Final public charge rule

[Z@f 6]

If someone has insurance through marketplace and Obamacare and got subsidized insurance through it would it be considered as public charge second question people going to apply for I-751 and n-400 would it new public charge rule impact them as well or not

[yuna628 9,689]

1 minute ago, Z@f said:

If someone has insurance through marketplace and Obamacare and got subsidized insurance through it would it be considered as public charge second question people going to apply for I-751 and n-400 would it new public charge rule impact them as well or not

The subsidy is not considered a public charge.

[Lemonslice 4,922]

21 minutes ago, Ash. said:

That would depend on if they would take the foreign fiances assets into consideration. My husband came in on K-1 with 14k$, where as my available money was what ever he sent to me.

With that said, I do agree with showing that. But... I mean realistically that's what being 125% of the poverty line should do. I know it doesn't take in consideration net income and only gross, but ideally they feel if you make that much then you should be able to save a little over 1000$.

There's always been four types of AOSers.

The ones that do it and can afford it/have saved for it.
The ones who hit a streak of bad luck and can't afford it. (These would be the people who could probably prove they have the money for AOS at interview, but then end up having to spend it prior to AOS)
The ones who didn't even know they had to afford it. (Adding something like this into the interview process would make them aware)
The ones who don't care and don't want their spouses AOS'd.  (Wouldn't really affect them because they probably have the funds the show and probably still won't AOS their spouse.)

I think it's fine to use immigrant resources, I have zero problem with that. I also agree that common sense would be that 125% is allowing them to have some savings - but we see these stories so often that apparently it's not that easy.

 

Maybe a security deposit deposit might solve it for most - AOS is prepaid, otherwise it's refunded upon exit of the country? 

 

[Ash.1101 1,756]

14 minutes ago, Lemonslice said:

I think it's fine to use immigrant resources, I have zero problem with that. I also agree that common sense would be that 125% is allowing them to have some savings - but we see these stories so often that apparently it's not that easy.

 

Maybe a security deposit deposit might solve it for most - AOS is prepaid, otherwise it's refunded upon exit of the country? 

 

I think prepaid AOS would be a GREAT idea. I think the mechanics of it working might be a little weird on the paper work end (such as the credit being attached to an A# and the USCIS employee putting it on the wrong account), but I think it would make sense. 

I also wouldn't mind with a prepaid AOS in place that the USC be penalized in some way shape or form for not AOSing their spouse. Having it prepaid would bring the type of AOSers from 4 types to just the ones who don't want their spouses AOS'd for usually selfish reasons.

[Mrsjackson 300]

1 hour ago, missileman said:

https://www.kff.org/disparities-policy/fact-sheet/public-charge-policies-for-immigrants-implications-for-health-coverage/

 

"What are the Key Changes in the Rule?

The rule broadens the programs that the federal government will consider in public charge determinations to include previously excluded health, nutrition, and housing programs. The rule redefines a public charge as an “alien who receives one or more public benefits for more than 12 months in the aggregate within any 36-month period (such that, for instance, receipt of two benefits in one month counts as two months),” and defines public benefits to include federal, state, or local cash benefit programs for income maintenance and certain health, nutrition, and housing programs that were previously excluded from public charge determinations, including non-emergency Medicaid for non-pregnant adults, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and several housing programs (see Appendix Table 1).

⁷The rule does not include CHIP or subsidies for Affordable Care Act Marketplace coverage as public benefits. Public charge determinations will only consider use of benefits by the individual and will not take into account benefits used by other family members, including children, of the person for whom officials are making the determination.⁸

Self delete because I misread. That’s what happens when you have a one year old waving things in your face all day. 

 

Edited August 13, 2019 by Mrsjackson

[yuna628 9,689]

7 minutes ago, Ash. said:

I think prepaid AOS would be a GREAT idea. I think the mechanics of it working might be a little weird on the paper work end (such as the credit being attached to an A# and the USCIS employee putting it on the wrong account), but I think it would make sense. 

I also wouldn't mind with a prepaid AOS in place that the USC be penalized in some way shape or form for not AOSing their spouse. Having it prepaid would bring the type of AOSers from 4 types to just the ones who don't want their spouses AOS'd for usually selfish reasons.

 I'd like to see the K1 - AOS process more streamlined or combined. But ultimately with the extreme delay waiting around for an EAD or the green card is a problem. It was also eye-opening to see how many employers just didn't know what an EAD was or didn't want to hire because there was an EAD instead of a green card.

