When does that 10 years of support start and end? I-864

[Boiler 44,943]

5 minutes ago, Redro said:

I'm not quite sure why your lawyers don't think the $250K you paid out was sufficient. 

I-864 has a provision where you can use assets as opposed to income to show you can support the immigrant. 

Currently 125% for a household of 2 is 24,650 (effective March 2023)- so it was probably less when you divorced... 

That is $246,500 for 10 years... So, you've already paid her for 10 years UNLESS the $250K settlement was a separate agreement. 

One would assume you calculated how many credits she had for social security because if you filed MFJ she received some credits through you...  So, you might not be bound by the full 10 years. But, if she never works she won't be ever get the credits for social security so your obligation will never end....

Either way, sounds like your lawyers are saying "Yep! Buddy, you have to pay her $2k a month in perpetuity if she never gets a job". 

So, maybe a lesson to all petitioners out there... 

Interesting situation. And Boiler did point out the lawyer who likes to file these cases. So, it is interesting to see a real life example in the wild. 

Thank you @Cali_D for being so kind and sharing your experience and knowledge with us... 

 

 

 

Well the I 864 as you point out gives you the option of using assets rather than income, 3x the income amount and the OP paid this three times over.

 

Item Number 10. Total Value of Assets. In order to qualify based on the value of your assets, the total value of your
assets must equal at least five times the difference between your total household income and the current Federal Poverty
Guidelines for your household size. However, if you are a U.S. citizen and you are sponsoring your spouse or child age
18 years of age or older, the total value of your assets must only be equal to at least three times the difference. If the
intending immigrant is a foreign national orphan who will be adopted in the United States after he or she acquires legal
permanent residence, and who will, as a result, acquire citizenship under section 320 of the INA, the total value of your
assets need only equal the difference.

 

I did read the California case law, obviously most of our members do not live in California, I found it confusing and incomplete, and illogical. It did not address the capital instead of income option.

 

Obviously for the OP this is chump change but we have many members scraping to meet the minimum, I can think of quite a few who are retired, questions about using SSDI etc.

 

So if the logic of this California case is followed they would have to hand over all their income and have nothing to live on. Would a non California court do this?

 

Anyway quite fascinating.

 

[Ontarkie 14,143]

You really need the exact wording in your divorce agreement. Do not listen to whatever the lawyer is saying without actually having that agreement in your hands to read. They can say just about anything as they will still be billing you. Get out your court order agreement and read that. 

[Boiler 44,943]

6 minutes ago, Redro said:

Would like to add @Cali_D I864 assumes a household of minimum 2. But, she is most likely a household of 1 (unless there are dependents you haven’t mentioned) so I’d really like to see the argument your ex used to argue for $2k a month and to see if it states: you’ll be paying her even if she remarries, you have to increase the amount every year to keep up with COL, and the obligation never ends if she never gains enough credits or becomes a citizen… 

The Court case initially mentioned 10 years and then went on later to specify the proper wording of the I 864.

 

Remarrying has no impact on the I 864, and I think that was also mentioned.

 

OP mentioned the I 864 was specified so if it is related to that it would only expire when one of the dies etc, she seems to have no interest in working or naturalising, well why would she?

 

I remember some time back reading somewhere about the need to update the I 864 amounts, seems it does not include housing which is why it is so low. Just think of the consequences if that happens.

[Cali_D 43]

Not going to reply to each person.. I'll just try to answer a few questions.. 

 

The large payout of 250k has absolutely nothing to do with the I-864. Nothing. Zero. Forget about it. It's not a factor when determining how much she should be paid per I-864 guidelines.  That payout was a divorce settlement. As explained several times, these are 2 very different issues. 

 

I don't know if the amount will ever increase but it can, that depends on my ex. It's actually just under 2k. Regardless, for the amount to increase, my ex would need to take me to court (unless I just agree) and a judge would decide if it would increase. And, I can 100% tell you, YES it would increase. I would lose because I am bound to support her for 10 years. That's the law. 

 

Something my lawyer told me today that I think might be helpful to everyone .. The document is not the most important part of understanding the law, the interpretation of the document is the most important thing. Many judges have given their interpretation of this through case law. So, if you want to understand the law, you really need to look at how judges have ruled and interpreted documents. This is why we have a US Supreme court and State Supreme courts. 

 

So in ALL cases taken to federal and state court (in CA and others), the court determined the I-864 means you will pay directly to your spouse (if they so choose) for 10 years. There is no getting around it. Even with a prenuptial agreement. 

