I-134 - is an approximate income figure appropriate?

[simonschus 58]

Hi all,

On the I-134, how exact does the "I derive an annual income of..." answer have to be?

My partner earns roughly $60,000 to $65,000 a year after tax, and she is signing the I-134. Her contract is wage-based rather than salary-based meaning that is can vary from year to year based on if she takes an extended vacation or such.

Would it be okay that I put down $65,000 a year even though this is rough and approximate? (as opposed to something more exact like $65,442 which is a figure that I just plucked out the air really).

It should be noted that we have evidence along the lines of:

- Her tax returns for the past years have hovered around $60,000 after tax

- Bank letter showing $62,000 of income per year

- Her employer has only offered a letter confirming her hourly rate, a daily per diem payment, and the number of hours she is contracted to per week. As such, it

doesn't state her annual income from that job. She'll earn more this year than last year as she is working for a new company.

Simon.

P.S. K1 @ the London embassy.

[Nich-Nick 3,354]

You need to put a figure you can back up with documentation. The employer letter isn't doing that so I think the 2015 tax return (line 22 if she uses Form 1040) is your best source. Or take the number off her 2015 W-2 Wage Statement which is an accurate figure of how much she earned from that employer in 2015.

It's income before taxes by the way.

Edited February 28, 2016 by Nich-Nick

[simonschus 58]

She hasn't filed her 2015 tax return yet, unfortunately, so we can't use that yet. In addition, the W2 is proving problematic because the figures relate to her old job and she got a new job for the start of January 2016.

The problem with using the 2015 W2 is that it only includes her taxable wage. Only around $20,000 of her wage is taxable as she receives the other $40,000 tax-free stipend for working away from home for 3 to 6 months at a time (the stipend covers accommodation, travel, living expenses. etc - it is just how that all works in her field). Only the $20,000 wage is listed on her W2, meaning that the $40,000 stipend is only documented by looking at her pay stubs on a weekly basis or by looking at her employer letter which lists how much stipend she gets on a daily basis. As an aside, that same issue means that I'm going to be paying close attention to what she puts into her IRS Form 1040 in order to ensure that it'll be appropriate for her I-864.

So I'm feeling a bit stuck about what will be acceptable. I could use the exact figure (around $62,000) that went into her bank account in the last twelve months and which is plainly document on the letter from her bank documenting deposits. Do you think that would suffice even though that figure is after tax?

Simon.

Edited February 28, 2016 by simonschus

[simonschus 58]

The alternative would be for us to use the figures from her employer letter whereby we add together

- her hourly rate multiplied by her contracted 40 hours per week, multiplied by 52 weeks in the year (= circa $25,000 before tax)

- her daily stipend multiplied by 5 days a week, multiplied by 52 weeks in the year (= circa $45,000 before tax)

That would give an exact figure of around $70,000 before tax which we could justify as being extrapolated from the figures her employer provided. However, it would still be an overestimation given that she doesn't works 52 weeks a year but sometimes between 47 and 50 weeks so that a) her and I can travel, and also b) so that she can have some time off between assignments.

Any thoughts about how to tackle this for the I-134 would be appreciated.

Simon.

Edited February 28, 2016 by simonschus

[Nich-Nick 3,354]

London is not that strict and will barely glance at it and for sure will not get out a calculator. Just pick something you can back up.

Do this one and make a little spreadsheet to show your calculations. I call it connecting the dots for them.

The alternative would be for us to use the figures from her employer letter whereby we add together

- her hourly rate multiplied by her contracted 40 hours per week, multiplied by 52 weeks in the year (= circa $25,000 before tax)

- her daily stipend multiplied by 5 days a week, multiplied by 52 weeks in the year (= circa $45,000 before tax)

Even $20k would pass If there are only two of you, so 60k or 65k or 70k are so far above passing that precise accuracy isn't going to be terribly important to London on an I-134. Showing more doesn't get you more approved. Pick a number. Make a spreadsheet. I bet they never even mention the I-134 at your interview. Edited February 28, 2016 by Nich-Nick

[simonschus 58]

Thanks for your help on this! My next issue is going to be that there is no place for her to mention her $45,000 tax-free stipend on her Form 1040, and so the figure will end up reading $25,000 for the I-864 when we go through AOS. As you say, I know $25,000 is above the threshold. However, I want our documentation to be way above the threshold given that her employment is technically only temporary in nature (assignments are 3 to 6 months in length, with her getting a new contract at the end of each assignment). I don't expect that to be resolved here, I'm just talking aloud and setting some context to why I'm treating this a little more importantly than I would otherwise would. If the employer letter read permanent then I would not care one bit at all.

Simon.

Edited February 28, 2016 by simonschus

[simonschus 58]

London is not that strict and will barely glance at it and for sure will not get out a calculator. Just pick something you can back up.

Do this one and make a little spreadsheet to show your calculations. I call it connecting the dots for them.

The alternative would be for us to use the figures from her employer letter whereby we add together

- her hourly rate multiplied by her contracted 40 hours per week, multiplied by 52 weeks in the year (= circa $25,000 before tax)

- her daily stipend multiplied by 5 days a week, multiplied by 52 weeks in the year (= circa $45,000 before tax)

Even $20k would pass If there are only two of you, so 60k or 65k or 70k are so far above passing that precise accuracy isn't going to be terribly important to London on an I-134. Showing more doesn't get you more approved. Pick a number. Make a spreadsheet. I bet they never even mention the I-134 at your interview.

