I864 income---AGI vs income

[Suss&Camm 2,213]

55 minutes ago, NikLR said:

A) RFE's are not handed out by the NVC.  The NVC gives checklists.  The DOS gives a 221g after interview if more information is needed.   ONLY the USCIS gives an RFE. 

Yes, I was referring to USCIS rfe's - adjudication is based on the same things regardless.

Quote

b) Current annual income = amount of income you will make in a 12 month period (aka a year.)   

 

Example: when my husband filed the I-130 he had just started his new job (Sept 2012.)  By the time I sent the AOS in April 2013, he had been working for 7 months and we provided evidence of that with pay stubs.  My interview was in June 2013, and we used the I-864 we had submitted before the tax return cut off.  I brought evidence of his 2013 filing extension as well but it wasn't asked for at interview.  Had the CO only used 2012 taxes he would have made only 1/3 of the income he made on a yearly basis at that time.  But they consider how much he "would make" on a yearly basis aka 12 month period not how much he "made" in a year.   Even on his pay stubs his Yearly Salary was written down  (and to this day will not change from pay stub to pay stub unless he obtains a raise) and it certainly was not the dollar value for Sept - Dec. 

That means your i-864 was sent in April 2013. Meaning he didn't have any part of that year (the year in which the i-864 was filed) as any other income. So his projected income for the year 2013 would certainly be what you are saying.

I never said anything about the PREVIOUS year (2012). I am not either saying that it is only the income that has been made thus far. I am saying that it is the PROJECTED annual income for the year in which the i-864 was signed. As it says in the field manual. For many ppl (such as yourself) this is never a problem and they will never incur any rfe's or 221g's , and thus be none the wiser when it comes to that.

 

During last year and this year  - I have seen plenty of rfe's (mostly in the AOS progression threads, cause that is where I was in the process myself) where the applicants had simply calculated current income as the monthly x 12, but where they were told they did not meet the income requirement (and all other evidentiary  requirements were met). 

Quote

For the years I've been on the forum, that is how "current income" is calculated with only self employed being the exception.

As said, for most it is not a problem. I have found threads dating back even to 2011 with such occurrences.

Quote

For AGI vs TOTAL INCOME, it depends on the form that was filed.  If a normal 1040 was filed, then you use total income.  If a 1040ez was filed, you supply total adjusted income.  Majority of the people will use total income. 

Yes, as stated.

Edited October 2, 2017 by Suss&Camm

[Suss&Camm 2,213]

Here is an explanation on the "most common mistakes" filling out the i864 according to immigration lawyer Charles Wheeler (https://cliniclegal.org/1101/charles-wheeler)

(it refers to the old i864 form so the item references are not the same but can be incurred.

https://cliniclegal.org/resources/five-most-common-mistakes-completing-i-864

 

"#1. It is anticipated income, not what the sponsor paid in taxes last year.  The I-864 in Part 6, line 5, asks the sponsor to indicate his or her “current individual annual income.” This phrase is key and every word is significant.  “Current” means what he or she anticipates earning this calendar year.  That may be easy to calculate in December, but more difficult early in the year.  So be prepared to ask your client for proof of what he or she is currently earning and likely to have earned by the end of the year. “Individual” means only report what the sponsor himself or herself is planning to earn, not what the sponsor and his/her spouse are earning jointly. “Annual” means what the sponsor is likely to earn this year. This figure, supplemented with any additional household members’ income on Part 6, line 10, will determine if the sponsor’s income is sufficient for his or her household size.  If the anticipated income is more than they paid taxes on last year, then include proof to support your estimate, such as pay stubs and a letter from their employer. Finally, “income” includes both taxable and nontaxable income, including certain federal or state benefits.  For example, include social security retirement or disability, as well as unemployment or workers compensation.  But do not include Supplemental Security Income (SSI) for the aged, blind, or disabled, and do not include Temporary Assistance for Needy Children (TANF). In addition, do not include interest income."

[pushbrk 12,883]

3 hours ago, Suss&Camm said:

Not according to rfe's handed out.

I disagree with you both based on what the manual says and what I have seen here on VJ.

 

For the OP to read: https://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-11261/0-0-0-16960/0-0-0-17008.html

OP, you can also search VJ for i-864 rfe's and you will find what I'm talking about.

I'll bet my experience against yours and give long odds in the bet.  Maybe take the suggestion in the NEXT line of my signature.    

 

Please note this is an immigrant visa case.  USCIS will never see the OP's I-864 like they did in your case.  Just what is it you disagree with and what specific information in the link are you citing?

Edited October 2, 2017 by pushbrk

[Suss&Camm 2,213]

12 minutes ago, pushbrk said:

I'll bet my experience against yours and give long odds in the bet.  Maybe take the suggestion in the NEXT line of my signature.  

That's alright. I know that all the evidence in the world can't convince some people.  

What you have provided is your "experience", and I'm not saying it's not a wide and long experience, but it would be good if there were some official information that corroborated what you are saying and no rfe's that contradicted it. But that's not the case. It is also true that there is a great deal of discretion involved on the behalf of the adjudicator - some might be lucky and some might not be. The OP might not be.

