Out With The Old In With The New

[I'm Gone 60]

Old

RM 00203.500 Employment Authorization for Nonimmigrants:

http://policy.ssa.gov/poms.nsf/lnx/0100203500

New

RM 10211.420 Employment Authorization for Non-immigrants:

http://policy.ssa.gov/poms.nsf/lnx/0110211420

[Coleen 2]

Hi..

I have read this new RM 10211.420 Employment Authorization for Non-immigrants. As far as I understood, all beneficiaries that enter USA on K1 (Fiance visa) will be able to work without EAD/GC ? Please someone confirm this...

Thank you.

[HeatDeath 430]

Hi..

I have read this new RM 10211.420 Employment Authorization for Non-immigrants. As far as I understood, all beneficiaries that enter USA on K1 (Fiance visa) will be able to work without EAD/GC ? Please someone confirm this...

Thank you.

Definitely not. the inclusion of the K-1 in this list is an administrative sleight-of-hand designed to enable K-1 entrants to obtain SSNs so that they can marry in sates that (until a recent court decision) require(d) all persons getting married to have SSNs.

K-1 entrants can NOT work until they have a green card or EAD in their hand. But SSA regulations wouldn't allow K-1 entrants (who need(ed) a SSC to get married in some states) to get a SSC unless they were work authorized. So, for SSA purposes, K-1s became work authorized. It's a funny little bit of fiction that is only true inside the SSA office. Don't worry too much about it - it'll make you go all cross-eyed, just don't get confused and don't try to work until you have a green card or an EAD in your hand.

[Coleen 2]

Well..

I'm still in my home country, waiting for my medical and interview. But I have been to USA three years ago as an AuPair (J2 visa) and got my Social Security Card that says ''VALID FOR WORK ONLY WITH DHS AUTHORIZATION''. I really didn't understand that regulation back then and I'm still confused about it.. Now can anyone tell me what should I do when I get to USA? Get married and then change name on my SSC, wait for EAD and then go again and change this regulation that says ''VALID FOR WORK ONLY WITH DHS AUTHORIZATION'', OR should I skip the thing about changing my name on the card and wait for EAD and then change it all? It's really confusing..

Thanks.

[I'm Gone 60]

Definitely not. the inclusion of the K-1 in this list is an administrative sleight-of-hand designed to enable K-1 entrants to obtain SSNs so that they can marry in sates that (until a recent court decision) require(d) all persons getting married to have SSNs.

K-1 entrants can NOT work until they have a green card or EAD in their hand. But SSA regulations wouldn't allow K-1 entrants (who need(ed) a SSC to get married in some states) to get a SSC unless they were work authorized. So, for SSA purposes, K-1s became work authorized. It's a funny little bit of fiction that is only true inside the SSA office. Don't worry too much about it - it'll make you go all cross-eyed, just don't get confused and don't try to work until you have a green card or an EAD in your hand.

It had absolutely nothing to do with K-1s needing an SSN to get married.

Read the SSA OIG Report:

http://www.ssa.gov/oig/ADOBEPDF/A-08-07-17044.pdf

[I'm Gone 60]

Well..

I'm still in my home country, waiting for my medical and interview. But I have been to USA three years ago as an AuPair (J2 visa) and got my Social Security Card that says ''VALID FOR WORK ONLY WITH DHS AUTHORIZATION''. I really didn't understand that regulation back then and I'm still confused about it.. Now can anyone tell me what should I do when I get to USA? Get married and then change name on my SSC, wait for EAD and then go again and change this regulation that says ''VALID FOR WORK ONLY WITH DHS AUTHORIZATION'', OR should I skip the thing about changing my name on the card and wait for EAD and then change it all? It's really confusing..

SSNs and cards don't expire and that is the type of card you would be issued based on K-1 status, so you really don't need to do anything until you are married and if you are changing your name. Then you can apply to get your SSN record updated and issued a card in your new name.

