Country of chargeability

[Tamerlan 0]

 

Hi, i am dv2022 winner. At the initial entry i chose my country of eligibility as Azerbaijan. Even at all my documents it was written as Azerbaijan. But as a matter of fact i was born in Ukraine. Because of technical error my national identity card and passport didn’t have Ukraine as a birth country and instead it was Azerbaijan at both of them. Back then i thought i had to put what my documents says. Then after i won the greencard i understood that i will have to provide birth certificate and there will be different infos between my documents. And i renewed my identity card and passport with correct ones. I have been in Azerbaijan since 5 and never left. So i would like to ask what should i do? Is this going to be a problem for me? Plus, my parents were both Azerbaijan citizens at my birth time. I don’t know what to do. Pls help me. Thanks in advance

[SusieQQQ 11,587]

I think you will be ok but cannot guarantee it. Until a year or two back there was an explicit provision in the manual that an incorrect country of birth would be ok if it was assigned to the same geographic region as the correct one - and both Azerbaijan and Ukraine fall under Europe region for DV. This provision has been removed from the public version of the manual, however it is not clear whether the actual rule has changed, and I am aware of a case from just the past week or so where a similar case (I think it was Latvia and Russia) was approved. You do have a copy of your old passport to take to the interview I assume, you can explain there if they ask you. Where will you be doing the interview?

 

 

Edited August 6, 2021 by SusieQQQ

[Tamerlan 0]

1 minute ago, SusieQQQ said:

I think you will be ok but cannot guarantee it. Until a year or two back there was an explicit provision in the manual that an incorrect country of birth would be ok if it was assigned to the same geographic region as the correct one - and both Azerbaijan and Ukraine fall under Europe region for DV. This provision has been removed from the public version of the manual, however it is not clear whether the actual law has changed, and I am aware of a case from just the past week or so where a similar case (I think it was Latvia and Russia) was approved. You do have a copy of your old passport to take to the interview I assume, you can explain there if they ask you. Where will you be doing the interview?

Yes, i have old copy of my passport. Interview will be at Georgia, Tbilisi. I have done some research about that provision you mentioned. Yes it has been removed but at the same time there is not any mention about this situation which says this error is completely fatal. That’s why I can’t find something solid to decide whether it is worth to attend interview. Probably i will attend the interview anyways. Plus, there is a provision also which says i can choose either of my parents’ country of chargeability if at the time of birth neither of parents were born in that country or neither of them were residents. Can that provision apply to me also? Or it is just for those who were born in ineligible countries? Thank for your effort by the way. Appreciate it.

[SusieQQQ 11,587]

2 minutes ago, Tamerlan said:

Yes, i have old copy of my passport. Interview will be at Georgia, Tbilisi. I have done some research about that provision you mentioned. Yes it has been removed but at the same time there is not any mention about this situation which says this error is completely fatal. That’s why I can’t find something solid to decide whether it is worth to attend interview. Probably i will attend the interview anyways. Plus, there is a provision also which says i can choose either of my parents’ country of chargeability if at the time of birth neither of parents were born in that country or neither of them were residents. Can that provision apply to me also? Or it is just for those who were born in ineligible countries? Thank for your effort by the way. Appreciate it.

As far as I know the parent chargeability provision is just for ineligible countries but anyway you’d also need to find actual proof that your parents were not residing there at the time, which is often hard to do years later.

[jan22 3,056]

In the Frequently Asked Questions section at the end of the document linked to below -- the official instructions for the DV-2022 program from the US State Department -- Question 1 is on the issue of eligibility/chargeability.  It clearly states at the end of the response that: 

 

"Listing an incorrect country of eligibility or chargeability (i.e., one to which you cannot establish a valid claim) will make you ineligible for DV-2022."

 

The second question response makes it clear that you can use your spouse's or parents' countries of eligibility only if you were born in an ineligible country.  Plus, it states that if you claim an alternate country of chargeability, you have to explain why you are doing so on your E-DV Entry Form, Question 6.  It seems unlikely you did that on your entry from what you posted.  

 

These instructions would seem to disqualify you from the 2022 DV program.

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/Diversity-Visa/DV-Instructions-Translations/DV-2022-Instructions-Translations/DV-2022-Instructions-English.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi4w9Pq05zyAhUXHc0KHXJ2CwIQFnoECAQQAg&usg=AOvVaw0iqrMfdfLV21-8dOpo4epU

[SusieQQQ 11,587]

24 minutes ago, jan22 said:

Listing an incorrect country of eligibility or chargeability (i.e., one to which you cannot establish a valid claim) will make you ineligible for DV-2022."

 

The second question response makes it clear that you can use your spouse's or parents' countries of eligibility only if you were born in an ineligible country. 

Yet the manual has included exceptions for these and in fact for spouses specifically explicitly  now states you can elect your spouse country if it is more favorable, not just for ineligibility.  

[jan22 3,056]

2 hours ago, SusieQQQ said:

Yet the manual has included exceptions for these and in fact for spouses specifically explicitly  now states you can elect your spouse country if it is more favorable, not just for ineligibility.  

But the OP did not use his spouse's country. 

 

There is no inconsistency between the quoted statement and the existence of approved methods of cross- chargeability.  The referenced statement comes after the information on cross-chargeability.  The use of an approved cross-eligibility as described in the instructions would be an instance of establishing a "valid claim" to a country other than your birth country -- which would be made clear in the original application via the required explanation.

