K-1 Petitioner Not Employed but with Sufficient Assets

[KT and Xyrena 4]

My US citizen fiance's K-1 petition is currently under initial review by the USCIS. I am concerned that he is currently unemployed (by choice as this is his sabbatical year) but he had a great earnings history ($100K+ p.a.) as well as future earning potential. He has assets that are just above 5x the poverty line for a household of 2. I have enough assets to combine with his and I understand that my current income will not be considered since I won't continue to have it until after we are married or I obtain my PR because my current job is in Manila and I have to give it up to move to the US. I also have a strong earning potential of $70K+ as I have worked in the US in the recent five years. My guy does not want to get a co-sponsor and is confident that we will be approved. I'm honestly not and would rather be sure. Given this situation and if I put this together to the consular officer, would I stand a chance?

Has there been an instance that your petitioner solely relied on assets and was approved?

Thank you.

[Ironman140 45]

solely relied on assets and was approved? Thank you.

I'm new and far from an expert, but I don't think you will have a problem if your showing a history of earning that kind of money.

[Tim/Mav 305]

My US citizen fiance's K-1 petition is currently under initial review by the USCIS. I am concerned that he is currently unemployed (by choice as this is his sabbatical year) but he had a great earnings history ($100K+ p.a.) as well as future earning potential. He has assets that are just above 5x the poverty line for a household of 2. I have enough assets to combine with his and I understand that my current income will not be considered since I won't continue to have it until after we are married or I obtain my PR because my current job is in Manila and I have to give it up to move to the US. I also have a strong earning potential of $70K+ as I have worked in the US in the recent five years. My guy does not want to get a co-sponsor and is confident that we will be approved. I'm honestly not and would rather be sure. Given this situation and if I put this together to the consular officer, would I stand a chance?

Has there been an instance that your petitioner solely relied on assets and was approved?

Thank you.

Where Are Senior Members when we need a Answer to something like this? MY GUESS IS ! (Guess)

There are NO Financial Requirements to File a Petition except you Pay Homeland Security a Fee. The I-129F is just a Form, it ONLY conducts a background on the Petitioner and Beneficiary.

AFTER Your NOA2 Approval then thats when the Financial Requirements become IMPORTANT at the Interview In Manila.

Since you have No Timeline I would assume your finacee be prepared to produce 2010 Tax documents for your Interview.

Though it it Not Counted as Income, The Consular will be looking at you for anticipated income making opportunities in the States.

I think.... (Think) Your Future husband is correct about not to worry if all the above is true. GOOD LUCK AT THE INTERVIEW.

[iampatricias 17]

Also, it's my understanding co-sponsors are almost never allowed in Manila for K1 visas.

[sjr09 155]

My US citizen fiance's K-1 petition is currently under initial review by the USCIS. I am concerned that he is currently unemployed (by choice as this is his sabbatical year) but he had a great earnings history ($100K+ p.a.) as well as future earning potential. He has assets that are just above 5x the poverty line for a household of 2. I have enough assets to combine with his and I understand that my current income will not be considered since I won't continue to have it until after we are married or I obtain my PR because my current job is in Manila and I have to give it up to move to the US. I also have a strong earning potential of $70K+ as I have worked in the US in the recent five years. My guy does not want to get a co-sponsor and is confident that we will be approved. I'm honestly not and would rather be sure. Given this situation and if I put this together to the consular officer, would I stand a chance?

Has there been an instance that your petitioner solely relied on assets and was approved?

Thank you.

Sabbatical year, as in the biblical ordinance?

[pushbrk 12,883]

My US citizen fiance's K-1 petition is currently under initial review by the USCIS. I am concerned that he is currently unemployed (by choice as this is his sabbatical year) but he had a great earnings history ($100K+ p.a.) as well as future earning potential. He has assets that are just above 5x the poverty line for a household of 2. I have enough assets to combine with his and I understand that my current income will not be considered since I won't continue to have it until after we are married or I obtain my PR because my current job is in Manila and I have to give it up to move to the US. I also have a strong earning potential of $70K+ as I have worked in the US in the recent five years. My guy does not want to get a co-sponsor and is confident that we will be approved. I'm honestly not and would rather be sure. Given this situation and if I put this together to the consular officer, would I stand a chance?

