Federal poverty guidelines

[Audy_Rob 26]

The terms co-sponsor and joint sponsor are often used interchangeably here on VJ when discussing the K visa petition process.

For the purposes of the K visa most consulates follow the standards set in the I-864 as the K visa recipient will adjust status in the future and the I-864 will be used at that time.

The asset ratio is 3:1 for the K1 and the spouse visa. See page 9 of the I-864 instructions as well as this I-864 FAQ link from the State Dept. website for confirmation.

The I-134 has no provisions for joint sponsorship while the I-864 does. A reading of the instructions tells us that. That being said, both pushbrk and Audy_Rob assert correctly that most consulates will accept a "co-sponsor" when the I-134 is used.

Pushbrk is simply stating that there is no provision for a co-sponsor or joint sponsor in the I-134 instructions.

You are absolutely correct in that the I-134 has no provisions for a joint sponsor nor co-sponsor. The I-864 has no provisions for a co-sponsor, only a joint sponsor. Why does pushbrk insist there is no such thing as a joint sponsor and there is such a thing as a co-sponsor.

Next using AhnMap's same reasoning as no provisions for a co-cponsor or joint sponsor under the I-134, there is no provision for the use of assets under the I-134 with a given ratio. I do not see in the I-134 where it says the ratio is Assets are 3 times the value of the incom stream. Is that in the I-134 document ?

[SuicideBlonde 0]

Nik+Heather,

I bought a duplex in September of 2007 for $113000. I was able to send the whole sum from my Belgian bank account to an American one, directly, without a problem. I bought the house using two personal loans (not possible to get a mortgage for foreign property in Belgium), one of which I will be paying for another 2.5 years, and the other one for another 3.5 years. I have to pay $800 for each of them on a monthly basis but as far as the US government is concerned I own the house outright, without any mortgages in the US.

I looked into self-sponsorship previously and it seems that only a few consulates allow it and even then only for select cases. The one in London is known for that, for instance, but I could not find anything about the one in Dublin.

If self-sponsorship is not possible (at this time I can only assume it is not, until proven otherwise) then the only possible course of action is to put the necessary funds directly into my fiancee's bank account. Can't we just provide a letter with an explanation to accompany the I-134, and perhaps also a notarized copy of my house deed as well a statement from my property rental agency, just to show that I would have liked to self-sponsor myself as well as to drive the point home that with the rental income coming my way there is no way I could become a burden to the state. If I have my own house, which will be rented out, and I put $30000 into her bank account... What more could they possibly expect?

[SuicideBlonde 0]

[...]

Next using AhnMap's same reasoning as no provisions for a co-cponsor or joint sponsor under the I-134, there is no provision for the use of assets under the I-134 with a given ratio. I do not see in the I-134 where it says the ratio is Assets are 3 times the value of the incom stream. Is that in the I-134 document ?

"What Cash Value of Assets is Needed?

To be counted, the cash value of assets must equal five times the difference between the sponsor's income and 125 percent of the poverty line for the household size.

For example, a petitioner/sponsor with a household size of four and an income of $18,000 would need assets equal to five times the difference between his/her income and the income required for a family of four at the current federal poverty guidelines level. He/she would also need to show evidence of mortgages, liens, and liabilities against the assets.

The cash value of assets required is different for these sponsors:

Sponsors of immediate relative spouses and children of U.S. citizens must only show assets in the amount of three times the difference between the poverty guideline and actual household income.

Sponsors of foreign orphans who will acquire citizenship after admission to the United States need only prove assets in the amount of the difference between the poverty guideline and actual household income."

Immediate relative spouses... I hope that refers to my fiancee and I?

Thanks, Anh map.

Edited April 20, 2010 by SuicideBlonde

[Bobby+Umit 161]

You are absolutely correct in that the I-134 has no provisions for a joint sponsor nor co-sponsor. The I-864 has no provisions for a co-sponsor, only a joint sponsor. Why does pushbrk insist there is no such thing as a joint sponsor and there is such a thing as a co-sponsor.