Other than that there is nothing you need to do with SSA until you are a permanent resident, then you can go apply for an unrestricted SSN card.

Right now you have a restricted card that requires you to provide another document such as a Form I-766 EAD card as work authorization. Other than that the restriction does not affect the card or number.

Edited June 9, 2010 by I Quit

[HeatDeath 430]

It had absolutely nothing to do with K-1s needing an SSN to get married.

Read the SSA OIG Report:

http://www.ssa.gov/oig/ADOBEPDF/A-08-07-17044.pdf

Under §205©(2)(B)(i)(I) of the Social Security Act, SSA is required to assign SSNs "to

aliens at the time of their lawful admission to the United States either for permanent

residence or under other authority of law permitting them to engage in employment in

the United States. . . .” Because Federal law authorizes K-1 visa holders to work

incident to their visa status,4 K-1 visa holders are eligible for SSNs.

I suspect you are referring to this paragraph at the bottom of page 3 of the pdf. I couldn't find any other information that relates to the reason why K-1 holders are issued SSNs.

Assuming that is what you were referring to, this document provides very little information about why K-1 holders are issued SSNs, and certainly does not contradict my point. I am fully aware that K-1 holders are issued SSNs because SSA policy mandates so. And I am also fully aware that SSA policy is so written because of federal law authorizing K-1 holders to work. What I was referring to - the [former[ requirement of some states of marriage license applicants to possess SSNs - was the motivation for the aforementioned federal law. Unless I have missed something subtle,which I will be glad to have pointed out to me, nothing in this document seems to contradict this theory - that the initial motivation to legally (in SSA 205) declare K-1 holders work authorized was to facilitate the provision of SSN to K-1 holders whose state's required them for marriage licenses.

[I'm Gone 60]

I suspect you are referring to this paragraph at the bottom of page 3 of the pdf. I couldn't find any other information that relates to the reason why K-1 holders are issued SSNs.

Assuming that is what you were referring to, this document provides very little information about why K-1 holders are issued SSNs, and certainly does not contradict my point. I am fully aware that K-1 holders are issued SSNs because SSA policy mandates so. And I am also fully aware that SSA policy is so written because of federal law authorizing K-1 holders to work. What I was referring to - the [former[ requirement of some states of marriage license applicants to possess SSNs - was the motivation for the aforementioned federal law. Unless I have missed something subtle,which I will be glad to have pointed out to me, nothing in this document seems to contradict this theory - that the initial motivation to legally (in SSA 205) declare K-1 holders work authorized was to facilitate the provision of SSN to K-1 holders whose state's required them for marriage licenses.

You need to read a little closer

The Agency established its policy based on the Immigration and Naturalization Service’s, now DHS, guidance in 1998. At that time, DHS could not always process and issue an EAD to K-1 visa holders before their 90-day stay in the

United States expired."

That is the only reason SSA will assign an SSN based on K-1 status and just having an I-94. K-1s can apply for an EAD card in the A6 category and INS could not get them out to people before they very invalid.

Once again it has nothing to do with getting married.

[HeatDeath 430]

You need to read a little closer

The Agency established its policy based on the Immigration and Naturalization Service’s, now DHS, guidance in 1998. At that time, DHS could not always process and issue an EAD to K-1 visa holders before their 90-day stay in the

United States expired."

That is the only reason SSA will assign an SSN based on K-1 status and just having an I-94. K-1s can apply for an EAD card in the A6 category and INS could not get them out to people before they very invalid.

Once again it has nothing to do with getting married.

I'm afraid I still don't quite understand how that contradicts my point. The decision to allow a sole I-94 (as opposed to an EAD) to serve as sufficient documentation to get a SSN was a reasonable decision, based on a the combination of:

A ) a preexisting institutional desire to give K-1 holders SSNs, and

B ) an inconvenient contingent fact: that the normal documentation required for a SSN - the EAD - was usually unavailable.

