Need co-sponsor or not ? Plz help !!

[KayDeeCee 4,894]

I made 25906 do I need a co sponser??my lawyer send a wrong affidavit form and my fiances visa was refused last week.so I just wanna make sure she is doing the right thing this time.

That depends on your household size. Check the poverty guidelines at 125% to see if you fall short or not: http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-864p.pdf

[Moomin 292]

Really, your comments are not useful and i don't know why anyone would rely on critical information in these forums when it is available at government site. But to clear everything up for the gentleman, The I-134 requires 100% poverty level, and I-864 requires 125%. He will need 100% at time of interview, and 125% at time of adjustment to permanent. (reason needed to do the math Einstein), Therefore, his lawyer who you said is full of Sheets may be correct that he could need sponsor later, if not sooner.

I-134 may require 100 % yet the embassy may require to see 125 %. I'd definitely rely on Jamaican couples who went through the embassy recently. Regardless, it's still better to count on having a co-sponsor when in doubt, bring documents to interview and if the 100 %/125 % isn't accepted, you'll probably be happydancing by the time you put the co-sponsor's documents on the counter.

The 18.387 dollars isn't enough either since the household is 3 people so it will be 23.162; 11 dollars, 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year, you're below.

But do come back and share your experience if it turns out they only need 100 %.

Edited February 13, 2012 by moomin

[L+T 71]

Except for the fact that most consulates still look for 125% with a K-1 using the I-134, since they will be needing the 125% for AOS soon after arriving in the US. The I-134 requirement is for 100%, but the form is used for other things besides the K-1 visa. It is completely up to the interviewing officer at the time of your interview. This is not just a black and white issue based on form requirements. Also, the OP is not a 'gentleman'. She is a female. It has already been cleared up that she will need a co-sponsor, as she does not make enough to cover a household of 3, even if it were based at 100%.

Yes, sure, the consulate can do what they like in any regards. ie, is it 100% for 2 months or 122% for 5 years? I would still trust the gov site before taking many of the comments here for gospel...

ie, quoted from site: http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/types/types_2994.html#8

Proof of Financial Support and Affidavit of Support Forms

During the visa interview, applicants will be required to present evidence to the Consular Officer that they will not become a public charge in the U.S. You may present evidence that you are able to financially support yourself or that your U.S. citizen fiancé(e) is able to provide support. The Consular Officer may request that a Form I-134, Affidavit of Support be submitted by the U.S. citizen fiancé(e).

The U.S. citizen fiancé(e) will need to submit Form I-864 to USCIS with the application for adjustment of status to that of legal permanent resident following the marriage.

Do the Same Income Requirements Apply to Form I-134 as Apply to Form I-864?

No. The 125 percent of the federal poverty guideline minimum income requirement, the most recent year's tax return, and other requirements only apply when Form I-864 is needed. Applicants presenting Form I-134 will need to show that their U.S. sponsor's income is 100 percent of the federal poverty guideline.

[Moomin 292]

Yes, that's neat and all, fine text on travel.state.gov. K1 is also a nonimmigrant visa but they're processing them at the IV unit instead. Nothing about that on travel.state.gov - they don't mention 212 (a ) (4 ) that much either which is the reference the CO will give when they determine the foreign fiance(e) is likely to become a public charge based on their findings. Their findings according to INA, not according to travel.state.gov's general info that is way too general after the petition goes overseas.

IN theory you're right but most here are speaking from experience. If you make 90.000 dollars in one month or have it transferred to your account, you'll - in theory - have enough for the affidavit of support but it doesn't necessarily please the officer to see the lack of steady income.

[L+T 71]

Yes, that's neat and all, fine text on travel.state.gov. K1 is also a nonimmigrant visa but they're processing them at the IV unit instead. Nothing about that on travel.state.gov - they don't mention 212 (a ) (4 ) that much either which is the reference the CO will give when they determine the foreign fiance(e) is likely to become a public charge based on their findings. Their findings according to INA, not according to travel.state.gov's general info that is way too general after the petition goes overseas.

IN theory you're right but most here are speaking from experience. If you make 90.000 dollars in one month or have it transferred to your account, you'll - in theory - have enough for the affidavit of support but it doesn't necessarily please the officer to see the lack of steady income.

Yes, this is all at state.gov.

Ever play a game of telephone, where one person says something... on and on...

Public Charge

Q. What is a public charge and when does it apply?

A. For purposes of determining inadmissibility, “public charge” means an individual who is likely to become [/url]primarily dependent on the government for subsistence, as demonstrated by either the receipt of public cash assistance for income maintenance or institutionalization for long-term care at government expense.

A number of factors must be considered when making a determination that a person is likely to become a public charge.