Next using AhnMap's same reasoning as no provisions for a co-cponsor or joint sponsor under the I-134, there is no provision for the use of assets under the I-134 with a given ratio. I do not see in the I-134 where it says the ratio is Assets are 3 times the value of the incom stream. Is that in the I-134 document ?

It's not written in the I-134 instructions, indeed, there is are no real guidelines in the FAM/AFM for the 134.

In my convo's with the Ankara embassy and my USCIS buddy, they indicated to me that they follow the rules for the 864 when they consider the 134. However, some require more than the 100% of the poverty level that the I-134 states it uses.

So if you go by the 864 FAQ posted - and the AFM -

it's 5 x for using assets to make up the difference, unless the person is an immediate relative;

in the AFM - this is what they say are "immediate relatives"

(1) Immediate relatives, including:

(a) Spouse of a U.S. citizen;

(b) Parent of a U.S. citizen;

© Child of a U.S. citizen (including adopted orphans unless the orphan would become a citizen upon lawful admission as an immigrant pursuant to section 320 of the Act); (See 9 FAM

40.41 N3.4-1); and

(d) K nonimmigrants adjusting to lawful permanent resident (LPR) status

(source)

So K visas would use 3X the amount - as people have pointed out.

Again - some embassies play hardball, and they do not consider K's relatives (yet) even though it's in their AFM - they still want 5X the difference (similar to the 125% scenario).

(in most of the cases I have run across, the larger the difference, the more assets they want to see).

I believe some of their "wiggle room" is due to the definition of immediate relatives:

Immediate Relative: Spouse, widow(er) and unmarried children under the age of 21 of an American citizen. A parent is an immediate relative if the American citizen is 21 years of age or older. There are no numerical limits to immigration of immediate relatives.

Source

K-1's are not married yet (not a spouse) - so they do not fall under this definition - however, the AFM just states K-non-immigrants so...

Confusing - isn't it? I am sure in my earlier postings, I was mistaken in going with the latter take - K-1's need 5X - there are cases where that happened, but more researching on my part (and reading the AFM) shows it's suppose to be 3x for K-1's.

Same goes for co-sponsor/joint sponsor - means the basically the same thing, someone other than the primary sponsor using their income/assets to cover the poverty level needed.

For what it's worth - Ankara calls people other than the primary sponsor for the I-134 "co-sponsors"

(sorry for any confusion I may have caused)

Edited April 21, 2010 by Bobby+Umit

[Anh map 2,098]

You are absolutely correct in that the I-134 has no provisions for a joint sponsor nor co-sponsor. The I-864 has no provisions for a co-sponsor, only a joint sponsor. Why does pushbrk insist there is no such thing as a joint sponsor and there is such a thing as a co-sponsor.

Next using AhnMap's same reasoning as no provisions for a co-cponsor or joint sponsor under the I-134, there is no provision for the use of assets under the I-134 with a given ratio. I do not see in the I-134 where it says the ratio is Assets are 3 times the value of the incom stream. Is that in the I-134 document ?

Welcome to the gray area of K1 visas. The non-immigrant visa that is often treated as an immigrant visa.

For example look at the US Consulate Amsterdam website and you will see Finace(e) visas listed under Immigrant visas. http://amsterdam.usconsulate.gov/immigrant_visas.html Even the State Dept. is playing both sides of the street with the classification.

My assertion is based on the preponderance of posts here on VJ dealing with the I-134 and K1/K3 visas. It's always best to consult the embassy/consulate directly to learn what they expect. That way there are fewer surprises.

[SuicideBlonde 0]

Welcome to the gray area of K1 visas. The non-immigrant visa that is often treated as an immigrant visa.

