It takes a lot of trust (on both sides) and complexity to establish a working relationship across two jurisdictions, if at all possible.

For instance, what labor laws apply? And who enforces them? And how, given parties in two different countries?

Does the company want to subject itself to some arbitrary country’s tax man or labor law enforcer prosecutions? Does the employee want to work under effectively zero labor protection? Possibly, but rarely.

It’s not even always possible, it’s very complicated to work remotely in France, for instance. The state cracks down on one person one client companies, and EoRs beyond being impractical (as they must adhere to drastic labor laws compared to the US) are in a legal gray zone.

>For instance, what labor laws apply?

The laws of the worker's locality is generally how it works. In the film industry, a production company based in LA might do a shoot in NYC- they have to follow NYC's labor laws since that's where the workers are and the work is being done.

The workers at the home base in LA have the LA laws applied to them.

>And who enforces them?

The local government.

Exactly, and those answers are why it’s a hurdle and a leap of faith.

The company has to adhere to labor laws in foreign countries (most likely plural if this is a general policy). That’s quite the overhead and opens you up to legal trouble.

The employee has to trust their government can prosecute or otherwise coerce a foreign company with no entity on their territory (otherwise they’d just get hired normally through the subsidiary).

LA and NJ remain two states of a common country and I'm sure that simplifies a lot of things.

Although none of this applies if the company is a multinational with offices in the employee’s country. But then that is offshoring rather than remote work.

Cultural and timezone alignment. We’ve been here before with the outsourcing wave 20 years ago. The answers are still the same, remote is just a job perk.

Before Covid-19, when you asked tech folks about outsourcing to central American countries (or even within the US to places with lower wages than the bay area), the answer would always be "nothing can replace in-person meetings around a real whiteboard"

I'm sure they'd still prefer that. However, a team on another continent can become a black box organizationally in a way even a remote individual probably can't. Or at least the size of the effect is much less.

If they work remotely from the other side of the ocean then they are free to leave and find another job easily without risking their green card

If you bring them to America you've basically created a worker who is dependent on staying employed with you in order to keep their place

Taxes probably. And you can bring them in if necessary occasionally.

It's a lot less accounting work to have most of your workers in the same state. Imagine single workers or small groups in many different countries.

Saving half in salaries might make up for some additional payroll complexity.

* NDA, non-compete, and other legal protections

* same timezone

* easy to verify who is actually working on your system -- on the other side of a B2B VPN you never really know...

The place I work has embraced foreign workers as employees. the person gets a company laptop with company email. The contracted staff get to use a azure desktop and no contractor identified email.