The theory that I am advocating is the that preexisting institutional desire to give K-1 holders SSNs derives from the then-current circumstance that K-1 holders needed SSNs to get married [and thereby fulfill their visa conditions] in some states.

This document, while ably addressing the the origins of the decision to allow a solitary I-94 to serve as documentation, does not appear to discuss - let alone authoritatively state - the origin of the institutional desire to give K-1 holders SSNs. It certainly does not seem to contradict the theory that the institutional desire to give K-1 holders SSNs has its origin in the former requirement [by some states] for marriage license applicants to have SSNs.

Edited June 9, 2010 by HeatDeath

[Coleen 2]

SSNs and cards don't expire and that is the type of card you would be issued based on K-1 status, so you really don't need to do anything until you are married and if you are changing your name. Then you can apply to get your SSN record updated and issued a card in your new name.

Other than that there is nothing you need to do with SSA until you are a permanent resident, then you can go apply for an unrestricted SSN card.

Right now you have a restricted card that requires you to provide another document such as a Form I-766 EAD card as work authorization. Other than that the restriction does not affect the card or number.

Thanx very much, now I understand.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

I'm afraid I still don't quite understand how that contradicts my point. The decision to allow a sole I-94 (as opposed to an EAD) to serve as sufficient documentation to get a SSN was a reasonable decision, based on a the combination of:

A ) a preexisting institutional desire to give K-1 holders SSNs, and

B ) an inconvenient contingent fact: that the normal documentation required for a SSN - the EAD - was usually unavailable.

The theory that I am advocating is the that preexisting institutional desire to give K-1 holders SSNs derives from the then-current circumstance that K-1 holders needed SSNs to get married [and thereby fulfill their visa conditions] in some states.

This document, while ably addressing the the origins of the decision to allow a solitary I-94 to serve as documentation, does not appear to discuss - let alone authoritatively state - the origin of the institutional desire to give K-1 holders SSNs. It certainly does not seem to contradict the theory that the institutional desire to give K-1 holders SSNs has its origin in the former requirement [by some states] for marriage license applicants to have SSNs.

I think you are confused by the assertions of a couple of other Vj members that SS numbers are issued because of marriage license requirements.

The simple point is these members are confused.

[belluco86 3]

I concur with JohnnyQuest. You are confused as well as those members, if you read the article and open your mind up you will see that the reason why K1 is eligible for a SSN is that EAD would take the same amount of time it took the visa to expire. if the EAD had been issued on the same day you arrived then it would not be an issue.

[HeatDeath 430]

I'm pretty sure you're not understanding me.

It seems to me that the default case for K-1 visas would have been to have them be not able to get a SSN without an EAD. Since the EAD always shows up well after the I-94 expires, they would simply not be work authorized during the period of validity of their I-94. They would come in, get married, apply for AOS and an EAD, and they can apply for a SSN right after their EAD showed up. They would not be listed in an SSA or any other document as work authorized. That would have been easy, simple, and elegant.

However, according to the pdf, an inconvenient reality reared its head. It became obvious that it was virtually impossible to get a K-1 holder their EAD (and by extension, their SSN) before their I-94 expired. A major policy change was made to allow K-1 holders to use their I-94s alone to get a SSN, because this was the only way to get the K-1 holder an SSN before their I-94 expired.

The question is: why did they care? Why not just wait until the K-1 holder's EAD shows up, and let them apply for a SSN then? Why do/did K-1 holders need to have an SSN earlier? There doesn't appear, by your logic, to be any particularly compelling reason to give K-1 holders their SSNs earlier than the arrival of their EAD, so why bother in the first place?