For example look at the US Consulate Amsterdam website and you will see Finace(e) visas listed under Immigrant visas. http://amsterdam.usconsulate.gov/immigrant_visas.html Even the State Dept. is playing both sides of the street with the classification.

My assertion is based on the preponderance of posts here on VJ dealing with the I-134 and K1/K3 visas. It's always best to consult the embassy/consulate directly to learn what they expect. That way there are fewer surprises.

Thanks for that link. I found the following on the state.gov website:

"Should K-1 fiancé(e) visa applicants use the I-864 or the I-134?

Since fiancé(e)s are nonimmigrant visa applicants, they should use the I-134. They will need to submit an I-864 to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) when they adjust status to conditional immigrant in the United States after they are married.

Do the same income requirements apply to all immigrant visa applicants even if they use the I-134?

No. The 125 percent minimum income requirement, the most recent year's tax return and other requirements only apply when an I-864 is needed. Applicants using the I-134 will need to show that their sponsor's income is 100 percent of federal poverty guidelines as required under Section 212(a)(4) of the INA."

So, at least officially, we only need 100% of federal poverty guidelines. In either case, 100% of federal poverty guidelines with 1/5th of cash assets or 125% of federal poverty guidelines with 1/3rd of cash assets we should be okay with $30000 in the bank. I will try to get into touch with the embassy just the same though. The problem is that they only offer a fully automated voice system when you call them, which then guides you to an e-mail address if you take the visa option, but they do not write you back when you write them. I guess I will just have to continue to try and try again.

[trailmix 77]

Your fiancee just opened an account, and you're putting in 3x her annual income. Just think about that from a 3rd party perspective for a moment. Surely you can see how fishy it might seem to someone who knows neither one of you?

Furthermore, I do not believe that you can transfer more than $10k into the US without declaring it and paying taxes. Please research this.

Yes, and that is why, when using assets like that, they request that you bring 12 months worth of bank statements with you.

NikandHeather - regarding the more than 10k transfer, this is incorrect. While you do have to declare bringing in cash of 10k or greater, there is no such requirement on an individual level when transferring funds - I mean the bank may report it, but - it is not something to worry about.

Also, paying tax on it is not required either, so maybe you should research that a bit.

It's to stop money laundering - which has nothing to do with taxes.

Edited April 22, 2010 by trailmix

[SuicideBlonde 0]

Well, I managed to find an alternate phone number on this page: <http://dublin.usembassy.gov/vis.html>. They charged me $20 and then told me that they could not provide any information regarding (non-)immigrant visas. So much for the Dublin Visa Information Center! They did refer me directly to the embassy and gave me their e-mail address, which is dublincons@state.gov. I had previously e-mailed dublinvisainfounit@state.gov, the e-mail address they state when you work your way through their automated telephone system, but never got a reply. I sent them a lengthy e-mail, which includes a summary of everything I have said here, got it all out in the open, and asked them what would be the best course of action for us. The automated reply said that our e-mail is being processed and that we can expect a reply in two business days.

Regarding self-sponsorship: we wanted to go for a K-3 last year but I did not have the $30000 at the time and I was told that I would not be able to use the house as an asset because it is not something that is readily convertible to cash. I assume the same would be true in the case of self-sponsorship, i.e. I am better off finishing that second apartment so I will have $1400 to $1500 a month in rental income? I figure that that, in and of itself, should be enough to get us through the K-3 process if we should not be able to overcome the hurdles in the K-1 process? What is this CR1 I have seen mentioned elsewhere?

[SuicideBlonde 0]

A brief status update: I eventually did manage to get through to the embassy and they told me that we would need a co-sponsor for our K-1 visa application, as my fiancee does not meet the minimum poverty guidelines for a family of two. This was confirmed by an immigration lawyer today. Both pointed out that while self-sponsorship is allowed in some cases by the Department of State, it usually does not fly. Hence, we will either have to find a co-sponsor or eventually go a different route. My fiancee and I are both aware of the K-3 visa but are there any other options?