 

Also... if obtaining health insurance is now going to be considered a weighty factor, you have seen the posts from couples on this forum (almost nearly daily) that weren't aware about getting an SSN, got it too late, or the SSA somehow screwed the pooch on that process, and then their company HR or the insurance employee won't sign them up because they don't understand the rules and now it's too late for open or special enrollment. I'm sure the government isn't thinking about that little hiccup though. If there was a lot of red tape cut down and streamlined processes, I think some things would ease the burden.

[Ash.1101 1,756]

1 minute ago, yuna628 said:

 I'd like to see the K1 - AOS process more streamlined or combined. But ultimately with the extreme delay waiting around for an EAD or the green card is a problem. It was also eye-opening to see how many employers just didn't know what an EAD was or didn't want to hire because there was an EAD instead of a green card.

 

Also... if obtaining health insurance is now going to be considered a weighty factor, you have seen the posts from couples on this forum (almost nearly daily) that weren't aware about getting an SSN, got it too late, or the SSA somehow screwed the pooch on that process, and then their company HR or the insurance employee won't sign them up because they don't understand the rules and now it's too late for open or special enrollment. I'm sure the government isn't thinking about that little hiccup though. If there was a lot of red tape cut down and streamlined processes, I think some things would ease the burden.

It would be nice, but at that point if it were so stream lined that you could come in, get married, stay and get a green card in a quick amount of time, there would probably be a lot less CR-1/IR-1. At the end of the day though, they are aware that for K-1, you may or may not get married, so they can't stream line it too much. It's possible that you could have a bond or a deposit per se on AOS if something happens. It is also possible that they could increase their concepts of what a relationship is, as we've seen people here who have gotten a Visa and within a month of coming in the US they have decided they won't get married.

I personally believe that the government doesn't mind the red tape and the lack of information. There was a poster on another thread who was looking at USCIS and travel.gov sites to try to figure out how to immigrate, but all of the information is separate, sometimes the pages don't even link to each other. At the end of the day, it looks like if you want to immigrate, it's on you to figure out how to do it correctly. They don't seem to be willing to give all the facts to make it any easier.

[RCable 75]

3 hours ago, cyclone27 said:

Yes - if you are going to sponsor someone you need to do it on your own income.

I've been through this process before, years ago. My ex-husband is English. I lived with him in London for 5 years before we decided to move to America. Because I lived in the UK for so long, I had no credit history or income in the US. I needed my father to co-sponsor my ex in order for us to move back.. Otherwise, I would have had to move back and spend a few years establishing a job & credit history before I could even apply for my then husband to come over. My father never actually helped at all money-wise, and I would have never asked him to either. I always saw it as my responsibility. So, I still support co-sponsors for situations like this. But if we didn't have this, and I did still move back, it would be 5+ years probably before my ex would have had a visa. That's a long time to keep families apart. And I was grateful that I had someone willing to co-sponsor. 

9 years later, I'm going through this process again, but this time my husband is Canadian. I don't need a co-sponsor but I still support the need for them in some situations. Maybe the rules just need to be tightened up when it comes to that.

[Scandi 4,173]

2 hours ago, JC&BS said:

How long is the spousal visa process?

You don't have to be married to get residency in Sweden, it's enough that you're moving in/living with the Swedish citizen that you have a relationship with after you get your residency granted. So therefore there is no fiance or spousal visa, only temporary and permanent residency. The wait time is the same as that of the US spousal visa, just over a year. 

[RCable 75]

3 hours ago, cyclone27 said:

^not to mention if you can’t earn 125% the poverty level yourself something is seriously wrong.

Needing a co-sponsor isn't always down to that. A co-sponsor is usually needed if the USC and spouse are moving back to the US after living abroad for several years.

[Unlockable 7,315]

1 hour ago, beloved_dingo said:

We've all heard dozens of stories (many in our own families!) along the lines of "my grandfather/grandmother came here with nothing but the clothes on his/her back and worked 70 hours a week to make a living and support their family" or "My *insert relative* didn't speak a word of English when they came here but started selling door to door to save enough to start their own business" and 100 different variations of the same thing because that is the epitome of the American dream and stories like this are used to inspire others (regardless of citizenship or immigration status). I don't think we should lose the spirit of this in our country, personally. 

