K1- If assets alone are inadequate are you allowed to re-apply later?

[Juliet and Steve 93]

I'm unemployed and anticipate having a new full-time job near the end of the year. I have greater than 5x 120% poverty level in assets (a house that can be appraised with no mortgage) + a triplex apartment house + plenty of dollars in a brokerage and bank accounts. So the minimum 5x120% poverty level assets are met.

I could retire (I'm 63) and collect social security now but have no interest in doing so and want to continue working another 7 year before retiring.

Considering the Manila embassy will we run into trouble with assets alone? If so, and then a few months later I'm working full time again (I'm an RN) can we re-apply if we're rejected once I'm working again?

Or are we better off waiting for the interview until I'm working again full-time?

Edited July 18, 2013 by Juliet and Steve

[Hank_ 9,174]

125% is the number.

Once your petition is approved and you receive the MNL #, the petition is valid for 4 months from approval date, now the embassy will extend that time up to a year, 4 months at a time, so if you play it cool you could keep your current petition valid and waiting for most of a year before you had to schedule an interview.

You need to call the embassy to get the extensions but I have not heard of anyone being denied an extension.

[Juliet and Steve 93]

Thanks Hank_, any idea on whether my assets alone will be enough. Generally everyone does it the other way...look at earnings, and then consider assets for any deficits. In my case I'd rather prove greater than $100,000 in assets (excluding primary home, and including only assets that could be sold within one year and which are supported by licensed appraisal (in the case of a 2nd home) and bank/brokerage statements.

I've read that some embassies will simply not approve based upon assets alone--is Manila one?

I could get a job but would prefer taking my time and getting a job I really want, rather than take a subcontractor job (which are readily available). So if I can get approved by assets alone, I'd prefer to do that.

[Hank_ 9,174]

I don't have a clue if USEM would accept assets only. I know that for shortage in income you can use assets to make up the difference at 5 times the difference, but with no income I don't know, if most of it were cash and not real estate... but I am only guessing.

First question that comes to my mind and I would guess theirs is - How do you live now without income? (nope I don't want an answer - just sticking a thought out there)

[LeeandJoy 0]

Assets did not help me...they seemed more concerned with my past income than anything else. I am getting a joint sponsor. I have lived here in the Philippines for 3 plus years and that worked against me. (past income). I think every case is different, and you never know what the CO's take is. All I can say after what I have seen, is to be prepared for everything. If you think you might need something...you probably will.

[Juliet and Steve 93]

First question that comes to my mind and I would guess theirs is - How do you live now without income? (nope I don't want an answer - just sticking a thought out there)

"Drug money" Yup, that's the answer.

Until recently I worked for Shire Pharmaceuticals in Boston, and though Boston is expensive my salary was quite nice. Shire bounced my contract company and so I'm out of a job, but will find another in a month or three. I live under my means and my house has no mortgage, and I own an apartment house on top of that. In reality I don't even need to work but I prefer to do so until I'm at least 70 and hopefully long after that. I enjoy what I do.

[Hank_ 9,174]

Wasn't really wanting to know. I was just posing the question that I think USEM would have regarding income.

They need to see income that meets or exceed the poverty guideline of the I-864P

[Greenbaum 12,259]

Thanks Hank_, any idea on whether my assets alone will be enough. Generally everyone does it the other way...look at earnings, and then consider assets for any deficits. In my case I'd rather prove greater than $100,000 in assets (excluding primary home, and including only assets that could be sold within one year and which are supported by licensed appraisal (in the case of a 2nd home) and bank/brokerage statements.

I've read that some embassies will simply not approve based upon assets alone--is Manila one?

I could get a job but would prefer taking my time and getting a job I really want, rather than take a subcontractor job (which are readily available). So if I can get approved by assets alone, I'd prefer to do that.

I am facing the same situation as you and I got this response from a friend from another group who just when through this not to long ago.

He said and I quote: "The good news is you should be able to get them over here based on your 2012 1040 forms, assuming your income was adequate in calendar year 2012. I told them I was "retired" even though I was only 60 at the time. That explains why no letter from my employer was in the packet. I was laid off after 30 years with the same company right after I committed to my (now) wife to bring her over here. I kept copies of bank statements that showed I had income coming through my account. I had some income coming in from savings and 403b proceeds. My house was also paid for. I could show some retirement account and savings account balances. I was getting unemployment payments, but I did not volunteer that was part of the money showing in the accounts. Even though I had those 1040s in my packets for the Manila interview and the adjustment of status for the K1 to permanent resident, she/I was never asked one question on income. If they were not going to ask, I was not going to bring it up! I had a lot of the same worries as you were voicing to the group, but it seems the interviewers in Manila and Phoenix just were not too concerned about my retired status. Of course, I really did have some resources to support the family, but it never really came up for me to defend."

