S2N

Depends on your country and the embassy wait times. L1 is a dual intent visa. You’re allowed to enter the U.S. with the intent of applying for a green card with it. If it were me I’d wait to see if the L1 is approved first and if it is adjust once you’re here. There’s no disadvantage to you to letting someone sponsor you for an L1 as you can work while you’re here waiting for the AOS to process. If the I-130 is approved first and you get an IR-1 interview before an L1 is issued, obviously go for that I’m assuming money isn’t a consideration here as IR-1 rather than AOS from L1 is cheaper.

If you get an L-1 approved and enter the U.S. on it you can file an I-485 after arriving in the U.S. If the I-130 is pending you send in an AOS package (I-485 and related forms) with the I-130 receipt as a cover. If it’s approved and sent to NVC send them an email/upload a letter informing them of your intent to adjust status and send the I-485, etc. to USCIS.

And really October 15 is the cut-off because of the automatic extension.

If you filed electronically see if you can get the transcripts. IRS processes them pretty fast these days (mine were available next day last year) and they’re preferred. They don’t always process that fast though. If you need to use a 1040 for processing delays or some reason what Crazy Cat said is correct.

For what it’s worth post-change-in-administration, I-130 processing per day has sped up. 2/3/25 was the most approved I-130s since July 2024 according to other corners of the internet. You can track the stats at track my visa now (linked is being censored as spam, not sure why since it’s just pulling from the USCIS API.) I’m not sure I quite buy it, but there’s a popular theory that with Trump ending a lot of the humanitarian programs, resources will be freed up for I-130s as USCIS doesn’t do much in the way of enforcement so there’s not all that much else they can work on. I just filed in January and we’re planning on waiting the 2 years for an IR-1 regardless of when the I-130 gets approved for both immigration and non-immigration reasons, so 16 vs. 17 months isn’t that big a deal. If it starts getting to 20+ months we’d be annoyed though because it’d change planning on a few things.

OP — file form 4868 to request the automatic extension and either email a PDF of the confirmation email or email a scan of the paper form you mail in. You can do it yourself using any of the tax prep softwares assuming your wife has an ITIN or you’re married filing separately. In that case the IRS will email you a receipt notice. If you’re filing jointly and she doesn’t have an ITIN you can paper file the extension request, but you don’t get a receipt. In that case just scan a copy of it and send to the IRS via certified mail so you have proof of mailing and scan the proof of mailing to your wife. Both of those will show you’re in compliance with the Internal Revenue Code and also why taxes aren’t filed yet in April. Actually filing would be better, but documentation that you’re telling the IRS that you legally might not file by 4/15 should help if the returns are requested. You can still file by 4/15 even if you request the automatic extension. 1099s have a 2/15 deadline and are frequently screwed up by the issuer, and K-1s get sent out late March. In theory everyone should have everything they need in order to file by 4/15, but people with complex tax situations usually don’t, which is why the automatic extension exists.

If it’s something that worries you, disclose it in the interview and say you misunderstood the question. Generally speaking US government officials are good at determining the difference between intentional lying and an honest mistake. And like I said above, that question was mocked by a Supreme Court justice for how ridiculous it is since it would include jaywalking and speeding, which are "offenses" but not crimes. The wording is so broad as to make the only answer yes. You are not the first person to misunderstand that and check no when you’d previously admitted drug use and you won’t be the last. Immigration officers get it’s a weirdly worded question and disclosing it orally will likely be enough, especially since it was decades ago. If you’re going to keep worrying though, it might be worth talking to a lawyer to ease your anxiety. I don’t think this is that complicated, but there’s value in it if it puts you at ease with a course of action.

I guess Maslenjak concerned removing naturalization after it’d already been approved, but the case history here contained discussion of this question on the N-400. The only correct answer to it as literally worded is “yes” for anyone filling out the form, which the Chief Justice pointed out in oral arguments — the lawyer from the government agreed with his interpretation that as written it would require disclosing every time you speed and don’t get a ticket. With the new administration who knows how USCIS will look at stuff, but the principle of the law is that immaterial false statements, even if knowingly false, are not bars to citizenship. I think OP would be fine clarifying in the interview their confusion and probably doesn’t need a lawyer, but it never hurts to get one if there’s cause for concern. Also for anyone curious, the oral argument exchange on this was somewhat funny: https://m.soundcloud.com/cnn/maslenjak-v-us-oral-argument-april-26-2017 Starts around 25:50

Marijuana has special rules in place vs other drugs on the good moral character question. It’s extremely unlikely that trying it 20-something years ago would make someone ineligible for citizenship. If I was OP, I’d mention it in the interview to be safe and explain their confusion, but it’d also probably fall under the "immaterial false statements" from Maslenjak v. United States. For anyone unaware of the context of that case: the wife of a Serbian war criminal lied on her naturalization application/interview about her husband’s status as a war criminal and SCOTUS unanimously ruled that alone wasn’t sufficient to strip her of her naturalized citizenship without the government proving it had an impact on the decision. Yes, tell the truth, mention it in the interview if you feel that the most honest answer is “yes”, but if a conservative Supreme Court sided with a war criminal’s wife on this, I’m going to guess that someone being confused on how to answer a question about smoking pot in their 20s is on solid legal ground.

Also worth adding that by the time it gets to NVC he’ll have another year above 125%

Note that it costs more to do it that way: $675 vs. $625

Can’t give advice about Atlanta, but tell her not to listen to what the Chilean news says about ESTA if she ever brings it up. Fretting about the U.S. removing Chile from the VWP and denying Chileans entry is a regular occurrence on the news down there. Current trend is stories about Chileans who have visited Cuba being denied entry in local papers. I had to talk my husband down from applying for a B visa because of it (he’s never visited Cuba, and he’d be denied B visa because of I-130 and he has a valid ESTA.)

Is there a reason you aren’t using tax transcripts? If you filed single or married filing separately uploading those and not the full return might be easier.

The financial evidence is more convincing if you have it and is viewed by USCIS (and just about every other federal agency) as the primary indicator that you have ties to someone in a foreign country. See the SF-86 if you want an example outside the immigration context; foreign financial questions are EVER vs. last 7 years on that. And it makes sense. I have friends I’ve visited all over the world and country. None of them are on my bank account and none of them are in my will or beneficiaries on my retirement accounts. My husband is on one of my credit cards and in my will and my retirement accounts beneficiary. Thats for reasons unrelated to immigration. Most of us who are doing IR-1/CR-1 from the U.S. with a spouse overseas aren’t going to have a ton of that evidence, which is fine. The government understands it and doesn’t ask the impossible or for people to go out of the way to do things they wouldn’t ordinarily do, But if people do have financial evidence it is absolutely a positive thing to upload. All that to say — OP should be fine with evidence of time spent together and if that’s all they have there’s no reason to worry. But there are also normal financial planning things that you do together as a married couple that they can do now that might further bolster the package.

Yeah, I’ve seen you post it a few times and I get it in theory, but come at it from a different point of view. Government documents are amongst the easiest things to translate as they’re usually designed so someone with an extremely limited proficiency in the language can read them. In most cases where translation is needed at least one of the couple will have the necessary language skills to do a translation and save money in an already expensive process. That being said, I had to translate bus tickets from Spanish to English in my petition and and I think there’s something to be said for paying someone to do something tedious like that to avoid the hassle. Only problem is most charge by the word and a South American bus ticket has 500+