 

Not sure what manual you are referring to (FAM?).  If it's the FAM, the only exception to cross-chargeability that doesn't start with being from an ineligible country is when a spouse's country of chargeability is more favorable (i.e., from a lower admissions country).  And that exception requires that the principal applicant be from an eligible country to begin with.  I can't find any other exceptions.

[SusieQQQ 11,587]

1 minute ago, jan22 said:

But the OP did not use his spouse's country. 

 

There is no inconsistency between the quoted statement and the existence of approved methods of cross- chargeability.  The referenced statement comes after the information on cross-chargeability.  The use of an approved cross-eligibility as described in the instructions would be an instance of establishing a "valid claim" to a country other than your birth country -- which would be made clear in the original application via the required explanation.

 

Not sure what manual you are referring to (FAM?).  If it's the FAM, the only exception to cross-chargeability that doesn't start with being from an ineligible country is when a spouse's country of chargeability is more favorable (i.e., from a lower admissions country).  And that exception requires that the principal applicant be from an eligible country to begin with.  I can't find any other exceptions.

This is not a cross-chargeability issue. FAM used to explicitly state that an incorrect country of chargeability was not disqualifying IF the incorrect country was from the same region, which in this case they are. (This is because selection is made by region, not by country, in other words there would be no advantage or difference in the chance of selection from that error. A different region by contrast would be automatic disqualification as that would have altered the chance of being selected.) That explicit clause has been removed but that rule continues to be applied, as recently as last week in a case I am aware of where a person born in Russia incorrectly charged to Latvia.

[jan22 3,056]

1 minute ago, SusieQQQ said:

This is not a cross-chargeability issue. FAM used to explicitly state that an incorrect country of chargeability was not disqualifying IF the incorrect country was from the same region, which in this case they are. (This is because selection is made by region, not by country, in other words there would be no advantage or difference in the chance of selection from that error. A different region by contrast would be automatic disqualification as that would have altered the chance of being selected.) That explicit clause has been removed but that rule continues to be applied, as recently as last week in a case I am aware of where a person born in Russia incorrectly charged to Latvia.

I put in the information on the exceptions (the cross-chargeability) to show the only approved ways to claim a country other than your birth country, so the possible exceptions to not putting your birth country were clear up-front.

 

Generally, if the instruction is not in the FAM (especially if it was previously included and was removed), it is not applicable.  Do mistakes happen and an officer uses old guidance and a case gets approved?  Certainly.  Is there sometimes information in a case that may be unknown to others that makes the person eligible under current guidance?  Certainly.  I just think it's important for the OP to be aware of the current offticial stance on the issue before deciding to move forward with the further expenses of a DV application.  

 

Generally

[SusieQQQ 11,587]

21 minutes ago, SusieQQQ said:

This is not a cross-chargeability issue. FAM used to explicitly state that an incorrect country of chargeability was not disqualifying IF the incorrect country was from the same region, which in this case they are. (This is because selection is made by region, not by country, in other words there would be no advantage or difference in the chance of selection from that error. A different region by contrast would be automatic disqualification as that would have altered the chance of being selected.) That explicit clause has been removed but that rule continues to be applied, as recently as last week in a case I am aware of where a person born in Russia incorrectly charged to Latvia.

To be specific, where the clause was is still numbered but rather than fully described is just listed as “unavailable”. It was unclear at first whether that meant it was removed from consideration or just not made available in the public version of the manual, but the fact that people are still being approved implies it is still there.  As I said in the first response there are no guarantees on this one, but I certainly would not discourage someone from attempting to pursue this as long as they understand that the chance of rejection is there. Most people would spend $330 for the chance especially if others are still being approved.

 

 

Edited August 6, 2021 by SusieQQQ

[jan22 3,056]

32 minutes ago, SusieQQQ said:

To be specific, where the clause was is still numbered but rather than fully described is just listed as “unavailable”. It was unclear at first whether that meant it was removed from consideration or just not made available in the public version of the manual, but the fact that people are still being approved implies it is still there.  As I said in the first response there are no guarantees on this one, but I certainly would not discourage someone from attempting to pursue this as long as they understand that the chance of rejection is there. Most people would spend $330 for the chance especially if others are still being approved.

 

 

I wasn't trying to discourage an application -- just wanted to put out information on which to make a decision.  The $330 is just the visa application fee, as I know you know.  There's also the medical, travel to the interview, etc.  Only the OP can decide if the total cost is worth the chance of refusal, of course.

[SusieQQQ 11,587]

2 minutes ago, jan22 said:

I wasn't trying to discourage an application -- just wanted to put out information on which to make a decision.  The $330 is just the visa application fee, as I know you know.  There's also the medical, travel to the interview, etc.  Only the OP can decide if the total cost is worth the chance of refusal, of course.

People have in the past not scheduled medicals until they know they don’t have other disqualifications. Not the way I’d do it and certainly would not advise for a high case number, but it has been done. Then they just go on AP till the medical result is handed in. You also need to know your consulate - there are a couple that will not allow entry for the interview  if the medical  is not complete.

[SusieQQQ 11,587]

FYI we have had another case yesterday being approved with wrong country but same region. Different embassy to the others I am aware of.