Search the Community

We applied for her SS Card today. No problems with her. But her son (11 years old) needs work authorization before we can apply for his SS Card. He is K2. The lady at the SS Office said that Yan can work after she gets SS # in about 2 weeks, because she is K1 attached to me. Is this true? I was understanding that she would need to wait 3 months for Work Authorization. we are not complaining! She is very bored sitting at home.

So I have followed a number of the posts on obtaining SSN and the discussions on whether to use married name or not (we had decided to use Given Name, Family, Married Name). However, upon beginning to fill out the application for my wife, I was not prepared for the portion of instructions saying that for "Legal Aliens Not Allowed to Work" or "Other", then one must provide a "... document from... a government agency that explains why you need SSN... and that you meet the requirements for the US Government benefit." Huh? Can anyone advise what this means? And what must we have to satisfy this requirement? Is the I-94 in passport and marriage license sufficient to meet this requirement? Thanks in advance for any advice. David

Hello, My wife got her SS card today but it says “Valid for work only with DHS Authorization". How do we fix this (She is K-1 and auto authorized to work according to official links I have read here) Thanks!

Here is a collection of documents establishing that a K1 is authorized to work incident to status; proof of that is an unexpired I-94 or EAD. This interpretation appears to have first surfaced by Social Security in a memo in 2000. Most seemed to have interpreted this exclusively in light of getting a SSN... but their language is clear that the I-94 is "PROOF" of work authorization [for getting a SSN and should by logical extension apply to the general concept of "PROOF" of employment eligibility as well.] SS appears to have consistently stated this while USCIS code of federal regulations has struggled through many revisions to produce inconsistency within the regulation as well as leaving contradictory interpretations to SS's position. Since the I-9 is based on the CFR, this has left employers also unclear as to the proper application. Particularly difficult is the comment: "if employees are authorized to work, but are unable to present the required document(s) within three business days, they must present a receipt for the application of [sic] the document(s) within three business days and the actual document(s) within ninety (90) days." It seems that the correct definition, although a minority view, should be based upon the Social Security memos and POMs. If one stays purely within the regulations, then one will not get to the correct interpretation. More recently, SS and CIS have come together and evidence agreement on the SS position of the 2000 memo... As well, an interesting read is the RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CIS OMBUDSMAN TO THE DIRECTOR, USCIS, which really deserves it's own write-up. It takes a CFR-centric view and makes some very good recommendations about EAD. But an interesting footnote states their opinion that "there appears to be no rationale for the EAD requirement for K-1s". --------------- Documents cited: --------------- 1) The Social Security memo Evidence of Employment Authorization?-- 11/1/2000 See: http://www.k1k3.com/stuff/SSNMemo.pdf 2) RM 00203.500 Employment Authorization for Nonimmigrants See: https://s044a90.ssa.gov/apps10/poms.nsf/lnx...opendocument#c1 3) List of Documents Establishing Lawful Alien Status for an SSN Card See: https://s044a90.ssa.gov/apps10/poms.nsf/lnx...33;opendocument 4) MINUTES OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION AND CIS AILA LIAISON MEETING ON SSA-RELATED ISSUES -- May 8, 2006 See: http://www.tomesparza.com/documents/minssocialcis.pdf 5) RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CIS OMBUDSMAN TO THE DIRECTOR, USCIS -- March 20, 2006 See: http://www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/C...AD_03-20-06.pdf 6) The Meaning of 8 CFR 274a.12(a) as it Relates to Refugee and Asylee Authorization for Employment. -- July 17, 2002 See: http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/han...ylees031003.pdf 7) Employment Authorization of Aliens Granted Asylum -- March 10, 2003 See: http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/han...ylees031003.pdf 8) British ExPat Thread: K1 and EAD See: http://britishexpats.com/forum/showthread.php?t=313634 ------------------------------------- Excerpts and comments from the Documents: -------------------------------------- 1) The Social Security memo Evidence of Employment Authorization-- 11/1/2000 - A nonimmigrant alien in K1 alien status is authorized to work based on that status and is no longer required to show employment authorization document (EAD) as proof of employment authorization when applying for a social security card? - Accept as proof of employment authorization an unexpired I-94 showing the alien is admitted as a K1 for a 90 day period. - Some I-94s are issued to K1s are stamped or annotated Employment Authorized, and some are not. Either way, an I-94 is proof a K1 alien is authorized to work. See: http://www.k1k3.com/stuff/SSNMemo.pdf 2) RM 00203.500 Employment Authorization for Nonimmigrants K1 visa holders are aliens in a Class of admission listed as: Aliens Work Authorized Without Specific DHS Authorization This group is stated as those, who are authorized to work in the U.S. without specific authorization from DHS. The person's I-94 will not have the DHS employment authorization stamp and the alien will generally not have an EAD. Evidence of this work authorization is mentioned as: Required evidence for employment authorization is either a Form I-94, Arrival/Departure Record, showing a class of admission that indicates the person can work without specific DHS authorization or an employment authorization document (EAD). The phrase: "Showing a class of admission that indicates the person can work without specific DHS authorization" has been established above as the class that K1s are in. Thus, K1s are work authorized incident to status and proof of that work authorization is either a [unexpired] I-94 OR an EAD. See: https://s044a90.ssa.gov/apps10/poms.nsf/lnx...opendocument#c1 3) List of Documents Establishing Lawful Alien Status for an SSN Card "When an alien listed below has an (*) next to the description, he/she may work only when INS grants employment authorization and issues an EAD." Note that K1s in the list have no (*) by