Instead, what seems to have happened is that someone - USCIS, SSA, I don't know - decided that it was very important, for some reason - I don't know what - that K-1 holders be able to get an SSN during the validity period of their I-94. Why? What is this reason? Why is/was it so important [to somebody] that K-1 holders be able to get a SSN during the period of their I-94 validity? All of this weirdness in whether or not K-1 holders can get SSNs seems to the result of a huge effort to get K-1 holders an SSN before their I-94 expires. Why are they bothering, when getting K-1 holders their SSNs after the I-94 expiry, after the EAD arrives, would seem to work just as well, and eliminate the weird, easy-to-misinterpret [even by SSA clerks!], easy-to-misconstrue langauge about K-1 holders being work authorized?

The only reason I can think of off the top of my head is that the SSA may have a long standing and foundational regulation or law that absolutely forbids giving a SSN to anyone who does not have one of US citizenship, a green card, or a valid I-94, and that issuing a SSN to someone who is between the expiry of their I-94 and the awarding of their green card would be absolutely unthinkable and/or require changes to federal law, and that tying the regulations in knots was seen as a preferable option to attempting to rewrite the Social Security Act or other related federal legislation. Is this, in fact, the case?

[You will notice I am scrupulously avoiding mentioning any requirement of a SSN for marriage here. I accept that that is probably not the reason why the government has decided to make significant regulatory changes to ensure that K-1 holders can get a SSN prior to their I-94 expiry date. But a reason certainly exists! The above-posted pdf does not contain it. What is it?]

I'm pretty sure you're not understanding me.

It seems to me that the default case for K-1 visas would have been to have them be not able to get a SSN without an EAD. Since the EAD always shows up well after the I-94 expires, they would simply not be work authorized during the period of validity of their I-94. They would come in, get married, apply for AOS and an EAD, and they can apply for a SSN right after their EAD showed up. They would not be listed in an SSA or any other document as work authorized. That would have been easy, simple, and elegant.

However, according to the pdf, an inconvenient reality reared its head. It became obvious that it was virtually impossible to get a K-1 holder their EAD (and by extension, their SSN) before their I-94 expired. A major policy change was made to allow K-1 holders to use their I-94s alone to get a SSN, because this was the only way to get the K-1 holder an SSN before their I-94 expired.

The question is: why did they care? Why not just wait until the K-1 holder's EAD shows up, and let them apply for a SSN then? Why do/did K-1 holders need to have an SSN earlier? There doesn't appear, by your logic, to be any particularly compelling reason to give K-1 holders their SSNs earlier than the arrival of their EAD, so why bother in the first place?

Instead, what seems to have happened is that someone - USCIS, SSA, I don't know - decided that it was very important, for some reason - I don't know what - that K-1 holders be able to get an SSN during the validity period of their I-94. Why? What is this reason? Why is/was it so important [to somebody] that K-1 holders be able to get a SSN during the period of their I-94 validity? All of this weirdness in whether or not K-1 holders can get SSNs seems to the result of a huge effort to get K-1 holders an SSN before their I-94 expires. Why are they bothering, when getting K-1 holders their SSNs after the I-94 expiry, after the EAD arrives, would seem to work just as well, and eliminate the weird, easy-to-misinterpret [even by SSA clerks!], easy-to-misconstrue langauge about K-1 holders being work authorized?

The only reason I can think of off the top of my head is that the SSA may have a long standing and foundational regulation or law that absolutely forbids giving a SSN to anyone who does not have one of US citizenship, a green card, or a valid I-94, and that issuing a SSN to someone who is between the expiry of their I-94 and the awarding of their green card would be absolutely unthinkable and/or require changes to federal law, and that tying the regulations in knots was seen as a preferable option to attempting to rewrite the Social Security Act or other related federal legislation. Is this, in fact, the case?

[You will notice I am scrupulously avoiding mentioning any requirement of a SSN for marriage here. I accept that that is probably not the reason why the government has decided to make significant regulatory changes to ensure that K-1 holders can get a SSN prior to their I-94 expiry date. But a reason certainly exists! The above-posted pdf does not contain it. What is it?]

I'm pretty sure you're not understanding me.