 

Edited July 19, 2023 by Cali_D

[Boiler 44,943]

Quote

The large payout of 250k has absolutely nothing to do with the I-864. Nothing. Zero. Forget about it. It's not a factor when determining how much she should be paid per I-864 guidelines.  That payout was a divorce settlement. As explained several times, these are 2 very different issues. 

 

I am not sure that is the case, it would still seem to be cheaper to give her an extra $70k even if it is.

 

Quote

I don't know if the amount will ever increase but it can, that depends on my ex. It's actually just under 2k. Regardless, for the amount to increase, my ex would need to take me to court (unless I just agree) and a judge would decide if it would increase. And, I can 100% tell you, YES it would increase. I would lose because I am bound to support her for 10 years. That's the law. 

 

I can not remember a year where the I 864P has not increased, some years have been nominal, but now we seem to be back in a period of high inflation, if the 2k is something you have to pay to meet the requirements why is it not automatic?

You mention 10 years, that as has been mentioned many times has nothing to do with the I 864, nowhere is there any mention of 10 years.

 

Quote

 

Something my lawyer told me today that I think might be helpful to everyone .. The document is not the most important part of understanding the law, the interpretation of the document is the most important thing. Many judges have given their interpretation of this through case law. So, if you want to understand the law, you really need to look at how judges have ruled and interpreted documents. This is why we have a US Supreme court and State Supreme courts. 

 

So in ALL cases taken to federal and state court (in CA and others), the court determined the I-864 means you will pay directly to your spouse (if they so choose) for 10 years. There is no getting around it. Even with a prenuptial agreement. 

 

 

Where does the 10 years come in to this? As a general comment Family Law varies by State.

[Cali_D 43]

26 minutes ago, Boiler said:

 

I am not sure that is the case, it would still seem to be cheaper to give her an extra $70k even if it is.

 

 

I can not remember a year where the I 864P has not increased, some years have been nominal, but now we seem to be back in a period of high inflation, if the 2k is something you have to pay to meet the requirements why is it not automatic?

You mention 10 years, that as has been mentioned many times has nothing to do with the I 864, nowhere is there any mention of 10 years.

 

 

Where does the 10 years come in to this? As a general comment Family Law varies by State.

 

Payout

I could give her $0 or million dollars, it would have no bearing on the I-864. My payout was a DIVORCE SETTLEMENT. I-864 has nothing to do with divorce. These matters are not related. 3 lawyers told me that today. If she was an American, I would have paid her the same 250, with no I-864 support. Conversely, if I was broke and she was an immigrant, I would have paid her zero dollars in divorce settlement and I would still be paying her monthly per the case law on I-864.

 

If Bill Gates marries an immigrant, he will be paying her monthly per the case law on I-864. I realize thats an extreme example, but it's true.  Even if he gave her a billion dollars, she would be able to collect the tiny amount from I-864. Even if the court ordered Bill to pay a monthly spousal support of a million dollars a month, she would still be able to collect the tiny additional amount from I-864. 

 

Divorce settlement and I-864 support are in no way related. I am not sure how to make the more clear. 

 

Increase amount

The amount would only go up if the person sues me. Nothing is automated. There is no system in place for automatic increase. 

 

10 years

10 years came from the case law. The document stats 40 quarters (10 years). As I have said many times, this has been interpreted by the court to mean I must pay 125% above the living wage for 10 years. 

 

If you want to understand the real world consequences of signing an i-864, look at case law, not just the document.

 

 

Edited July 19, 2023 by Cali_D

[TBoneTX 44,787]

1 minute ago, Cali_D said:

the real world consequences of signing an i-864

If case law is this firmly established, and if this obligation becomes widely known, it's foreseeable that many U.S. petitioners will refuse to sign the I-864, and there will be fewer international marriages.  I would not sign one under these circumstances.

[Cali_D 43]

4 minutes ago, TBoneTX said:

If case law is this firmly established, and if this obligation becomes widely known, it's foreseeable that many U.S. petitioners will refuse to sign the I-864, and there will be fewer international marriages.  I would not sign one under these circumstances.

 

The problem is, it is not widely known by immigration lawyers because they don't do many divorces. 

 

Regardless, I would have still signed the document and 7 years ago when I signed it my income as far less than it is today. Love makes you do crazy things, lol 🤣

[Ontarkie 14,143]

That is not how it works. Sadly the lawyers are telling you what you want to hear. 

 

Lets go with your own examples. If she is given 1 billion then she sure is not below the poverty line so the I-864 would give her nothing she is over the poverty line no if's ands or buts about it. 

 

Read your actual divorce agreement. We know her lawyer got some wording in there for the 250K plus a monthly support. But you need to actually really understand what that wording is. Yes some divorce courts will use the I864 as a guideline to set support.