Under Section 212(a)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), an individual seeking admission to the United States or seeking to adjust status to that of an individual lawfully admitted for permanent residence (green card) is inadmissible if the individual, "at the time of application for admission or adjustment of status, is likely at any time to become a public charge." Public charge does not apply in naturalization proceedings. If an individual is inadmissible, admission to the United States or adjustment of status is not granted.

Q. How is it determined whether someone is likely to become a public charge for admission or adjustment purposes?

A. Inadmissibility based on the public charge ground is determined by the totality of the circumstances. This means that the adjudicating officer must weigh both the positive and negative factors when determining the likelihood that someone might become a public charge. At a minimum, a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officer must consider the following factors when making a public charge determination:

• Age
• Health
• Family status
• Assets
• Resources
• Financial status
• Education and skills

The officer may also consider any affidavit of support filed on behalf of the individual under Section 213A of the INA. Presence or absence of a single factor cannot be the sole criteria for determining inadmissibility as a public charge, (unless that factor is the absence or insufficiency of an affidavit of support when required by the laws and regulations governing a specific immigration benefit, such as certain family-based adjustment of status applications).

In assessing the totality of the circumstances, including the statutory factors above, an officer may consider the individual’s receipt of certain publicly funded benefits. Not all publicly funded benefits are relevant to deciding whether someone is likely to become a public charge. When determining whether someone is likely to become a public charge, USCIS will consider whether the individual is likely to become primarily dependent on the government for subsistence as demonstrated by either the receipt of public cash assistance for income maintenance or institutionalization for long-term care at government expense. Short-term institutionalization for rehabilitation is not subject to public charge consideration under existing field guidance. Non-cash benefits that USCIS does not consider are discussed in greater detail below.

Q. What publicly funded benefits may be considered for public charge purposes?

A. Cash assistance for income maintenance and institutionalization for long-term care at government expense may be considered for public charge purposes. However, receipt of such benefits must still be considered in the context of the totality of the circumstances before a person will be deemed inadmissible on public charge grounds.

Public benefits that are received by one member of a family are also not attributed to other family members for public charge purposes unless the cash benefits amount to the sole support of the family.

Acceptance of the following types of assistance may lead to the determination that the individual is likely to become a public charge:

Supplemental Security Income (SSI) under Title XVI of Social Security Act

• Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) cash assistance (part A of Title IV of the Social Security Act--the successor to the AFDC program) (Note: Non cash benefits under TANF such as subsidized child care or transit subsidies cannot be considered and non-recurrent cash payments for crisis situations cannot be considered for evidence of public charge)
• State and local cash assistance programs that provide benefits for income maintenance (often called "General Assistance" programs)
• Programs (including Medicaid) supporting individuals who are institutionalized for long-term care (e.g., in a nursing home or mental health institution). (Note: costs of incarceration for prison are not considered for public charge determinations)

This is not an exhaustive list of the types of cash benefits that could lead to a determination that a person is likely to become primarily dependent on the government for subsistence, and thus, a public charge. Receipt of any such cash benefits not listed above will continue to be assessed under the “totality of the circumstances” analysis described above.

Q. What publicly funded benefits may not be considered for public charge purposes?

A. Non-cash benefits (other than institutionalization for long-term care) are generally not taken into account for purposes of a public charge determination.

Special-purpose cash assistance is also generally not taken into account for purposes of public charge determination.

Non-cash or special-purpose cash benefits are generally supplemental in nature and do not make a person primarily dependent on the government for subsistence. Therefore, past, current, or future receipt of these benefits do not impact a public charge determination. Non-cash or special purpose cash benefits that are not considered for public charge purposes include:

• Medicaid and other health insurance and health services (including public assistance for immunizations and for testing and treatment of symptoms of communicable diseases; use of health clinics, short-term rehabilitation services, and emergency medical services) other than support for long-term institutional care
• Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP)
• Nutrition programs, including Food Stamps, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Program, and other supplementary and emergency food assistance programs
• Housing benefits
• Child care services
• Energy assistance, such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
• Emergency disaster relief
• Foster care and adoption assistance
• Educational assistance (such as attending public school), including benefits under the Head Start Act and aid for elementary, secondary, or higher education
• Job training programs
• In-kind, community-based programs, services, or assistance (such as soup kitchens, crisis counseling and intervention, and short-term shelter)

State and local programs that are similar to the federal programs listed above are also generally not considered for public charge purposes. Please be aware that states may adopt different names for the same or similar publicly funded programs. It is the underlying nature of the program, not the name adopted in a particular state, which determines whether or not it should be considered for public charge purposes. In California, for example, Medicaid is called "Medi-Cal" and CHIP is called "Healthy Families." These benefits are not considered for public charge purposes.

