newacct

Not true. State governments have sued I-864 sponsors to recover amounts before. The I-134 is specifically "not legally binding". http://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/ilink/docView/AFM/HTML/AFM/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-12693/0-0-0-13496.html

Yes, it's tax fraud. When you are married, you can only file as "Married Filing Jointly" or "Married Filing Separately" (or in some special cases "Head of Household"); never as "Single". Your wife not having an SSN is not an issue. If you want to file as "Married Filing Jointly", then you can get her an ITIN, with the reason for getting it being to file jointly with a U.S. resident. If she is a nonresident alien for tax purposes, you would also have to elect to treat the nonresident spouse as a resident. If you want to file as "Married Filing Separately", and she is a nonresident alien for tax purposes, and she doesn't have an SSN or ITIN, then the instructions say to just write "NRA" in the SSN blank.

If you just need more ports, just use a switch. Make sure someone else is not using your Internet.

If she can afford to pay for insurance, she can continue the insurance she had under her job, under COBRA. But if she doesn't have income now, it will eat up her money. She should also get unemployment benefits (which are probably not enough to live by though). Yes, I am sure they are talking about Medicaid. New permanent residents are banned from normal types of Medicaid during the first 5 years.

Maybe they're referring to Medicaid? I was thinking along the same lines. If I understand the rules correctly, since both spouses (or in this cases ex-spouses) are working, you can accumulate the 40 SS credits (2 people x 4/year x 5 years) in 5 years expiring the I-864 which would make her eligible for need-based aid including health care. Now since they got divorced, I am not clear how many of his credits count. Based upon the timeline above, she has likely earned at least 20 so the I-864 may or may not be in effect. The I-864 does not affect the immigrant. The immigrant did not sign it.

You do not have an unusual case -- It is very common for people born in China to not have birth certificates. Going to Gong Zheng Chu with the hukou to get a notorial certificate is the standard procedure for Chinese people immigrating to the U.S. It's the notorial certificate (with translation) that you need, not a "birth certificate". I haven't heard of them needing DNA tests; it should be sufficient that you are listed on the hukou as their child. Maybe try again at another time and talk to another person there?

Why was it only for 1 year? I though re-entry permits can be up to 2 years?

It's kind of like when Southern U.S. people use the Confederate flag and sing Dixie. They say it represents their culture. But to black people it's offensive.

No, it is not the same. Chinese citizens who are not U.S. citizens can get a U.S. visa. However, a U.S. citizen cannot get a U.S. visa. Since they do not have a visa on their Chinese passport, they will need an entry/exit permit in order to leave China. You are plain wrong. Chinese law says it very clearly. This person is a Chinese citizen. Period. There is no basis anywhere in the law for "refusing Chinese citizenship". China will issue an entry/exit permit to Chinese citizens who also have foreign passports. This does not mean they are not Chinese citizens. Hukou and Chinese citizenship are two separate things. Many Chinese people born and raised in China lost their hukou when they went abroad to study and live, even though they did not acquire foreign nationality. This does not mean they are not Chinese citizens. No, this is completely different. If a Chinese citizen voluntarily acquires foreign nationality, then they no longer have Chinese nationality, by Article 9. I was talking about Chinese citizens who have dual nationality, like the OP's child. So this is not related.

China "does not recognize that its citizens possess dual nationality" (Article 3) meaning that China will ignore any other nationalities its citizens have. The problem arises when the US paperwork/passport/visa is acquired, then the person usually loses their Hukou... ergo, their chinese national ID number. Most I've read/heard from will milk the Hukou/forego the US passport for as long as the child is in china. But if one day the child needs to visit the U.S. (even briefly, just as a tourist), they will need a U.S. passport. Surely you're not gonna avoid the U.S. forever?

You don't "claim" citizenship. Citizenship is mandated by law at birth. There is no such thing as "claiming" citizenship for U.S. or China, because the child either has citizenship at birth, or he/she does not. If you can apply for documents, it means the child was already a citizen at birth; but they would be a citizen even if you don't apply for anything. According to Article 4 of the Nationality Law of the People's Republic of China, someone born in China to at least one Chinese citizen parent automatically has Chinese nationality. No exceptions. No provision for you to refuse it. Similarly for the U.S. If the parent satisfies the conditions for trasmitting citizenship at birth, the baby is a automatically U.S. citizen at birth. Again, there is no way for you to refuse it. Even if you never get any documents, the baby is a U.S. citizen in the eyes of U.S. law. Also, under U.S. law, a U.S. citizen cannot involuntarily lose U.S. citizenship. Renunciation of U.S. citizenship has to be applied for and approved by the U.S. And parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship for their child. China "does not recognize that its citizens possess dual nationality" (Article 3) meaning that China will ignore any other nationalities its citizens have.

