Remote work income from non-US company caused RFIE

[payxibka 10,045]

Just now, Nitas_man said:

I do not forget however violation of terms of the visa (will likely) close the door on adjustment from K1 causing them to re-file I130/I485 on immediate relative status

 

I hope nothing I said implies they’ll scramble jets and deport him (and) who knows I’m wrong.  That’s my worst case call right now.

Forgiveness is forgiveness (i.e. as if it never happened).  Illegal work on a b2 adjustment is forgiven, why would a k1 be different?

[art1234 14]

3 minutes ago, Nitas_man said:

I do not forget however violation of terms of the visa (will likely) close the door on adjustment from K1 causing them to re-file I130/I485 on immediate relative status

 

I hope nothing I said implies they’ll scramble jets and deport him (and) who knows I’m wrong.  That’s my worst case call right now.

How come other's have reported successful AOS even after mentioning their continuous remote work for non-US entity?   

[Nitas_man 3,100]

Just now, payxibka said:

Forgiveness is forgiveness (i.e. as if it never happened).  Illegal work on a b2 adjustment is forgiven, why would a k1 be different?

Illegal work on a B2 is forgiven the same way I am guessing this will be forgiven - filing an I130 with AOS

[Nitas_man 3,100]

4 minutes ago, art95 said:

How come other's have reported successful AOS even after mentioning their continuous remote work for non-US entity?   

Nothing I said implies this activity is unforgivable, just expensive and paperwork heavy

At any rate OP was advised to correct the I864 and re-file it, which is what they should do right now.

Edited July 11, 2021 by Nitas_man

[art1234 14]

9 minutes ago, Nitas_man said:

Nothing I said implies this activity is unforgivable

Ah I miss-read your post... The core problem is that the law as much as I can find "doesn't know" about existence of remote work. Back when it was written the only way of working was to physically go to office which inevitably be for U.S. company. These days there's so many ways of working. Technically I own a business through which I provide IT services. Do they expect people to close their business when going through K1/AOS? And I could also have passive income from investment's, real estate and 100 other things.

Edited July 11, 2021 by art95

[art1234 14]

I think the best thing I can think of is to write a statement of that in my case the authorization was not explicitly required by law. If it doesn't work out it'll set a precedent for others.

I don't think removing the stated income from a new i-864 will look good. Once the water is spilled no point of trying to get it all back in bucket. 

[Nitas_man 3,100]

3 minutes ago, art95 said:

Ah I miss-read your post... The core problem is that the law as much as I can find "doesn't know" about existence of remote work. Back when it was written the only way of working was to physically go to office which inevitably be for U.S. company. These days there's so many ways of working. Technically I own a business through which I provide IT services. Do they expect people to close their business when going through K1/AOS? And I could also have passive income from investment's, real estate and 100 other things.

IRS clearly defines source income as the physical location the person is in while doing the work and sets very clear regulations about both billable work and passive income.

If you want to enter the US and continue to work there are paths to do that.  K1 is not one of them.

[Nitas_man 3,100]

22 minutes ago, art95 said:

How come other's have reported successful AOS even after mentioning their continuous remote work for non-US entity?   

Since 2006 I have seen this forgiven hundreds of times.  I do not recall a successful K1 adjustment where the rules were blatantly disregarded.  I have seen several K1 adjustments that switched as mentioned above for one reason or the other. 
This case is unique, makes it interesting.

Edited July 11, 2021 by Nitas_man

[Nitas_man 3,100]

6 minutes ago, art95 said:

I think the best thing I can think of is to write a statement of that in my case the authorization was not explicitly required by law. If it doesn't work out it'll set a precedent for others.

I don't think removing the stated income from a new i-864 will look good. Once the water is spilled no point of trying to get it all back in bucket. 

