PLEASE HELP US! K-1 QUESTIONS

[mox 298]

well then lets just give way with the K visas

I don't understand your meaning. As I understand it, the OP now intends to file DCF.

[Sinergy 3]

well then lets just give way with the K visas

I don't understand your meaning. As I understand it, the OP now intends to file DCF.

it was for a remark about "anyone can come in on a tourist visa and just get married"

[pushbrk 13,084]

well then lets just give way with the K visas

I don't understand your meaning. As I understand it, the OP now intends to file DCF.

it was for a remark about "anyone can come in on a tourist visa and just get married"

The "remark" is the truth. A K1 visa is for people who intend BOTH to marry and Immigrate during the same US entry period. K1 visa holders must marry the petitioner within 90 days AND at least file to adjust status to permanent resident (begin immigrating) before they are allowed to exit and enter the US again.

People who simply wish to marry and leave, followed by immigrating later or never immigrating at all, would not use a K1 visa. They'd use a visitor visa of some kind, the VWP or Canadian visitor privilege.

K1 visa are not "marriage visas". The US doesn't require a visa to marry like the UK or possilbly some other countries do. K1 has a very specific purpose above and beyond "marriage".

[mox 298]

it was for a remark about "anyone can come in on a tourist visa and just get married"

Hmm. I'm not sure if you don't know that this is legal (entering on a non-immigrant visa with plans to marry), or if you personally don't agree that it should be legal. If you don't know that it's legal, well...it's legal. The only restriction (on a non-immigration visa) is that the non-USC cannot have entered the country with the intent to immigrate. Marrying in and of itself is not intent to immigrate, and if the non-USC then leaves the country, it's no problem. In fact, the opposite happens all the time (USC marries in the non-USC's country and returns to the US alone), which is why we have K-3 and IR-1/CR-1. The reason that the OP is being advised to keep mum about the marriage is because it's an unnecessary red flag to the POE. The POE cannot possibly know that there is no intent for fraud, and it's very hard to prove there's no fraud, so why even bring it up? It's like telling a police officer who's pulled you over for a routine traffic stop that you had a glass of wine at lunch 5 hours earlier. Why invite the trouble?

If it's that you don't agree that marriage should be allowed on a non-immigrant visa, that's a whole 'nuther issue.

Edited February 2, 2009 by mox

[English Muffin 59]

Sinergy, why don't you just admit that you are wrong and apologize to everyone? You really are talking a lot of cr@p in this thread.

[payxibka 10,047]

well then lets just give way with the K visas

I don't understand your meaning. As I understand it, the OP now intends to file DCF.

it was for a remark about "anyone can come in on a tourist visa and just get married"

The only problem is that anyone can... destination weddings is quite a tourism business not only around the world but in the USA as well...

[morocco4ever 63]

What I have learned for this thread. Withholding information is not necessarily lying, and is moral.

Example:

I have a business. I make $50,000.00 in cash sells, the remaining in checks. If I claim the money received in checks, but withhold the information on the cash sales, this is neither lying nor immoral.

I am also sure that if the officer at the POE knew you were withholding this information as well, as long as you have an answer, it would be perfectly acceptable to him/her as well.

I am sure glad I have VJ to come to keep me in check.

Then you learned poorly.

If you are asked to state revenue or income it's dishonest to omit any revenue or income.

If you are asked for a detailed itinerary of your US visit and you omit "marriage" as an itinerary item, that's dishonest.

If you are asked what you do for a living and you answer, "I'm in sales." but don't mention (insert least favorite product or service here) that's honest.

If you are asked "purpose of visit?" and you provide a general answer like "visiting friends and family" and don't mention that for one hour you'll be attending your own wedding, that's just as honest.

If as an answer to the same question, you give the same answer but omit, "visiting an illegal brothel" or "going to watch a dog fight" are on your itinerary, that's honest too even though those activities would be illegal.

Entering the US to get married is legal if you also leave before your granted stay expires. Giving answers that avoid additional questions that could cause problems even though your intentions are legal, is "honest".

Nobody has suggested anybody lie. On the contrary, the direct statement was, "general truth, no lies".

Okay, so I learn poorly. So let's see if I can get this straight now.

Omitting income to the IRS...bad, very bad.

Omitting information of your true intentions to coming to the US...very good.

So another example then.

If I want to sleep with my boss, if we go to dinner first for a business meeting, and then head to the hotel afterwards then all I need to tell my husband is that I had a business meeting. Basic information, right?

I think I am getting the hang of this now.

I don't know what has happened to people's integrity these days. I guess I am one of the few that was raised to be honest. And my idea of honesty is to give the REAL reason for your visit, not skirt around the issue, which is what you are suggesting. If it is nothing illegal then why does anyone feel the need to hide it?

[mox 298]

I don't know what has happened to people's integrity these days. I guess I am one of the few that was raised to be honest. And my idea of honesty is to give the REAL reason for your visit, not skirt around the issue, which is what you are suggesting. If it is nothing illegal then why does anyone feel the need to hide it?

It's been explained to you why. Stop being obtuse and reason it out.

[pushbrk 13,084]

What I have learned for this thread. Withholding information is not necessarily lying, and is moral.

Example:

I have a business. I make $50,000.00 in cash sells, the remaining in checks. If I claim the money received in checks, but withhold the information on the cash sales, this is neither lying nor immoral.

