pushbrk

Contract yes, and just one most recent pay stub. You are not required to have qualifying income for any of the previous years. Current income is king here.

It's not all or nothing. I mentioned four separate red flags. The cultural norms are part of the totality of circumstances that will be evaluated. Best to stop trying to explain, and simply arrange to spend enough time together that the time will overcome the red flags. Of course you have excuses. Everybody does. Just get it done.

Her sending money to you is not a plus. My advice is not to mention it.

Might be sufficient, but the year you sponsor an immigrant is not a good year to file an extension. That they did so, does not prevent them from filing now though. Note that your current income would be calculated by taking the gross pay for one pay period times the number of pay periods in a full years. 1k a week is 52k, for example. That's how YOU state YOUR current income. It does NOT come from any tax return. Those are separated sections and answers unless self employed.

Seems the OP disappeared, but definitely do not marry again. You would have to fraudulently state you are free to marry. If this is about shortcutting a name change that wasn't already done, just abandon that idea and get driver license in the name on her passport and green card. Further, a new immigrant does not need a State issued Real ID to travel domestically. Their passport is real ID enough.

Just a quick read, makes me think the form may have been signed in the right place. Make sure it's signed where it says "Sponsor's Signature". Second, yes a current pay stub documents current income. This kind of RFE "properly completed" etc. usually means there's an error, not just an omission.

It didn't matter. You could have logged in as the petitioner each time, with no issues.

Correct answer above. It comes in a booklet. Upload including front cover, as a single PDF file.

OK. Either of you could have done that, or both.

Neither the Petitioner or Beneficiary has any dealings with NVC for a K visa. There's no need to assume. Somebody who knows will be along shortly to provide the correct answers.

The standard process, is that a family member with access to your family book, takes it to the Gong Zheng Chu (Government Notarial Office) and a Notarial Birth Certificate is produced. Anything you received at birth would not be a birth certificate in this context. I don't have any idea what that would be, as China uses family books, not birth certificates, unless it's needed for a purpose like this.

I meant exactly what I said. Words mean things here.

Maybe you are confused, because that is not what I said.

Yes, that is the correct procedure. A complete copy of the federal tax return including all schedules, W2, and 1099 forms. Please note there are several kinds of "tax transcripts". What is relevant here is the Tax Return Transcript. I-864 instructions are clear about return or return transcript. The word or is there for a reason.

Incorrect. Both deal with NVC. It's also ok, if it is only the petitioner who ever logs in. Petitioner must provide the affidavit of support and supporting documents, and the beneficiary must provide additional documents and an actual visa application. But, it does not matter who logs in. Either or both, is ok. See what needs to be done and make your own plan. It's almost always the petitioner who pays the fees.

No. To combine income you use the "a", the I-864a. No shortcuts. Time to become an A-Student of the I-864 instructions, which make this abundantly clear. Failing to do so, is foolish indeed.

That person files nothing unless their income is needed to qualify. Otherwise the "a". A person supporting themselves and filing their own tax return is also not counted in the Joint sponsors' household.

OK then. You've got a start. Now is the time to study those I-864 instructions and learn how to combine income with your household member. Once you've done the homework, you may well have other questions. That's why we're here.

The best you can do is the best you can do. If you sell your house, the proceeds are liquid and would need to remain liquid until your spouse's visa is issued. With regard to your sister, you would need to first determine whether she will be combining income with you or acting as a joint sponsor qualifying on her own. From the details you have explained, I would suggest that if there are no additional household members to be counted, that you combine income with your sister/household member and she does the I-864a. You can then qualify now. Become an A-Student of the I-864 instructions (separate PDF from the forms). You don't mention whether the petition is already approved and at NVC or not. My recommendation above is based on the case already being at NVC, and there are no more household members to be counted for you or your sister. Please clarify.

While your feelings are understandable, expressing them is not helpful to you. Answering questions I already asked, and providing details would help us help you. You mention a sister who lives in your house but only has social security as her income. If you plan to combine income with her, she would not be a "joint sponsor". She would be your "household member". Words mean things and details matter. Please clarify so we can provide meaningful advice. OK?

Equity in the primary residence is not considered liquid. If you can document significant equity, that's a positive thing, but will not be considered liquid in terms of qualifying. Did you plan to combine income with your sister, or does she have enough to qualify on her own?

No, it doesn't. It's natural to think that, but all experience indicates NVC assigns the case based on the current residence address on the I-130 with no regard whatsoever to the Consulate Requested. The clear reason, from experience, is that they don't yet have any justification (evidence or residence or citizenship) to send to a Consulate in a country where the applicant does not live.

A "joint sponsor" never files an I-864a. That's for a household member, and even then only when it's a joint tax filing spouse or a household member who is combining income with the petitioner. If the petitioner and her same house living sister are combining income, then sister is "Household member" not joint sponsor. (Note the term "co-sponsor" does not apply anywhere in this context.) If the sister qualifies on her own, she should be the "Joint Sponsor" and provide an I-864. The Petitioner and anybody she doesn't directly support will not be counted in her household. This kind of situation can get quite complicated depending on how many people live in the same house, as just living there and being related in a certain way, does not necessarily mean they count in the household. Typically, no letter from the IRS is needed. Just check the box that says they were not required to file. NVC and the Consular Officer know people with only SS income don't need to file a tax return. Presumably, if the sister's only income is Social Security, she would not be my first choice as a joint sponsor. More information is needed for better advice.

Correct but you do not need to delay paying fees or anything else. The change can happen in the background. Not sure what evidence you have or what a SOFA card is but you probably have what is needed. Guessing the SOFA card is enough, as it is in lieu of a visa. Perhaps she also has a visa or at least an entry stamp to go with the SOFA card.

Absolutely. Reading through this I see three huge red flags and maybe 4 but the OP has not been clear about how many visits and for how long. First flag is the reverse age difference in a country where that is not culturally accepted. Second is the Egyptian husband's family not knowing about the marriage of four years. Third is the reason they don't know, which speaks to red flag number one. Consular Officers do not have "love radar". That's why the term "bona fide" is used in connection with the marital relationship. Behavior speaks louder than words. People in bona fide relationships do what is necessary to spend significant time together. That CAN overcome pretty much any red flag. If that has not occurred, that's red flag number 4. For me and other senior members here, it's also a red flag that this discussion is with only the visa applicant, with petitioner absent.