Has there been an instance that your petitioner solely relied on assets and was approved?

Thank you.

First, the financial documents are provided at the interview stage. Yes, assets alone can carry the day but it depends on what kind of assets. If "investments" or "savings" sure. If most of the assets consist of equity in his primary residence, then not so good. Prior earnings and a job to return to would help as well. What kind of assets are we talking about?

[KT and Xyrena 4]

First, the financial documents are provided at the interview stage. Yes, assets alone can carry the day but it depends on what kind of assets. If "investments" or "savings" sure. If most of the assets consist of equity in his primary residence, then not so good. Prior earnings and a job to return to would help as well. What kind of assets are we talking about?

Oh yes - thank you - these are mostly cash reserves, savings, stocks and 401K. That's the other thing - Though 401K, he can withdraw this anytime when necessary and he will. And we both know that its withdrawal will cost money - subject to income tax and penalty and that is being considered. He has 2 real property which book values (market values-mortgages) offset each other (gain in TX property less upside down in WA property) and while he will show it on the affidavit, we will not count on it.

[pushbrk 12,883]

Oh yes - thank you - these are mostly cash reserves, savings, stocks and 401K. That's the other thing - Though 401K, he can withdraw this anytime when necessary and he will. And we both know that its withdrawal will cost money - subject to income tax and penalty and that is being considered. He has 2 real property which book values (market values-mortgages) offset each other (gain in TX property less upside down in WA property) and while he will show it on the affidavit, we will not count on it.

The 401k will get a major discount consideration as well because of tax and penalties. Count on only about 60% of a 401k being considered. If there's no net asset in the two real estate properties, you can just leave them out instead of getting them appraised.

[KT and Xyrena 4]

The 401k will get a major discount consideration as well because of tax and penalties. Count on only about 60% of a 401k being considered. If there's no net asset in the two real estate properties, you can just leave them out instead of getting them appraised.

Thank you for your inputs. We actually thought of counting on 70% of the 401K but I guess more conservative the better. Also I'd really not want to show the property on the affidavit however I might be questioned why not include it since we will disclose that we will live in the WA house when we come back. So you think they will not consider a listing of recent market values of surrounding real estate that is only generated by a real estate agent vs actual appraisals?

[pushbrk 12,883]

Thank you for your inputs. We actually thought of counting on 70% of the 401K but I guess more conservative the better. Also I'd really not want to show the property on the affidavit however I might be questioned why not include it since we will disclose that we will live in the WA house when we come back. So you think they will not consider a listing of recent market values of surrounding real estate that is only generated by a real estate agent vs actual appraisals?

They might consider market values from a real estate agent but the instructions say to provide an appraisal AND a mortgage statement. Remember that it's an affidavit of support, not a financial statement. You can leave any section blank that you desire but if you put any real property, you need to list and document all of it properly.

[Tahoma 2,292]

I've only been on this board for a little over two years but, during that time, I've tried to follow member's income issues at the U.S. Embassy Manila. I can't remember ever reading about a beneficiary being approved for a visa by the USEM where the petitioner had no current sustained income and qualified on assets alone. On the other hand, I've never read about a case at the USEM where the beneficiary was denied because the petitioner tried to qualify using only assets. If I were in your fiancé's shoes, I wouldn't be so confident and I wouldn't take any chances because the route he's taking is not very common.

Instead, I would submit a complete financial picture by including appraisals and mortgage info. In my opinion, the benefit of showing the consular officer that I'm a homeowner outweigh any disadvantages.