You yourself just posted the part that the lawyers are feeding you. You are not understanding the part that she must be below the poverty line to start with. Your example that if Bill Gates had married an immigrant he would still have to pay according to the I864 even if she had a 1billion payout, why would he be paying her a cent after that payout, she sure would not be under the poverty guidelines? For a 1 person household with the poverty guidelines posted above is just over 12k a year and that is based on 2023. You've been overpaying according to your own lawyers. 

 

 

Edited July 19, 2023 by Ontarkie

[Redro 4,609]

17 minutes ago, Cali_D said:

Not going to reply to each person.. I'll just try to answer a few questions.. 

 

The large payout of 250k has absolutely nothing to do with the I-864. Nothing. Zero. Forget about it. It's not a factor when determining how much she should be paid per I-864 guidelines.  That payout was a divorce settlement. As explained several times, these are 2 very different issues. 

 

I don't know if the amount will ever increase but it can, that depends on my ex. It's actually just under 2k. Regardless, for the amount to increase, my ex would need to take me to court (unless I just agree) and a judge would decide if it would increase. And, I can 100% tell you, YES it would increase. I would lose because I am bound to support her for 10 years. That's the law. 

 

Something my lawyer told me today that I think might be helpful to everyone .. The document is not the most important part of understanding the law, the interpretation of the document is the most important thing. Many judges have given their interpretation of this through case law. So, if you want to understand the law, you really need to look at how judges have ruled and interpreted documents. This is why we have a US Supreme court and State Supreme courts. 

 

So in ALL cases taken to federal and state court (in CA and others), the court determined the I-864 means you will pay directly to your spouse (if they so choose) for 10 years. There is no getting around it. Even with a prenuptial agreement. 

 

Just read the opinion for Kumar v Kumar and in this case they don’t specify when the 10 years starts. But that the I864 is an agreement the sponsor will support the immigrant for 10 years. The marriage in Kumar v Kumar was short. The amount was based on a household of 1 and the immigrant has no obligation to seek work… (sponsored immigrant…has no duty to mitigate damages) 

Currently the amount is $18,225 or $1,518.75 a month. 

You’ve now changed the amount you pay your ex several times. 
First $4k them $2k now under $2k. 
But wording in the opinion does say “at least 125%…” so I can see how ex wife argued for more… 
If your ex arrived in the US 11/2016 one could argue the I-134 covered your wife for her first 90 days… 

Would lawyers argue the 10 years started 

1.) the day you signed your I864 

2.) Day 91 (after the K1 90 days) - early 2017 

3.) The day she became a permanent resident (one could argue you’ve been supporting her at the agreed amount and that’s when the I864 went into effect).

4.) The day you started directly paying her the (just under) $2k 

Do you even care? Will support ever end if she never works or naturalizes? 
As per Kumar v Kumar your ex has no obligation to seek employment. So, not sure if you are planning to seek an amendment or will leave the agreement “as is” until your ex decides to pursue more support due to COL increases… 

 

[Ontarkie 14,143]

Just to add what ever is in your divorce agreement you do have to pay but it is not because the I-864 it is because your wife knows what she is doing and your lawyers suck. 

[Cali_D 43]

1 minute ago, Ontarkie said:

That is not how it works. Sadly the lawyers are telling you what you want to hear. 

 

Lets go with your own examples. If she is given 1 billion then she sure is not below the poverty line so the I-864 would give her nothing she is over the poverty line no if's ands or buts about it. 

 

Read your actual divorce agreement. We know her lawyer got some wording in there for the 250K plus a monthly support. But you need to actually really understand what that wording is. Yes some divorce courts will use the I864 as a guideline to set support.

You yourself just posted the part that the lawyers are feeding you. You are not understanding the part that she must be below the poverty line to start with. Your example that if Bill Gates had married an immigrant he would still have to pay according to the I864 even if she had a 1billion payout. For a 1 person household with the poverty guidelines posted above is just over 12k a year and that is based on 2023. You've been overpaying according to your own lawyers. 

 

 

 

You are dead wrong and clearly didn't read the Kumar case I cited. A payout in divorce doesn't affect the obligation of support per I-864. It doesn't matter that she became a billionaire in a divorce settlement. THIS HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED IN REAL WORLD CASES. You can have your opinion, but you are wrong about the law. Read the full Kumar v. Kumar case please. This was the first most and most known case. After this, many more cases came about, all with the same result. 

 

I hate that this has turned into a debate. This is what I was worried about. Please stop spewing your opinion of things as facts. 