In addition, and consistent with existing practice, cash payments that have been earned, such as Title II Social Security benefits, government pensions, and veterans' benefits, among other forms of earned benefits, do not support a public charge determination. Unemployment compensation is also not considered for public charge purposes.

Q. Am I required to file an affidavit of support?

A. Form I-864, Affidavit of Support, is a form that a qualified individual (a sponsor) files on your behalf when you are applying for a green card or immigrant visa under certain family-related provisions. The purpose of the form is to show that you have the financial means to live in the United States without needing welfare or financial benefits from the U.S. government. The law requires that the sponsor demonstrate that he or she is able to assist you financially. The sponsor must show that he or she has an annual income of not less than 125 percent of the federal poverty level. The federal poverty guidelines are set once a year, and can be found on Form I-864P, Poverty Guidelines.

The following individuals are required to file an Affidavit of Support completed by their sponsor:

• Immediate relatives of U.S. citizens (including orphans)
• All family based preference categories:
  • First Preference: Unmarried, adult sons and daughters of U.S. citizens (Adult means 21 years of age or older)
  • Second Preference: Spouses of permanent residents and the unmarried sons and daughters (regardless of age) of permanent residents and their unmarried children
  • Third Preference: Married sons and daughters of U.S. citizens, their spouses and their unmarried minor children
  • Fourth Preference: Brothers and sisters of adult U.S. citizens, their spouses and their unmarried minor children

  [*]Employment based immigrants who will work for a relative or for a firm in which a U.S. citizen or a permanent resident relative holds a 5 percent or more ownership interest

Failure to file a qualifying Affidavit of Support showing sufficient income levels, when required, makes you inadmissible under Section 212(a)(4) of the INA. Note: Individuals whom the USCIS has approved as self-petitioning widows or widowers or battered spouses and children are exempt from filing an Affidavit of Support but must still file Form I-864W, Intending Immigrant’s Affidavit of Support Exemption.

For more information, see the “Affidavit of Support” link to the left.

Q. Does public charge apply to me?

A. For benefits adjudicated by USCIS, whether a person is likely to become a public charge is usually considered when someone is trying to become a permanent resident (get a green card). It is also considered when someone applies for certain non-immigrant or other temporary benefits, for example by extending non-immigrant status within the United States.

There are certain groups of people who are either exempt from public charge, or may get a waiver for public charge when applying for a green card or other benefits with USCIS. These include:

1. Refugees
2. Asylum applicants
3. Refugees and asylees applying for adjustment to permanent resident status
4. Amerasian Immigrants (for their initial admission)
5. Individuals granted relief under the Cuban Adjustment Act (CAA)
6. Individuals granted relief under the Nicaraguan and Central American Relief Act (NACARA)
7. Individuals granted relief under the Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act (HRIFA)
8. Individuals applying for a T Visa
9. Individuals applying for a U Visa
10. Individuals who possess a T visa and are trying to become a permanent resident (get a green card)
11. Individuals who possess a U visa and are trying to become a permanent resident (get a green card)
12. Applicants for Temporary Protected Status (TPS)
13. Certain applicants under the LIFE Act Provisions

Q. What if I am in removal proceedings or at a Port of Entry?

A. For information on public charge determinations in removal proceedings and at ports of entry, refer to the complete Field Guidance for Deportability and Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds; 64 FR 28689 (May 26, 1999) (see “Guidance on Public Charge” link to the right).

Q. How can I learn more about public charge?

A. For the complete published policy on public charge refer to the Published Policy on Public Charge: INA Sections 212(a)(4) and 237(a)(5) (see “Guidance on Public Charge” link to the right).

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

Yes, sure, the consulate can do what they like in any regards. ie, is it 100% for 2 months or 122% for 5 years? I would still trust the gov site before taking many of the comments here for gospel...

ie, quoted from site: http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/types/types_2994.html#8

...

Do the Same Income Requirements Apply to Form I-134 as Apply to Form I-864?

No. The 125 percent of the federal poverty guideline minimum income requirement, the most recent year's tax return, and other requirements only apply when Form I-864 is needed. Applicants presenting Form I-134 will need to show that their U.S. sponsor's income is 100 percent of the federal poverty guideline.

Curiously enough, there are nothing in the Foreign Affairs Manual that instructs a consular officer to apply a different minimum income standard with an I-134 than they do with an I-864. In fact, about the only thing the Foreign Affairs Manual has to say is that the consular officer is not permitted to require an I-864 for certain classes of visas, including fiancee visas, and that the I-134 may be useful in these cases, and that the I-134 should not be accorded the same weight as an I-864 because it's not legally binding on the sponsor.

There is sufficient experience on this site to indicate that the information on the Department of State website is inaccurate, at least for most consulates. There have been many K1 beneficiaries who have been denied visas on the "public charge" requirement when the petitioner should have qualified at the 100% threshold, but did not qualify at the 125% threshold.