I would also attempt to use a cosponsor. The USEM doesn't always accept them, but I would try it because I would not want to leave any stone unturned on such an important occasion. At the very least, attempting to submit the cosponsor's documents at the interview will leave a positive impression on the consular officer, and will show the consular officer that you will have a cosponsor if and when you need one for adjusting your status. I have even seen two or three instances where a consular officer at the USEM has accepted a cosponsor's I-864 rather than an I-134.

One of those intangibles that I've seen make a difference at the USEM is the beneficiary's education, work history, and earnings potential in the U.S. You should submit a short letter at your interview outlining this issue.

I also believe it would help a lot if your petitioner attended the interview with you. I have read about cases at the USEM where that made the difference for those with income issues. I believe it's more difficult on a personal level for a consular officer at the USEM to deny a visa for financial reasons if the petitioner is at the interview. It also insures that the petitioner can make their best financial case and not have to rely solely on the beneficiary to do so.

Those are just some thoughts...I hope someone who has tried to use only assets at the USEM will chime in. Maybe you will get more responses to your question if you posted in the Philippines forum.

[KT and Xyrena 4]

I've only been on this board for a little over two years but, during that time, I've tried to follow member's income issues at the U.S. Embassy Manila. I can't remember ever reading about a beneficiary being approved for a visa by the USEM where the petitioner had no current sustained income and qualified on assets alone. On the other hand, I've never read about a case at the USEM where the beneficiary was denied because the petitioner tried to qualify using only assets. If I were in your fiancé's shoes, I wouldn't be so confident and I wouldn't take any chances because the route he's taking is not very common.

Instead, I would submit a complete financial picture by including appraisals and mortgage info. In my opinion, the benefit of showing the consular officer that I'm a homeowner outweigh any disadvantages.

I would also attempt to use a cosponsor. The USEM doesn't always accept them, but I would try it because I would not want to leave any stone unturned on such an important occasion. At the very least, attempting to submit the cosponsor's documents at the interview will leave a positive impression on the consular officer, and will show the consular officer that you will have a cosponsor if and when you need one for adjusting your status. I have even seen two or three instances where a consular officer at the USEM has accepted a cosponsor's I-864 rather than an I-134.

One of those intangibles that I've seen make a difference at the USEM is the beneficiary's education, work history, and earnings potential in the U.S. You should submit a short letter at your interview outlining this issue.

I also believe it would help a lot if your petitioner attended the interview with you. I have read about cases at the USEM where that made the difference for those with income issues. I believe it's more difficult on a personal level for a consular officer at the USEM to deny a visa for financial reasons if the petitioner is at the interview. It also insures that the petitioner can make their best financial case and not have to rely solely on the beneficiary to do so.

Those are just some thoughts...I hope someone who has tried to use only assets at the USEM will chime in. Maybe you will get more responses to your question if you posted in the Philippines forum.

Thanks for the inputs. I agree for the most part and you are right about the property. Even if we do not show it on the affidavit of support, there is some rental income on his tax returns so it will still show that he is a homeowner (just trying to avoid getting appraisals!) I'm thinking twice about him being on the interview though. I have read from some forums that the consular officers are normally not happy to see the petitioner around.

Tried to post on the Philippines forum, will see.

[Tahoma 2,292]

I'm thinking twice about him being on the interview though. I have read from some forums that the consular officers are normally not happy to see the petitioner around.

I have only read that it helps to have the petitioner at the interview.

For example, VJ member bmagno 23 is happy that he attended the interview. It is the reason his fiancée was approved.

Which forums have you been reading?

[91mk2 0]

I have no real work history. I can get a sponsor but i'd like to do it on my own. I was reading somehting about a BOND on the support affadavit. Is there such a thing like putting up a bong instead of dealing with a co sponsor???

[BrentR 0]

Is there such a thing like putting up a bong instead of dealing with a co sponsor???

I can't think of any visa situation where a bong would help your case. Jamaica, maybe?

(Sorry I have nothing of value to add, but I couldn't let this typo go without comment.)