It seems to me that the default case for K-1 visas would have been to have them be not able to get a SSN without an EAD. Since the EAD always shows up well after the I-94 expires, they would simply not be work authorized during the period of validity of their I-94. They would come in, get married, apply for AOS and an EAD, and they can apply for a SSN right after their EAD showed up. They would not be listed in an SSA or any other document as work authorized. That would have been easy, simple, and elegant.

However, according to the pdf, an inconvenient reality reared its head. It became obvious that it was virtually impossible to get a K-1 holder their EAD (and by extension, their SSN) before their I-94 expired. A major policy change was made to allow K-1 holders to use their I-94s alone to get a SSN, because this was the only way to get the K-1 holder an SSN before their I-94 expired.

The question is: why did they care? Why not just wait until the K-1 holder's EAD shows up, and let them apply for a SSN then? Why do/did K-1 holders need to have an SSN earlier? There doesn't appear, by your logic, to be any particularly compelling reason to give K-1 holders their SSNs earlier than the arrival of their EAD, so why bother in the first place?

Instead, what seems to have happened is that someone - USCIS, SSA, I don't know - decided that it was very important, for some reason - I don't know what - that K-1 holders be able to get an SSN during the validity period of their I-94. Why? What is this reason? Why is/was it so important [to somebody] that K-1 holders be able to get a SSN during the period of their I-94 validity? All of this weirdness in whether or not K-1 holders can get SSNs seems to the result of a huge effort to get K-1 holders an SSN before their I-94 expires. Why are they bothering, when getting K-1 holders their SSNs after the I-94 expiry, after the EAD arrives, would seem to work just as well, and eliminate the weird, easy-to-misinterpret [even by SSA clerks!], easy-to-misconstrue langauge about K-1 holders being work authorized?

The only reason I can think of off the top of my head is that the SSA may have a long standing and foundational regulation or law that absolutely forbids giving a SSN to anyone who does not have one of US citizenship, a green card, or a valid I-94, and that issuing a SSN to someone who is between the expiry of their I-94 and the awarding of their green card would be absolutely unthinkable and/or require changes to federal law, and that tying the regulations in knots was seen as a preferable option to attempting to rewrite the Social Security Act or other related federal legislation. Is this, in fact, the case?

[You will notice I am scrupulously avoiding mentioning any requirement of a SSN for marriage here. I accept that that is probably not the reason why the government has decided to make significant regulatory changes to ensure that K-1 holders can get a SSN prior to their I-94 expiry date. But a reason certainly exists! The above-posted pdf does not contain it. What is it?]

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

I Quit posted an official commentary (in the last couple of months I believe so feel free to research his posts)from the SS Administration explaining the issuance of numbers to K1.

Substance I took from that memo is that the SSA is not really keen on the concept and is issuing numbers only because of the visa classification itself.

Found it for you:

http://www.ssa.gov/oig/ADOBEPDF/audittxt/A-08-07-17044.htm

Edited June 9, 2010 by JohnnyQuest

[HeatDeath 430]

I Quit posted an official commentary (in the last couple of months I believe so feel free to research his posts)from the SS Administration explaining the issuance of numbers to K1.

Substance I took from that memo is that the SSA is not really keen on the concept and is issuing numbers only because of the visa classification itself.

Found it for you:

http://www.ssa.gov/oig/ADOBEPDF/audittxt/A-08-07-17044.htm

Sigh. Are you even reading my posts? I GET that! I understand that SSA is only issuing numbers because of the visa classification itself! The pdf made that perfectly clear, and I CAN in fact READ!

What I want to know, and what the marriage-theory is an attempted explanation of, is WHY the visa classification itself allows for SSNs in the first place!!!! It doesn't have to, and there doesn't appear to be any particular reason for it to, but the SSA has gone WAY out of their way to make it possible, so WHY? Don't tell me I'm confused. Tell me why K-1 entrants need SSNs during the I-94 period of validity in the first place!

Is this thing even on?