my husband lost his job

[pushbrk 12,908]

3 minutes ago, Boiler said:

A joint sponsor on hand seems good insurance.

Yes.  If the husband can round up a qualified joint sponsor and affidavit of support package from them, the wife can take it to the interview and present it ONLY if needed.

[CEE53147 559]

He should immediately file for job assistance with your state's unemployment agency.  Having a referral from them is a plus when applying for a new position.

[sunshinelove 52]

During my wife's interview I (the petitioner) was asked if everything was the same in regards to my job. I answered yes and we moved on.

I'd agree with everyone here and get a co-sponsor just in case your interviewer asks him about his job, which I think is highly likely. Good luck

[geowrian 22,337]

As others stated, if the CO asks about his job or for an updated I-864, then he will need to either have a new job (and/or sufficient qualifying assets) or to have a joint sponsor.

 

They may not ask. Don't bring it up on your own. But if they do ask and you don't have a new I-864, or one from a qualifying joint sponsor, then they will refuse the visa.

[pushbrk 12,908]

12 minutes ago, geowrian said:

But if they do ask and you don't have a new I-864, or one from a qualifying joint sponsor, then they will refuse the visa.

....Until you do have one or the other.

[geowrian 22,337]

Just now, pushbrk said:

....Until you do have one or the other.

Yes. The refusal can be overcome with a suitable I-864 afterwards.

[Ontarkie 14,234]

~~Non English posts removed. It's English only in the main forums. If you need to use any other language please do so in the appropriate regional forum. It is also a TOS violation to change what is inside a quote.~~

[Nitas_man 3,100]

9 hours ago, pushbrk said:

The answer is in the reply you just quoted.  Yes, they can deny the visa.  However, if they do not ask you about his current job, don't mention it and all will be well.  If they do ask, be sure to tell the truth.  At that point, you will need a qualified joint sponsor, OR your husband will need a new job, OR there will be no visa until you have one or the other, a qualified joint sponsor, or a husband with a new job.

……...…..Or a new support affidavit with 3X the 125% poverty level in assets

 

Suggest OP to ask her husband to add up net assets to see if they can meet the secondary qualification?

[pushbrk 12,908]

2 minutes ago, Nitas_man said:

……...…..Or a new support affidavit with 3X the 125% poverty level in assets

 

Suggest OP to ask her husband to add up net assets to see if they can meet the secondary qualification?

Net "liquid assets" as defined in the I-864 instructions.

[Nitas_man 3,100]

14 hours ago, Loren Y said:

I don't think it will affect it at all really. Obviously you qualify right now and it's not like the CO can say I don't think your going to qualify next year. And you probably sent 3 years worth of taxes showing everything was good the past 3 years, so why would they worry about you becoming a public charge. 

Dude

 

The rules are clear:  Current, ongoing income, assets at 3X 125%, or a co-sponsor with one or the other.

[Nitas_man 3,100]

2 minutes ago, pushbrk said:

Net "liquid assets" as defined in the I-864 instructions.

That's how I did it.

 

 

[pushbrk 12,908]

6 minutes ago, Nitas_man said:

That's how I did it.

Good.  I just added accuracy to what you wrote.

[Nitas_man 3,100]

17 minutes ago, pushbrk said:

Good.  I just added accuracy to what you wrote.

Of course.  Thank you.  I just said net assets didn't I. 

 

USCIS sez:

 

If you cannot meet the minimum income requirements using your earned income, you have various options:

• You may add the cash value of your assets. This includes money in savings accounts, stocks, bonds, and property. To determine the amount of assets required to qualify, subtract your household income from the minimum income requirement (125% of the poverty level for your family size). You must prove the cash value of your assets is worth five times this difference (the amount left over).
  • Exceptions:
    • If the person being sponsored is a spouse, or son/daughter (who is 18 years or older) of a U.S. citizen: The minimum cash value of assets must be three times the difference between the sponsor’s household income and 125% of the federal poverty guide line for the household

https://www.***removed***/affidavit-of-support/using-assets-meet-income-requirements.html is a pretty good summary of how and what types of assets can be used and how to value them.

 

Thank you for the clarification.  It was very valuable.

 

[Unidentified 2,930]

One thing to consider is this: you're going to come over to the US and neither of you will have a job for an unknown period of time. Is this really a good time to fly over and be two people on no income? Or should you consider delaying the interview and hope he will soon have a new job? If you don't wait, who will support the two of you?

[pushbrk 12,908]

1 hour ago, Nitas_man said:

Of course.  Thank you.  I just said net assets didn't I. 

 

USCIS sez:

 

If you cannot meet the minimum income requirements using your earned income, you have various options:

• You may add the cash value of your assets. This includes money in savings accounts, stocks, bonds, and property. To determine the amount of assets required to qualify, subtract your household income from the minimum income requirement (125% of the poverty level for your family size). You must prove the cash value of your assets is worth five times this difference (the amount left over).
  • Exceptions:
    • If the person being sponsored is a spouse, or son/daughter (who is 18 years or older) of a U.S. citizen: The minimum cash value of assets must be three times the difference between the sponsor’s household income and 125% of the federal poverty guide line for the household

https://www.***removed***/affidavit-of-support/using-assets-meet-income-requirements.html is a pretty good summary of how and what types of assets can be used and how to value them.

 

Thank you for the clarification.  It was very valuable.

 

You are missing the important part that I was referring to.  It is about what is considered "LIQUID".