Here's an example:

http://hochiminh.usconsulate.gov/iv/k-visa/faqs.html

The US consulate in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, quotes the exact same text that appears on the Department of State website, indicating that 100 percent of the poverty guidelines is required with the I-134. Yet, I personally KNOW at least two people who have been denied for the "public charge" requirement with income that was between 100% and 125%. I don't know anyone who was denied on the same basis when they had income above 125%.

When all else fails, there's always good 'ol common sense. Why would a consular officer give a beneficiary a K1 visa to go to the United States knowing that the petitioner will not be qualified to sponsor the beneficiary when it comes time to adjust status? The consular officer may have the discretion to cut the beneficiary some slack with the I-134, but USCIS will not have that same discretion with the I-864. It doesn't make much sense to send someone to the US knowing they won't be able to get a green card once they get here.

[L+T 71]

Curiously enough, there are nothing in the Foreign Affairs Manual that instructs a consular officer to apply a different minimum income standard with an I-134 than they do with an I-864. In fact, about the only thing the Foreign Affairs Manual has to say is that the consular officer is not permitted to require an I-864 for certain classes of visas, including fiancee visas, and that the I-134 may be useful in these cases, and that the I-134 should not be accorded the same weight as an I-864 because it's not legally binding on the sponsor.

There is sufficient experience on this site to indicate that the information on the Department of State website is inaccurate, at least for most consulates. There have been many K1 beneficiaries who have been denied visas on the "public charge" requirement when the petitioner should have qualified at the 100% threshold, but did not qualify at the 125% threshold.

Here's an example:

http://hochiminh.usc...-visa/faqs.html

The US consulate in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, quotes the exact same text that appears on the Department of State website, indicating that 100 percent of the poverty guidelines is required with the I-134. Yet, I personally KNOW at least two people who have been denied for the "public charge" requirement with income that was between 100% and 125%. I don't know anyone who was denied on the same basis when they had income above 125%.

When all else fails, there's always good 'ol common sense. Why would a consular officer give a beneficiary a K1 visa to go to the United States knowing that the petitioner will not be qualified to sponsor the beneficiary when it comes time to adjust status? The consular officer may have the discretion to cut the beneficiary some slack with the I-134, but USCIS will not have that same discretion with the I-864. It doesn't make much sense to send someone to the US knowing they won't be able to get a green card once they get here.

This is what i'm talking about... a game of telephone. Someone knows someone who knew some hpw it didn't work... but they don't lay out the specifics, or information is distorted due to lack of communication. How about a recent graduate getting the Ph.D., doing a 2 year Post Doc, making 100%, as they were in school 1/2 time. I guarantee they are approved. Or will the consulate look at their 3 degrees and say ... No Doctor, your not approved???

[Moomin 292]

Inadmissibility based on the public charge ground is determined by the totality of the circumstances. This means that the adjudicating officer must weigh both the positive and negative factors when determining the likelihood that someone might become a public charge. At a minimum, a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officer must consider the following factors when making a public charge determination:

It's boiled down to this, except for the part with USCIS - they're no longer in possession of the petition. With that in mind, it's a gamble to expect USCIS knows what's going on at the embassies, it's not their call and it's not DoS' call either. An immigrant has no right to immigration benefits. You can read, call and mail them all you want - but you're not going to get your final answer until you've been through the process and gotten a denial or approval.

No, I haven't played a game of telephone. I have taken a driver's license and know what's in the book isn't always what you experience on the roads. I also don't to crash before believing that there IS road construction ahead even though the GPRS didn't tell me.

[KayDeeCee 4,894]

This is what i'm talking about... a game of telephone. Someone knows someone who knew some hpw it didn't work... but they don't lay out the specifics, or information is distorted due to lack of communication. How about a recent graduate getting the Ph.D., doing a 2 year Post Doc, making 100%, as they were in school 1/2 time. I guarantee they are approved. Or will the consulate look at their 3 degrees and say ... No Doctor, your not approved???

So now you are agreeing it is based upon the interviewing officer's discretion and not about the text from the gov site that states 100%, period?

They could say no, you need a co-sponsor. They could say yes, you have a job offer or will be employed soon enough with a decent salary. Who knows what the individual IO will do? No one until they get interviewed. Each one is a case by case process. It is not all black and white requirement statements from the travel.gov website. There are gray areas.

I would say most with a low income struggling to even meet the 100% level do not have 3 degrees and prospects of making a lot more income in the near future. People have been denied for not making that 125% mark. That is a fact. It is better for someone to be prepared for an event that they know can occur. Better to have a co-sponsor lined up if asked for one, than to go with the false belief that making 100% of the poverty level will certainly get you an approval.