Just for completeness, do anybody think we should multiple by 52 weeks a year? Or something more realistic like 48 weeks per year? I don't want anything to be actively misrepresentative but instead to be presented in good faith - my partner and I go on holiday together and she takes off weeks here and there, rather than working a full 52 weeks per year.

Simon.

Edited February 28, 2016 by simonschus

[Greenbaum 12,259]

Just for completeness, do anybody think we should multiple by 52 weeks a year? Or something more realistic like 48 weeks per year? I don't want anything to be actively misrepresentative but instead to be presented in good faith - my partner and I go on holiday together and she takes off weeks here and there, rather than working a full 52 weeks per year.

Simon.

Sometimes we over think while processing our paperwork which ends up confusing the answer we must give. In the end we have to just make a decision and go with that. Nick-Nich has given you great advise to which you should follow as It sounds like the best answer. I would follow it and go to your interview and think positively.

[gradtaai 8]

I would think there has be some record or proof from the company that someone is paying the taxes on that $45000. I'm just saying as many years ago a friend of mine was told while working overseas that the money he was making was tax free (the company paying the tax). Turned out, that was not the case. Bring up the tax free $45000 could be opening a can of worms.

[simonschus 58]

I would think there has be some record or proof from the company that someone is paying the taxes on that $45000. I'm just saying as many years ago a friend of mine was told while working overseas that the money he was making was tax free (the company paying the tax). Turned out, that was not the case. Bring up the tax free $45000 could be opening a can of worms.

Hi there gradtaai! Thanks for your point which I understand. My partner's employer pays her the tax-free stipend as a business expense. It is a common practice in her field and I spent a good couple of hours looking through the tax law to actually understand what regulations it is under (to see if I could claim it as income). Technically, it is considered a reimbursement - rather than receiving it after the event, she receives the stipend as a fixed amount in advance her assignment to cover her house rental which are essential for her given that she does 3 to 6 month assignments in each place and is technically away from home.

You mention the tax looking a bit dubious. To clarify, the $45,000 is tax-free *to her* but her company will be paying a tax on it. We won't be asking for documentation from the company that they have paid tax on it because that is not our responsibility. The main thing for us is that it isn't on the W2 or Form 1040. I've looked into it, including into the "public charge" regulations, and I'm fairly sure that we can't technically can't class her her stipend/reimbursement as "income". This does cause a bit of a pickle now because we've finally gotten her W2s back from her various assignments: last year she earning $19,984 (not $25k) as a wage and $47k from her tax-free stipend. This will be a problem for the I-864 as we'll have to write $19,984 which isn't too far above the threshold (assuming the threshold stays the same for 2016 which I guess we'd find out soon enough).

Now, we're not so concerned about the I-134 given the points that Nich-Nick mentioned above. However, the greater scrutiny for the I-864 might be an issue during adjustment of status. For the I-864, we're considering a co-sponsor for the (which is ridiculous $70k goes into her bank account on a yearly basis) to counter that issue. However, we've also put together so much documentation for the I-864 that might be useful. We've organised this so that it would be easy to navigate for the adjudicator too. Anyway, we have the following:

- her tax return showing below the threshold given her tax-free stipend can't be included

- an explanation of why the tax-free stipend cannot be included, as well as why her taxable income suddenly dropped in 2015 compared to 2013 and 2014 (because she took a new travelling job with the different tax arrangement to her previous job which was located near her tax home/permanent home).

- an explanation of why my partner's annual income for 2016 is higher than her 2015 tax return. Basically, it calculates partner's taxable annual income for 2016 based on the the wage that is shown on her employer letter. The document also explain that there is a $45k stipend but that this is not included in any of the figures but that it is paid in advanced.

- all her 2016 pay stubs showing payments of around $1800 a week from her employer (covering her taxable wage and her tax-free stipend). By the time we submit our I-864, we'll have about 5 months of these.

- a bank letter showing deposits of around $70k in the past 12 months

- a letter from her employer highlighting her wage on an hourly basis, her contracted hours, and the value of her tax-free stipend on a daily basis

- a separate letter from her employer highlighting that her contracts are only 3 to 6 months in length because of the different demands of each placement/healthcare facility that she works in. The letter also highlights the state of the job market in which she works insofar that there are so many assignments readily available that there will be absolutely no issue in her finding a new assignment before her current one finishes. The reason why I care so much about being significantly above the threshold is because of that reason that my partner's job is technically "temporary" whereas in reality she has had three assignments for 15 months with her only time off being to come visit me in the UK/Europe.

Hopefully last five of those will highlight that the anticipated income for 2016 should be above the threshold and that the tax return for 2015 should not be considered too problematic. I'm aware from reading the "public charge" regulations and the adjudicator handbook that a lot of weight is applied to the previous year tax return. Assuming all goes well with the I-134, then hopefully the above will be good for the I-864 and if not then we'll receive an RFE for a joint sponsor.

Anyway, my message went on for a longer than I had intended. I'm mostly just getting it all of my chest - my partners understands it all but some of my work colleagues get bored stiff by hearing about immigration so I decide not to bother

Love to all.

Simon.

P.S. Thank you so much Greenbaum too - I appreciate your thoughts, and it is a useful slap to help me snap out of it! I focus on the minutiae and detail too much sometimes. My partner can usually snap me out of it, but it is good to have people around me on here to help do it as well!

Edited March 1, 2016 by simonschus