You have two choices - contact her hukou to find out what their policy is, or to register the child's American citizenship. So, ask someone else? Or register the child as an American? Wouldn't an American child have to pay much more to live in China (we do not have any plan to ever move to the USA)? At birth, the child will automatically be a Chinese citizen and (assuming you have been present in the U.S. anytime in your life for 5 years, including 2 after the age of 14) also a U.S. citizen. The nationality is determined by each country's laws and is not under your control. The hukou is a separate issue. However, since in your case since the child will live in China in the long term, I don't think it's possible to avoid the hukou.

Try torrenting instead of downloading from a site.

I'm not sure what the immigrations law is there, but the concern is anchor babies. The goal of having an anchor baby IS to use American resources, possibly for the lifetime of the baby. The article talks about how the agencies help their clients toward that end, and points out that some use Medicaid. The fact that Chinese tourists are having anchor babies is a news topic in both countries. We don't often hear much from the Chinese point of view on this. It mentions the movie as a factor in increased birth tourism. If they immediately go back to China to live, how is that using American resources? As I understand, most mothers pay a large sum to be able to come to the U.S. to give birth. Plus visitors generally are required to demonstrate financial resources, so birth mothers who uses American resources are probably only a few who do it fraudulently. The term "anchor baby" has always been incorrect, as anchor baby means the baby somehow lets in the mother. But that's not possible as the baby's citizenship does not help the mother's immigration until the baby turns 21. Plus people from China who come to the U.S. to have babies generally go back and do not intend to live in the U.S. in the near future. The birth occurred in America - that is the whole purpose of the trip (to use American resources, and to enable the use of American resources later in life). They pay a large sum, not to anyone in the U.S., but to the agency that arranges the trip. Some pay for all resources. This article is from the Chinese point of view - the Chinese have little to no say in the American immigration process. I don't care to take either side here. Giving birth in America is not for using American resources. Giving birth in America is solely for having the baby have American citizenship. Again, if you go to America to give birth and pay for it, that's not using other Americans' resources.

I'm not sure what the immigrations law is there, but the concern is anchor babies. The goal of having an anchor baby IS to use American resources, possibly for the lifetime of the baby. The article talks about how the agencies help their clients toward that end, and points out that some use Medicaid. The fact that Chinese tourists are having anchor babies is a news topic in both countries. We don't often hear much from the Chinese point of view on this. It mentions the movie as a factor in increased birth tourism. If they immediately go back to China to live, how is that using American resources? As I understand, most mothers pay a large sum to be able to come to the U.S. to give birth. Plus visitors generally are required to demonstrate financial resources, so birth mothers who uses American resources are probably only a few who do it fraudulently. The term "anchor baby" has always been incorrect, as anchor baby means the baby somehow lets in the mother. But that's not possible as the baby's citizenship does not help the mother's immigration until the baby turns 21. Plus people from China who come to the U.S. to have babies generally go back and do not intend to live in the U.S. in the near future.

But I don't understand what's the problem. What right do immigration officers to care whether someone entering is pregnant or not? As long as they won't use taxpayer resources (and I understand most birth tourists pay for everything themselves), they're in fact putting money into our economy. Their babies are American, great! Let's welcome them. If the problem is that "birth centers" are sketchy and expoiting women, then it's those that we need to shut down.

I believe that there will not be paper I-94 by that time anyway.

In fact, you have to be divorced to file on your own, unless you're running up against the 2 year anniversary.

If you guys cannot get the marriage worked out, I would suggest to divorce and then applying for ROC by yourself. "pretending we live together" does not sound like a good plan; when you file for ROC they will see that you have no evidence you lived together for this period of time.

So what was her status before applying for asylum?

After he gets the surgery, he should just tell them he has no money. If he doesn't have money they can't get money out of him.

Yeah, but why not fill out your records with the rounding also?

In fact, the fact that the wait in her category is so long is helpful for the tourist visa, because the priority date is not coming up soon, so the immigration officers are less likely to suspect her of trying to immigrate based on the visa.

I use Free File Fillable Forms every year. It always gets accepted really quickly and I get my refund quickly. Much quicker and easier than printing them out and mailing it in, and it saves postage (I'm a cheapskate). (Though it might just be that I like filling out forms on computers, and I know exactly how I intend to fill out the form.) About rounding it off, in filling out your tax form, you have the option of either including cents in everything, or round it off to the nearest dollar for everything (it says so in the instructions). All tax software I know will round everything to the nearest dollar anyway. Although it might be the case that doing it with cents will get a few more cents of money back to you in some cases, it's not worth the postage to do it by mail just for those few cents. I didn't know about the issues with ZIP and phone number, probably because I'm in the U.S. and always had a refund. I have heard stories though of people who've received cryptic "XML errors" or something like that because something didn't match. I can see how the sometimes unintuitive interface and lack of documentation or tech support for the site might make it frustrating for some people.

I think your tax accountant is wrong. There is nothing in the 1040 about any case when you can file single when you are married. There is an exception if you are a married nonresidents alien who lives apart in the 1040NR; however, it only applies to residents of Canada, Mexico, South Korea, or are U.S. nationals (i.e. from American Samoa). Do you fall into any of those?