I hope this sheds some light on your situation.

Good Luck

[Hank_ 9,174]

When we did the interview I didn't have a tax return as my income is not taxable, well a small part is but its below the "barrier" so still no tax return, we had zero issue at the interview and during AOS USCIS wanted proof that my income was not taxable.... so I gave it to them.

The embassy didn't see any tax returns, only bank statements and letters from the various benefits and pensions.

[Greenbaum 12,259]

When we did the interview I didn't have a tax return as my income is not taxable, well a small part is but its below the "barrier" so still no tax return, we had zero issue at the interview and during AOS USCIS wanted proof that my income was not taxable.... so I gave it to them.

The embassy didn't see any tax returns, only bank statements and letters from the various benefits and pensions.

Hank

What did you supply to the Interviewer. Bank statements and pensions which would show "income" or liquidity if needed?

[Hank_ 9,174]

Benefits statements from SSI, pension statements, bank statements showing deposits. I also get a VA disability so brought a copy of the benefits letter from that as well.

There is an IRS worksheet that can be used to show what is or isn't taxable, I provided that as well.

[Juliet and Steve 93]

I am facing the same situation as you and I got this response from a friend from another group who just when through this not to long ago.

He said and I quote: "The good news is you should be able to get them over here based on your 2012 1040 forms, assuming your income was adequate in calendar year 2012. I told them I was "retired" even though I was only 60 at the time. That explains why no letter from my employer was in the packet. I was laid off after 30 years with the same company right after I committed to my (now) wife to bring her over here. I kept copies of bank statements that showed I had income coming through my account. I had some income coming in from savings and 403b proceeds. My house was also paid for. I could show some retirement account and savings account balances. I was getting unemployment payments, but I did not volunteer that was part of the money showing in the accounts. Even though I had those 1040s in my packets for the Manila interview and the adjustment of status for the K1 to permanent resident, she/I was never asked one question on income. If they were not going to ask, I was not going to bring it up! I had a lot of the same worries as you were voicing to the group, but it seems the interviewers in Manila and Phoenix just were not too concerned about my retired status. Of course, I really did have some resources to support the family, but it never really came up for me to defend."

I hope this sheds some light on your situation.

Good Luck

Thanks everyone.

Yes, luckily my 2012 income is over 50k. Now my 2013 income (at least so far--is paltry, though that is not including unemployment income, which is not counted) but as long as we interview before April 2014 those forms would not be available anyway.

My income over the past years has been odd and erratic...

2012

$50,005

2011

$0

2010

$39,520

2009

$55,265

2008

$48,121

The reason is that in 2010 I became unemployed for quite a while (through 2011). Then got a new job in 2012 and then got booted (my company, not me personally--but out I went). I suppose averaged over 3 or 4 or 5 years this still makes the necessary income, plus I do have assets. These are very odd times and I've lost three jobs in 6 years, one to a corporate bankruptcy, the other (GM) closed my unit, and the last one got angry at my agency (I'm full-time but contract) because they could not find a particular medical person. It's odd really, and in a way frustrating, though at least unemployment has been there and I'll find another job this fall. I'm a late bloomer and went back to college to become an RN in 2002 at the age of 52--it turned out to be a good move. Tough being laid off after 30 years. The concept of loyalty has long since died.

I never really earned much annually before the age of 52 and so my social security benefits are small--though if I keep working for the next 7 years, I'll catch up handily. Ah...the myth of retirement! But then, as an RN, one who works exclusively with workers (I'm an Occupational Health Nurse that works in industry) all too often I see retirement = death. Too many simply stop...they gain weight and that leads to health issues rather quickly. Maybe having to struggle is the best in the long run.

Edited July 19, 2013 by Juliet and Steve

[Hank_ 9,174]

I think SSA looks at the last 5 years for qualifying for benefits, seems I read that but I could be wrong.

[sunandmoon 450]

SSA monthly benefits based on earnings in the 35 years in which you earned the most.

[Hank_ 9,174]

So much for what I thought I read.

Found this: Social Security benefits are calculated based on your 35 highest-earning working years. If you work fewer years, you’ll have years with zero income averaged in – which will lower your payout.