Final public charge rule

[Crazy Cat 41,745]

Just now, GoodJack said:

This 250%

Do you think the 125% of FPL is realistic ?

[GoodJack 3]

Just now, missileman said:

Do you think the 125% of FPL is realistic ?

FPL?

[Mrsjackson 300]

56 minutes ago, azblk said:

Before this new rule, For most immigrants the public charge bar was overcame with an i-864 completed by your sponsor or joint sponsor. As long they could show they earned over 125% of the poverty level for your household you would get approved. Under the new rules - The i-864 stops being sufficient on its own and the consular/DHS officer must now consider other factors like age, income, health, job skills, job history , credit score and the like.  Each of those factors is assigned a positive/negative rating.

 

So in my thinking a house wife/husband who stays home has a lot of negative factors and almost no positives based on the guidance from the new rule - she has no personal income, no employment history, no job skills, is unemployed blah blah. So with all those negative factors and one positive factor it is hard to see that person getting approved.

I have also seen some interpretations that the applicant(immigrant) must have an income of 125% level as well.

Ah I see. So other users have most likely tried to explain this already but the other factors that go along with affidavit (such as age, health, etc) have always been a part of the process. They’re just reiterating it in the new rule. If the 864 is currently sufficient but the applicant had a lot of the other negative factors the CO might still decide to deny. 

Edited August 15, 2019 by Mrsjackson

[geowrian 22,337]

1 minute ago, GoodJack said:

FPL?

Federal Poverty Level

[GoodJack 3]

1 minute ago, Mrsjackson said:

Ah I see. So other users have most likely tried to explain this already but the other factors that go along with affidavit (such as age, health, etc) have always been a part of the process. They’re just reiterating it in the “new” rules. If the 864 is currently sufficient but the applicant had a lot of the other negative factors the CO might still decide to deny. 

Yes. Uptick on denials have increased based on the liability to be welfare burden factor. 

[GoodJack 3]

4 minutes ago, geowrian said:

Federal Poverty Level

Yes. Department of Health and Human Services says it is sufficient. 

Edited August 15, 2019 by GoodJack

[jasonlzak 173]

9 minutes ago, GoodJack said:

Yes. Uptick on denials have increased based on the liability to be welfare burden factor. 

Like I mentioned before, if you are sill able to work, healthy and possess a sufficient AoS, you should overcome the rest factors. But the CO now will look at the credibility of the (co)sponsors, the immigrant has to demonstrate a well-known relationship with the sponsor and the likelihood of that person will obligate the AoS. Again, it's up to the CO, whether that person is tolerant or not, whether he/she strictly enforces the rule and guidance from this administration.

Edited August 15, 2019 by jasonlzak
typo

[azblk 338]

12 minutes ago, Mrsjackson said:

Ah I see. So other users have most likely tried to explain this already but the other factors that go along with affidavit (such as age, health, etc) have always been a part of the process. They’re just reiterating it in the new rule. If the 864 is currently sufficient but the applicant had a lot of the other negative factors the CO might still decide to deny. 

That happened very very rarely if at all. Now it is center stage. For instance a US citizen would have a very hard time sponsoring a parent unless they could show a 250% FPL under the new rules yet before it was a given that if you could show 125% your parent/s would be approved.

Edited August 15, 2019 by azblk

[GoodJack 3]

1 minute ago, jasonlzak said:

Like I mentioned before, if you are sill able to work, healthy and possess a sufficient AoS, you should overcome the rest factors. But the CO now will look at the credibility of the (co)sponsors, the immigrant have to demonstrate a well-known relationship with the sponsor and the likelihood of that person will obligate the AoS. Again, it's up to the CO, whether that person is tolerant or not, whether he/she strictly enforces the rule and guidance from this administration.

Relationship with sponsors as in close relatives such as the petitioner spouse itself or the family of the petitioner I guess. 

[GoodJack 3]

1 minute ago, azblk said:

That happened very very rarely if at all. Now it is center stage. For instance a US citizen would have a very hard time sponsoring a parent unless they could show a 250% FPL under the new rules yet before it was a given that if you could show 125% your parent/s would be approved.

That would curtail chain migration which the administration is against. Would not be so easy to bring both parents with same sponsor that easily. Especially when parents are usually old, out of working age and have health issues. 

[azblk 338]

2 minutes ago, GoodJack said:

That would curtail chain migration which the administration is against. Would not be so easy to bring both parents with same sponsor that easily. Especially when parents are usually old, out of working age and have health issues. 

And that is what I believe this administration is trying to do here. I believe that when this rule goes into effect it will make it impossible for many to sponsor their parents, spouses, children and the end result will be the number of immigrants entering will be thoroughly curtailed. They will be getting their desire for merit based immigration by rule and not by law.

We just have to wait and see what happens, what the courts will allow or disallow.

[GoodJack 3]

1 minute ago, azblk said:

And that is what I believe this administration is trying to do here. I believe that when this rule goes into effect it will make it impossible for many to sponsor their parents, spouses, children and the end result will be the number of immigrants entering will be thoroughly curtailed. They will be getting their desire for merit based immigration by rule and not by law.

We just have to wait and see what happens, what the courts will allow or disallow.

Courts have been in favor of the Trumpster on immigration issues so far. Would not get hopes up. 

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

2 minutes ago, azblk said:

Then we wait. Anyway this thread is not about DACA or Trump. Its about the new public charge rules so we should stay on topic.

Correct sir..... 

[GoodJack 3]

1 minute ago, azblk said:

Then we wait. Anyway this thread is not about DACA or Trump. Its about the new public charge rules so we should stay on topic.

True. What would the veterans of this forum say that an ideal situation would be right now for an immigrant to not be seen as a public charge? Primary Sponsor with 250% annual income, young age with no health issues, educated, good work history and savings in the bank to establish themselves? What is this self reliance form I keep hearing about in this thread? Does it officially exist? 

[azblk 338]

Just now, GoodJack said:

True. What would the veterans of this forum say that an ideal situation would be right now for an immigrant to not be seen as a public charge? Primary Sponsor with 250% annual income, young age with no health issues, educated, good work history and savings in the bank to establish themselves? What is this self reliance form I keep hearing about in this thread? Does it officially exist? 

its a new form i944