Up to you

[payxibka 10,045]

1 hour ago, Nitas_man said:

Illegal work on a B2 is forgiven the same way I am guessing this will be forgiven - filing an I130 with AOS

Don't see that the i130 has anything to do with it.  Its the i485 that is the application for the greencard,  the same i485 is used for both situations. 

[Nitas_man 3,100]

21 minutes ago, payxibka said:

Don't see that the i130 has anything to do with it.  Its the i485 that is the application for the greencard,  the same i485 is used for both situations. 

All of the regulations I have read state “adjustment of status under immigrant petition” and it is clear that USCIS waives unauthorized employment under that category.

This is my guess right now.  Employment authorization would not be necessary at all if employment was simply allowed and forgiven under the terms of the K1 visa after the couple gets married.
 

 

 

Edited July 11, 2021 by Nitas_man

[SteveInBostonI130 3,434]

6 minutes ago, payxibka said:

Don't see that the i130 has anything to do with it.  Its the i485 that is the application for the greencard,  the same i485 is used for both situations. 

Unapproved work is forgiven when married to a USC, which requires the I-130.  Unapproved work is not forgiven for a B2 holder.  A B2 cannot AOS without the I-130.

 

Not sure if the K1 holder can AOS without the I-130 due to the unapproved work since that violated the terms of the K1.  

 

@art95, you'll need to provide an explanation about your understanding of the work rules because you cannot provide an EAD.  You may also try to submit a new I-864 at the same time.  Please come back here and let us know how USCIS responds.

[Nitas_man 3,100]

16 minutes ago, payxibka said:

Don't see that the i130 has anything to do with it.  Its the i485 that is the application for the greencard,  the same i485 is used for both situations. 

I129F is not the petition category listed under “waived”

 

1 minute ago, SteveInBostonI130 said:

Unapproved work is forgiven when married to a USC, which requires the I-130.  Unapproved work is not forgiven for a B2 holder.  A B2 cannot AOS without the I-130.

 

Not sure if the K1 holder can AOS without the I-130 due to the unapproved work since that violated the terms of the K1.  

 

@art95, you'll need to provide an explanation about your understanding of the work rules because you cannot provide an EAD.  You may also try to submit a new I-864 at the same time.  Please come back here and let us know how USCIS responds.

Replace “B2” with any category of “non-immigrant not authorized to work visa holder” and that is what I believe OP is facing.  
 

I also believe that it won’t be an issue to fix it but this I485 is likely DOA

[payxibka 10,045]

3 minutes ago, SteveInBostonI130 said:

Unapproved work is forgiven when married to a USC, which requires the I-130.  Unapproved work is not forgiven for a B2 holder.  A B2 cannot AOS without the I-130.

 

Not sure if the K1 holder can AOS without the I-130 due to the unapproved work since that violated the terms of the K1.  

 

@art95, you'll need to provide an explanation about your understanding of the work rules because you cannot provide an EAD.  You may also try to submit a new I-864 at the same time.  Please come back here and let us know how USCIS responds.

Th

 

Just now, Nitas_man said:

I129F is not the petition category listed under “waived”

 

Replace “B2” with any category of “non-immigrant not authorized to work visa holder” and that is what I believe OP is facing.  
 

I also believe that it won’t be an issue to fix it but this I485 is likely DOA

 

 

In order to file the i485, it requires an underlying approved petition, current priority and legal presence in country.   I130 is NOT the only possible underlying petition.  

[Nitas_man 3,100]

15 minutes ago, payxibka said:

Th

 

 

 

In order to file the i485, it requires an underlying approved petition, current priority and legal presence in country.   I130 is NOT the only possible underlying petition.  

For OP’s sake I hope you are correct and I am not

USCIS denies K1 I485 petitions when the couple fails to marry within 90 days or “otherwise violates the terms of the visa”.  Marriage date, travel, and we will see if unauthorized work is included.  All of these “fail to comply with terms….” are fixed with a new Immigrant petition.

Edited July 11, 2021 by Nitas_man