Question about i-864a

[jandk 6]

Hello, there are many posts that are in regards to the i-864a. I have a specific question in regards to how NVC looks at the income portion of the co-sponsor as well as the sponsors income.

When the NVC recieves both i-864 from me as well as i-864a from my co sponsor. at that time if my income is not sufficient enough for their poverty guidelines, are they just looking at my co-sponsors income, and throwing mine to the side?

The household size is and will be:

myself, step father, mother, and my underage brother, my 6year old daughter, and soon, my wife will add to the mix here.

so household of 6. my income alone is at 26500 and his is 32900. So, approx 59400 annually, combined. According to the 2009 guidelines household of 6 is 36912(125% already figured into).

So would my step father(Co-sponsor) need around 37k annually to co-sponsor?

[Bobby+Umit 161]

If your using an I-864A, your cosponsor is basically stating they are allowing you access to their income level to make the poverty level needed.

Carefully read the instructions for the form, your co-sponsor would only count the people they are responsible for (like dependants, spouse, immigrants sponsored).

They would not count USC's if they are not responsible for them. (from what you posted - they would not count you or daugther - just his wife, your wife, and your brother (and himself)).

[jandk 6]

If your using an I-864A, your cosponsor is basically stating they are allowing you access to their income level to make the poverty level needed.

Carefully read the instructions for the form, your co-sponsor would only count the people they are responsible for (like dependants, spouse, immigrants sponsored).

They would not count USC's if they are not responsible for them. (from what you posted - they would not count you or daugther - just his wife, your wife, and your brother (and himself)).

Thanks for the info, like always . I would've assumed that was how it was. Just on the edge about the forms and making sure my ducks are in order to prevent that "further delay"