I think keeping the spirit of immigration at heart is good but change is absolutely necessary. The "back in day when our grandparents came here" is good to keep the history of how the country was developed but look what has happened since then. There were no computers, cellphones, or electric cars back then. I work for a Fortune 50 company and 90% of its products are produce outside of America. A person can be a graphic designer in a small Asia Pacific island and have Western clients. And it has been reported that extreme poverty in the world has declined, and one of the main contributor is the fact that those developed countries that had the most poverty are now manufacturing products... many for Western Companies. The inflow of immigrants must be monitored and adjusted. Everything from education to disease, to potential terrorism must be a factored in. Radical Religious Terrorism was not a huge issue to factor in when people's grandparents migrated to America last century. World War may have been a factor but not somebody hijacking a plane and flying it into a building. But who knows what the next big thing will be a few decades from now that will effect immigration. But whatever it is we have to be willing to adjust the immigration process if need be.

 

Point being that immigration rules can not remain the same forever. Changes always need to be made eventually to changing times (look at what streaming movies did to Blockbuster Video because Blockbuster did not adapt to the times). I had a convo with my coworker about how his granddaughter (he is a bit older than me) will never know how to drive a stick shift car because they are hardly made here anymore. I countered that my grandchildren may never know what it is like to drive a gas engine car.

[Crazy Cat 41,985]

7 minutes ago, Unlockable said:

I think keeping the spirit of immigration at heart is good but change is absolutely necessary. The "back in day when our grandparents came here" is good to keep the history of how the country was developed but look what has happened since then. There were no computers, cellphones, or electric cars back then. I work for a Fortune 50 company and 90% of its products are produce outside of America. A person can be a graphic designer in a small Asia Pacific island and have Western clients. And it has been reported that extreme poverty in the world has declined, and one of the main contributor is the fact that those developed countries that had the most poverty are now manufacturing products... many for Western Companies. The inflow of immigrants must be monitored and adjusted. Everything from education to disease, to potential terrorism must be a factored in. Radical Religious Terrorism was not a huge issue to factor in when people's grandparents migrated to America last century. World War may have been a factor but not somebody hijacking a plane and flying it into a building. But who knows what the next big thing will be a few decades from now that will effect immigration. But whatever it is we have to be willing to adjust the immigration process if need be.

 

Point being that immigration rules can not remain the same forever. Changes always need to be made eventually to changing times (look at what streaming movies did to Blockbuster Video because Blockbuster did not adapt to the times). I had a convo with my coworker about how his granddaughter (he is a bit older than me) will never know how to drive a stick shift car because they are hardly made here anymore. I countered that my grandchildren may never know what it is like to drive a gas engine car.

Very well said!!!!   You said what I was trying to say in an earlier post!!!!  😁

[Allaboutwaiting 2,503]

7 hours ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

They have already been using the vast majority of these rules for a long while now. So please do not worry

Here's an extract of the proposed rule that the Secretary signed on September 21, 2018. The official version of this document will publish in the Federal Register.

 

"This proposed rule would impose new costs on the population applying to adjust status using Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (Form I-485) that are subject to the public charge grounds on inadmissibility. DHS would now require any adjustment applicants subject to the public charge inadmissibility grounds to submit Form I-944 with their Form I-485 to demonstrate they are not likely to become a public charge."

"These applicants may also incur additional costs if DHS determines that they are required to submit Form I-944 in support of their applications for extension of stay and change of status. Moreover, the proposed rule would impose new costs associated with the proposed public charge bond process, including new costs for completing and filing Form I-945 (Public Charge Bond), and Form I-356 (Request for Cancellation of Public Charge Bond)."

 

There are new rules, more forms and associated costs, ergo, even longer delays. 

Edited August 13, 2019 by Allaboutwaiting

[VALU 55]

"DATES: This final rule is effective at 12:00 a.m. Eastern Time on [INSERT
DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].
DHS will apply this rule only to applications and petitions postmarked (or, if applicable,
submitted electronically) on or after the effective date. Applications and petitions already
pending with USCIS on the effective date of the rule (i.e. were postmarked before the
effective date of the rule and were accepted by USCIS) will not be subject to the rule.  "

 

Question: Which applications are they talking about? Spouse visa application 1-130  or the actual greencard application at NVC stage? Since the rule is only for greencard applications, then isn't it talking about at the NVC stage then where the actual greencard application takes place? So then wouldn't this affect those who apply for greencard at the NVC stage from that date?

[Crazy Cat 41,985]

2 minutes ago, Allaboutwaiting said:

"This proposed rule would impose new costs on the population applying to adjust status using Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (Form  I485) that are subject to the public charge  grounds on inadmissibility.

Does this ALL applicants....or just certain ones?