Denial Because of Public Assistance

[Clara 0]

I was wondering if anyone has experienced or heard of a K-1 visa denial because the beneficiary was on public assistance?

[YuAndDan 153]

The beneficiary can be unemployed, public assistance is not a reason for denial.

Now if the petitioner (US Citizen) is on public assistance than can cause a problem with affidavit of support.

[payxibka 10,045]

I was wondering if anyone has experienced or heard of a K-1 visa denial because the beneficiary was on public assistance?

The USCIS/DOS is concerned that the benficiary will not become a public "charge" while they are present in the USA. Being on "public assistance" in there current situation (ie. while living in there own country) is not what they are concerned about.

[Jasman0717 9]

I've never heard of it.

[Ron/Sharon 0]

It would as I see it depends on the work history of the beneficiary and not exactly the fact that he is on public assistance. They may think he has fallen into a pattern of some kind where he works and then doesn't on a regular or semi-regular basis.

The following may be some of the things they have looked for in his BIO.

How old is the beneficiary?

How many positions has he held in his lifetime?

How long is the longest position he has held?

How long has he been on public assistance?

How often has he gone from job to public assistance?

[Jason-Sasha 1]

I would have to side with the government here. I for one wouldnt want to pay more tax dollars to aid in the living for immigrants. Legal or illegal. But if the petitioner can provide a stable living, i dont see why the beneficiary's income or support would matter here.

[Kajikit 65]

They couldn't care less about the work history of the beneficiary! I know because I was on Disability and hadn't worked in three years when we put in my K1 petition and it didn't raise a ripple in the system - they never even asked about it! The only time they might be concerned about the earnings potential of the beneficiary is if the petitioner is of limited means... (even then, they care more about how much they WILL be earning in the future than what they are now - DH had only just got a 'real' job when we applied and they never asked about that either!)

So, no, you're not going to be refused because your work history is patchy or you're on the dole... it's irrelevant.

[rebeccajo 14]

I've never heard of it.

Jim, I have. It wasn't here on VJ but it was in some research I did while we were processing (and I don't have the link). The affiants case was fairly extreme - they had been on all manner of public assistance (including cash payments) for some time and there was really no evidence of that scenario changing.

Damn, that's what I get for speed reading in the middle of the night.

As far as the beneficiary goes - no, I've not heard of that either.

Edited September 1, 2007 by rebeccajo

[MM_MS 0]

I completely agree. Our tax dollars would be a loan - first to the beneficiary but ultimately to the petitioner/sponsor. It's the petitioner/sponsor who is responsible for reimbursing every nickel the beneficiary receives(!).

The I134 is a legalling binding document with the U.S. government which stipulates - many people miss this - that the petitioner/sponsor(s) will reimburse the U.S. government for all assistance provided to the beneficiary over 40 quarters => TEN YEARS. And here's the kicker: even if/when the couple is divorced.

The petitioner/sponsor assumes full ownership that debt, not the beneficiary ... unless the beneficiary becomes a naturalized citizen, dies, or cancels the current petition. Imagine that after spending a huge amount of money, time, and emotional investment in a relationship that (for argument sake) ultimately ends in divorce. Followed by your having to reimburse the government for all support your "ex-" receives from the U.S. government ... up to ten years of disbursements. You're raising kids, have rent/mortgage payments, regular monthly bills, and now the repayment of your ex's government support checks.

I know, worst case scenario ... but it's not an unlikely scenario. A little food for thought.

I would have to side with the government here. I for one wouldnt want to pay more tax dollars to aid in the living for immigrants. Legal or illegal. But if the petitioner can provide a stable living, i dont see why the beneficiary's income or support would matter here.

[bszoom42 0]

The I134 is a legalling binding document with the U.S. government which stipulates - many people miss this - that the petitioner/sponsor(s) will reimburse the U.S. government for all assistance provided to the beneficiary over 40 quarters => TEN YEARS. And here's the kicker: even if/when the couple is divorced.

If my recollection is correct, the I-134 is not legally binding on the petitioner/sponsor; which is why the I-864 is filed later on. The I-864 is legally binding.

