OK, thanks for the info. SE, you've got PM