[Boiler 44,943]

7 minutes ago, Cali_D said:

 

Payout

I could give her $0 or million dollars, it would have no bearing on the I-864. My payout was a DIVORCE SETTLEMENT. I-864 has nothing to do with divorce. These matters are not related. 3 lawyers told me that today. If she was an American, I would have paid her the same 250, with no I-864 support. Conversely, if I was broke and she was an immigrant, I would have paid her zero dollars in divorce settlement and I would still be paying her monthly per the case law on I-864.

 

If Bill Gates marries an immigrant, he will be paying her monthly per the case law on I-864. I realize thats an extreme example, but it's true.  Even if he gave her a billion dollars, she would be able to collect the tiny amount from I-864. Even if the court ordered Bill to pay a month spousal support of a million dollars a month, she would still be able to collect the tiny additional amount from I-864. 

 

Divorce settlement and I-864 support are in no way related. I am not sure how to make the more clear. 

 

Increase amount

The amount would only go up if the person sues me. Nothing is automated. There is no system in place for automatic increase. 

 

10 years

10 years came from the case law. The document stats 40 quarters (10 years). As I have said many times, this has been interpreted by the court to mean I must pay 125% above the living wage for 10 years. 

 

If you want to understand the real world consequences of signing an i-864, look at case law, not just the document.

 

 

 

40 Quarters is approx 10 years, and just so we are all on the same page is just one factor in terminating the I 864. From what you said previously if she ever completes 40 Quarters it will be a lot longer than 10 years.

 

Let us say she does decide to naturalise, the I 864 is no longer enforceable and you still have to pay her for another 4 or so years, why?

 

What if she decides she doesn't want to stay and goes home tomorrow, seems you still have to pay.

 

A bit macabre but if she dies tomorrow do you still have to pay her Estate?

 

The whole thing seems a mess to me, it does not reflect the I 864, assuming it is supposed to, in many ways.

[Cali_D 43]

Do you guys care more about being right? Or helping people?

17 minutes ago, Redro said:

Just read the opinion for Kumar v Kumar and in this case they don’t specify when the 10 years starts. But that the I864 is an agreement the sponsor will support the immigrant for 10 years. The marriage in Kumar v Kumar was short. The amount was based on a household of 1 and the immigrant has no obligation to seek work… (sponsored immigrant…has no duty to mitigate damages) 

Currently the amount is $18,225 or $1,518.75 a month. 

You’ve now changed the amount you pay your ex several times. 
First $4k them $2k now under $2k. 
But wording in the opinion does say “at least 125%…” so I can see how ex wife argued for more… 
If your ex arrived in the US 11/2016 one could argue the I-134 covered your wife for her first 90 days… 

Would lawyers argue the 10 years started 

1.) the day you signed your I864 

2.) Day 91 (after the K1 90 days) - early 2017 

3.) The day she became a permanent resident (one could argue you’ve been supporting her at the agreed amount and that’s when the I864 went into effect).

4.) The day you started directly paying her the (just under) $2k 

Do you even care? Will support ever end if she never works or naturalizes? 
As per Kumar v Kumar your ex has no obligation to seek employment. So, not sure if you are planning to seek an amendment or will leave the agreement “as is” until your ex decides to pursue more support due to COL increases… 

 

 

Are you suggesting I am lying because I didn't remember the amount I pay every month? Ridiculous. 

 

Also, she is under no obligation look for work. She would be obligated to supplement her income if I was paying her spousal support. But I do not pay spousal support. I-864 income is not spousal support. And yes, she could try to collect after 10 years. The Kumar case was ruled on in 2017 (I think). It will be interesting to see what happens after 10 years.   

Edited July 19, 2023 by Cali_D

[Cali_D 43]

5 minutes ago, Boiler said:

 

40 Quarters is approx 10 years, and just so we are all on the same page is just one factor in terminating the I 864. From what you said previously if she ever completes 40 Quarters it will be a lot longer than 10 years.

 

Let us say she does decide to naturalise, the I 864 is no longer enforceable and you still have to pay her for another 4 or so years, why?

 

What if she decides she doesn't want to stay and goes home tomorrow, seems you still have to pay.

 

A bit macabre but if she dies tomorrow do you still have to pay her Estate?

 

The whole thing seems a mess to me, it does not reflect the I 864, assuming it is supposed to, in many ways.

 

Good question, I asked all these questions today. Also, they were clearly spelled out in my judgement papers. 

 

If she works 40 quarters, I stop paying.

If she becomes a citizen I stop paying.

If she goes home tomorrow temporally, I still pay. If she changes her permanent residence, I stop paying. 

If she dies, I stop paying. 

Edited July 19, 2023 by Cali_D