[bszoom42 0]

And here is the relevant USCIS reference to back my recollection up.

http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?...44da2d34e4dbff3

\ afm \ Adjudicator's Field Manual - Redacted Public Version \ Chapter 30 Nonimmigrants in General. \ 30.8 Affidavits of Support for Nonimmigrants.

Every nonimmigrant seeking admission or extension or change of status must satisfy the inspector or adjudicator that he or she is capable of maintaining status and will not become a public charge. In situations where the status sought involves employment, the income from the employment itself generally satisfies the support requirement. A separate affidavit of support or other evidence of financial resources is most commonly required for nonimmigrant students and for certain visitors for pleasure (e.g., eld erly and infirm visitors seeking a lengthy stay in the U.S.). An affidavit in such a situation may be filed on Form I-134 or it may be prepared on plain paper and signed. It should be accompanied by documentation, such as bank records, to corroborate the claims made on the affidavit.

Such affidavits, although helpful in judging financial ability, are not legally binding. Form I-134 may only be used for nonimmigrant cases. The affidavit of support used for immigrants is Form I-864, discussed separately in Chapter 20.

Relatives and sponsors of visa applicants abroad who inquire at a USCIS office concerning the submission of affidavits of support in behalf of such applicants shall not be referred to anyone outside the USCIS ; instead, Forms I-134 shall be furnished them. They shall be advised, however, that the Forms I-134 are furnished solely as a guide as to items generally required in affidavits of support (see notes to 22 CFR 41.91(a)(15) and 42.91(a)(15) in Volume 9--Visas, Foreign Affairs Manual). Forms I-134 are to be made available only for use in individual cases and are not to be distributed outside the USCIS .

[MM_MS 0]

Hmm. I've confused Form I-134 and Form I-864, which addresses the 40 quarters time period. The details in each document vary; however, the gist of each is that the petitioner/sponsor(s) are responsible for the support of the beneficiary. If the beneficiary is issued public assistance, the petitioner/sponsor(s) are required to reimburse the government for that support, and attorney fees if sued.

http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-864.pdf

Form I-134 (Rev. 07/14/06)

4. That this affidavit is made by me for the purpose of assuring the U.S. Government that the person(s) named in item (3) will not become a public charge in the United States.

5. That I am will and able to receive, maintain and support the person(s) named in item 3. That I am ready and willing to deposit a bond, if necessary, to guarantee that such person(s) will not become a public charge during his or her stay in the United States, or to guarantee that the above named person(s) will maintain his or her nonimmigrant status, if admitted temporarily and will depart to the expiration of his or her authorized stay in the United States.

6. That I understand this affidavit will be binding on me for a period of three (3) years after entry of the person(s) named in item (3) and that the information and documentation provided by me may be made available to the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Secretary of Agriculture, who may make it available to a public assistance agency.

Oath or Affirmation of Sponsor

I acknowledge that I have read Part III of the Instructions, Sponsor, and Alien Liability, and am aware of my responsibilities as a sponsor under the Social Security Act, as amended, adn the Food Stamp Act, as amended.

The I134 is a legalling binding document with the U.S. government which stipulates - many people miss this - that the petitioner/sponsor(s) will reimburse the U.S. government for all assistance provided to the beneficiary over 40 quarters => TEN YEARS. And here's the kicker: even if/when the couple is divorced.

If my recollection is correct, the I-134 is not legally binding on the petitioner/sponsor; which is why the I-864 is filed later on. The I-864 is legally binding.

[Minister 0]

I'm not sure of the circumstances, But I many have some relevant information. I think there is a hard line minimum income around $22,000 per year that must be met in order to sponsor someone with an I-134. The requirement is 125%(?) of the poverty level or something very similar to that. I don't know if public assistance can be counted towards that goal, but I doubt it. I think the purpose of the I-134 is to ensure that the immigrant fiance will not become a public charge.

But then, that's just my understanding and I am NOT a lawyer. I have heard about people meeting the I-134 requirement by showing savings and other asset information too, so that may be possible.

I hope this helps in some way.

[rebeccajo 14]

The I134 is not binding. There is nothing in the INA which makes it so - there is no law underpinning the document.

It is most often used by consulates to give some uniformity to decisions that are made. But it is not binding to repayment of use of public assistance in US law.