I am also sure that if the officer at the POE knew you were withholding this information as well, as long as you have an answer, it would be perfectly acceptable to him/her as well.

I am sure glad I have VJ to come to keep me in check.

Then you learned poorly.

If you are asked to state revenue or income it's dishonest to omit any revenue or income.

If you are asked for a detailed itinerary of your US visit and you omit "marriage" as an itinerary item, that's dishonest.

If you are asked what you do for a living and you answer, "I'm in sales." but don't mention (insert least favorite product or service here) that's honest.

If you are asked "purpose of visit?" and you provide a general answer like "visiting friends and family" and don't mention that for one hour you'll be attending your own wedding, that's just as honest.

If as an answer to the same question, you give the same answer but omit, "visiting an illegal brothel" or "going to watch a dog fight" are on your itinerary, that's honest too even though those activities would be illegal.

Entering the US to get married is legal if you also leave before your granted stay expires. Giving answers that avoid additional questions that could cause problems even though your intentions are legal, is "honest".

Nobody has suggested anybody lie. On the contrary, the direct statement was, "general truth, no lies".

If it is nothing illegal then why does anyone feel the need to hide it?

This question has already been aptly answered multiple times in this thread. It's to give an honest answer to avoid an unnecessary problem or delay when you know your plans are entirely legal.

I liked somebody else's earlier comment about stamping the wrong date on an I-94. The CBP agent that handled my wife's K3 entry stamped the I-94 with August 39 and didn't collect the case file in the brown envelope. We're not always dealing with the sharpest tacks at the POE. Some are actually as confused as Sinergy about whether it's ok to marry without a fiance visa. Avoiding problems without lying is a useful skill in the hands of prudent honest people.

[morocco4ever 63]

Like I stated, if there is nothing shady or illegal why hide the true intentions? I don't care what any of you say, that is my take on it. I am as free to my opinion as you are, and bottom line this is opinions not facts. You are free to believe as you do, but it really does make me doubt many of the posters integrity. The OP is free to do as they choose as well. Nuff said.

[*julez* 124]

What's most upsetting about this thread is that accurate information was provided very early on in this thread, and yet there are two posters who are intent on trying to discredit that information by derailing this thread with misinformation, coupled with a healthy dose of fearmongering.

Let's face it, the only reason this is happening is because some people just don't like pushbrk. Heck, I don't really like the guy. BUT, in this case his advice was spot on.

It IS perfectly legal to enter the US on the VWP or Tourist Visa, for the purpose of marriage, so long as there is no intent to immigrate. Furthermore, offering advice to not lie, but speak the truth in general is not wrong, nor a violation of TOS. The OP was never once told to lie.

I think it's time for you two naysayers to take the roadshow somewhere else. You're clearly adding nothing of value to this thread.

[pushbrk 13,084]

Like I stated, if there is nothing shady or illegal why hide the true intentions? I don't care what any of you say, that is my take on it. I am as free to my opinion as you are, and bottom line this is opinions not facts. You are free to believe as you do, but it really does make me doubt many of the posters integrity. The OP is free to do as they choose as well. Nuff said.

As we each are "as free to our opinions" as the next poster, I'll decide when I've said enough. Your adultry analogy is a poor one. One more to the point would be, you're at the mall having lunch and buying a surprise gift for your wife that she might consider too extravagant and that you'll disclose at the appropriate time anyway. When you take her call and she asks why you're at the mall, do you tell her about both the lunch and the gift or just the lunch? If just the lunch, should your wife doubt your integrity?

[Kirsten UK 2]

OK, so what happens after he arrives on VW or B1, gets married, goes home and then when they later apply to go back to the States its discovered he got married on a trip he said was a holiday? I only ask to balance this debate...I have had personal experience, as I'm sure many others have, of being grilled and treated like a criminal at POE for my exact purpose of visit. Are you sure in advising them to be economical with the truth that you aren't endangering their future plans?

[pushbrk 13,084]

OK, so what happens after he arrives on VW or B1, gets married, goes home and then when they later apply to go back to the States its discovered he got married on a trip he said was a holiday? I only ask to balance this debate...I have had personal experience, as I'm sure many others have, of being grilled and treated like a criminal at POE for my exact purpose of visit. Are you sure in advising them to be economical with the truth that you aren't endangering their future plans?

Nothing untoward would result. Yes, I'm sure. As long as the foreigner doesn't overstay, the fact that they married while visiting is of no more significance than that they visited a library or went to the movies because no special permission or prior disclosure is required for any of those activities.

The US is not the UK. In the UK, you wouldn't be able to accomplish the marriage at all without the appropriate visa. I presume there's a good reason for this, probably some old law conferring rights on a UK citizen's spouse, that predates immigration laws.

Edited February 2, 2009 by pushbrk

[English Muffin 59]

Like I stated, if there is nothing shady or illegal why hide the true intentions? I don't care what any of you say, that is my take on it. I am as free to my opinion as you are, and bottom line this is opinions not facts. You are free to believe as you do, but it really does make me doubt many of the posters integrity. The OP is free to do as they choose as well. Nuff said.

It's a good job for the OP that all that matters are the rules of Immigration and not your puritanical morals. It doesn't matter what YOU think, it's what CBP thinks that matters.