 

I'm providing it for the benefit of the OP,  they'll have all available information at hand to make their decision in regards to their own circumstance.

 

I will leave it at that.

Edited October 2, 2017 by Suss&Camm

[pushbrk 12,883]

1 minute ago, Suss&Camm said:

That's alright. I know that all the evidence in the world can't convince some people.  

What you have provided is your "experience", and I'm not saying it's not a wide and long experience, but it would be good if there were some official information that corroborated what you are saying and no rfe's that contradicted it. But that's not the case. It is also true that there is a great deal of discretion involved on the behalf of the adjudicator - some might be lucky and some might not be. The OP might not be.

 

I'm providing it for the benefit of the OP,  they'll have all available information at hand to make their decision in regards to their own circumstance.

 

I will leave it at that.

You haven't provided any evidence of RFE's that would contradict my experience.  Nor have you suggested how your actual advice differs from mine.  I-864 evaluations by Consular officers is somewhat inconsistent from Consulate to Consulate with the ones in India being the biggest exceptions.  It's not that they calculate current income differently though.  It's that they tend to require qualifying income for the past three years as well as qualifying current income.  That is completely contradictory to USCIS guidelines but it is what it is, nevertheless.  The public charge issues is not cut and dried.  It's always a judgment call with Consular Officers and Immigrant visa unit policies, being less consistent than USCIS in the use of "judgment" in these matters.

 

[NikLR 13,227]

You have stated RFEs have said differently than what pushbrk and I have stated? Link them please.  You have not provided evidence supporting your claim that current annual income is Jan-Dec not per 12 month period. 

[Suss&Camm 2,213]

I'm not about to spend hours going through the monthly threads(?!) If you are really interested in finding those you can do it yourselves. They are there.

You two have both supplied only "cause we say so", I'm not the one who needs to support their claim. The argument "Do you know who I am?" - says nothing about the validity of someone's statement.

 

The fact is that the field manual doesn't say per 12 month period. It says per the year in which the i864 was signed. It is clear as day for all to read I'm not here to argue with the two of you. The OP can make up their own mind based on the information provided.

 

Again, I will leave it at that.

 

9 hours ago, pushbrk said:

You haven't provided any evidence of RFE's that would contradict my experience.

I'm not here to prove you wrong. It's not my job. If you were really interested in verifying it's there for you to find. 

 

9 hours ago, pushbrk said:

 Nor have you suggested how your actual advice differs from mine.

Yes I have.

 

9 hours ago, pushbrk said:

 I-864 evaluations by Consular officers is somewhat inconsistent from Consulate to Consulate with the ones in India being the biggest exceptions.  It's not that they calculate current income differently though.  It's that they tend to require qualifying income for the past three years as well as qualifying current income.  That is completely contradictory to USCIS guidelines but it is what it is, nevertheless.  The public charge issues is not cut and dried.  It's always a judgment call with Consular Officers and Immigrant visa unit policies, being less consistent than USCIS in the use of "judgment" in these matters.

 

 

It's definitely not cut and dried, we agree on that. I'm not talking about what evidence the different consulates request from different people. We all know that differs widely. I'm talking about the number that should be filled out as current annual income on the i-864 PERIOD - that's it.

[NikLR 13,227]

I'm also not wasting my time going through monthly threads if that's the only place something is posted.  With a small amount of google research I can see that other websites do agree with your hypothesis due to the USCIS manual.  

 

However, I also haven't seen a single person doing it the way pushbrk suggests to be denied at consulate, which obviously uses some different rules than the USCIS.    If they have, then I haven't seen it in the threads.  

 

So I agree to disagree. 

 

 

Edited October 2, 2017 by NikLR

[Ryan H 3,812]

~~~The back and forth bickering ends here; Administrative Action will be taken if it continues.~~~

[pushbrk 12,883]

A post directed to the OP.  I have literally advised hundreds of folks here and elsewhere on how to calculate current income and how to correctly enter past income from tax returns.  It works every time it's tried, as far as I've seen in the past 12 years.  That's not to say one cannot be successful doing it another way.  That's because no matter what you enter as your current income, a Consular Officer or Immigration Officer with USCIS (as applicable) is going to look at your supporting documentation before making a decision.  If the decision is positive, they won't bother to even mention your own calculation was wrong.  They just make the judgement call based on their own.

 

In contrast it is my certain knowledge that in practice, neither USCIS or Consular Officers, actually follow the "year of signing" wording in the manual.  I assume, because they have been instructed otherwise, or simply have enough common sense to know the sentence is improperly worded.

 

USCIS makes lots of mistakes in instructions and form designs.  I've seen it over and over again too many times to count.  A recent mistake is that in the I-130 for filing for a current spouse, they ask for a marriage termination date for your current marriage, then don't allow you to enter anything except a date in the applicable field.  You cannot say N/A, NONE, or Present, any of which would be correct answers.  You can only print the form and hand write in N/A in the space.  And THAT is just the first of many places the form has errors.

 

Sometimes, knowing what happens in actual practice is more important than reading manuals or even instructions.  Which is why...

 

Facts are cheap...knowing how to use them is precious...
Understanding the big picture is priceless. Anonymous