their class, although K2,K3,K4 do have an (*). See: https://s044a90.ssa.gov/apps10/poms.nsf/lnx...33;opendocument 4) MINUTES OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION AND CIS AILA LIAISON MEETING ON SSA-RELATED ISSUES -- May 8, 2006 "Eliminating need for EAD for noncitizens authorized to work incident to status under 8 CFR ?74a.12(a). In addition to asylees, which have been the subject of various instructional memos and guidance from CIS to SSA, there are other foreign nationals authorized to be employed incident to the status they hold in the U.S. Can SSA work with CIS to get updated guidance to SSA field offices confirming that all L-2 dependents, E-2 dependents, E-1 dependents, and K-1 fiancees are authorized to work without presentation of an EAD card, as stated in CIS regulations, and thus should likewise be able to have SSN issued upon presentation of their status" -- Note they claim CIS regulations do call for K1s as not needing EAD... "CIS agrees that spouses of Es and Ls are authorized to work incident to status and need not present EADs to demonstrate work authorization or to obtain an SSN and has so advised SSA. Since receiving CIS guidance, SSA has been reluctant to assign SSNs to E and L spouses who lack EADs because of difficulties in differentiating a spouse, who is work-authorized incident to status, from a child, who is not. (The I-94 does not identify whether the derivative is a spouse or a child). SSA will accept a marriage certificate, with appropriate translation, as proof that an applicant has been admitted as an E or L spouse. SSA will change its POMS guidance accordingly and will no longer require an E or L spouse to present an EAD to apply for an SSN. CIS and SSA also agree that K-1 fiancees do not require an EAD to evidence work authorization or to apply for an SSN, and POMS will be revised accordingly. Current guidance (to be revised) is at POMS RM00203.600" See: http://www.tomesparza.com/documents/minssocialcis.pdf See: https://s044a90.ssa.gov/apps10/poms.nsf/lnx...opendocument#c1 5) RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CIS OMBUDSMAN TO THE DIRECTOR, USCIS -- March 20, 2006 Lots of interesting recommendations on EAD... but it's also clear that CIS OMBUDSUMAN don't follow the SS position and instead is CFR-centric... but they do point out [in footnotes] that the asylee memo states asylees don't need any EAD due to they are "work authorized incident to status"... And in another footnote they make the logical extension that "the regulations require that the foreign national apply for an EAD. However, this is not the case with asylees, and there would appear to be no rationale for the EAD requirement for K-1s". See: http://www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/C...AD_03-20-06.pdf 6) The Meaning of 8 CFR 274a.12(a) as it Relates to Refugee and Asylee Authorization for Employment. -- July 17, 2002 In summary: - aliens listed under 274a.12(a) are "employement authorized incident to status" without restriction... and asyleees are one of the classes (AS ARE K1)... - That confusion is based on the section stating "as evidenced by an employment authorization document issued by the service"... and that the alien asylee, among others (IN THE GROUP, ERGO, K1) must apply to the service for a document evidencing such employment". - A distinct exists between an alien having employment authorization vs an alien having evidence of employment authorization... and one authorized to work may obtain evidence/proof, of which the EAD is one way, and is preferred since it is also an valid ID... but lack of EAD is not lack of employment authorization. See: http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/han...ylees031003.pdf 7) Employment Authorization of Aliens Granted Asylum -- March 10, 2003 Citing 8 C.F.R. 274a.12(a)(5) : Aliens authorized employment incident to status. Pursuant to the statutory or regulatory reference cited, the following classes of aliens are authorized to be employed in the United States without restrictions as to location or type of employment as a condition of their admission or subsequent change to one of the indicated classes. Any alien who is within a class of aliens described in paragraphs (a)(3) through (a)(8) or (a)(10) through (1)(13) of this section, and who seeks to be employed in the United States, must apply to the Service for a document evidencing such employment authorization. The phrase in 8 C.F.R. 274a.12(a)(5) that lists asylees as employment authorized, "as evidenced by an employment authorization document issued by the Service," has often been the source of confusion or misunderstanding, and is pointed to as further evidence that an asylee must apply for employment authorization. Two options emerge: A ) The phrase could be viewed as a condition of employment authorization. B ) The phrase could be interpreted as referring to the document of choice that the INS will issue to asylees, rather than a condition of employment authorization. "Given that in paragraph (a) of 274a.12, asylees are stated as being employment authorized without condition as a result of obtaining their status, espousing the first interpretation would read this language out of the regulations. " "This point is made clearer when applying the second interpretation to a class of aliens that is not subject to the EAD process. " "Under the plain language of the regulations, then, failing to utilize the EAD application process results in nothing more than the asylee being employment authorized without an INS-issued EAD. Despite this plain language reading of the regulations, some statements made by INS would seem to support the first and more restrictive interpretation of the EAD language in 8 C.F.R. ?274a.12(a)(5). These statements, however, are flawed and, therefore, have little, if any, interpretive value." Citing the 1994 final rule amending 8 C.F.R. 208.20: "The proposed amendments to section 208.20 are designed to ensure that asylees receive their EAD promptly upon application. They do not create new requirements or obstacles for asylees seeking authorization to work. Asylees are among the categories of persons who are eligible for employment incident to their status but must nevertheless apply for an employment authorization document." "Upon analysis of the italicized portions of this paragraph, it is evident that a number of misstatements were made" - Employment authorization is incident to status, so asylees will not be separately seeking work authorization from the INS; The regulations at 8 C.F.R. ?274a.12(a)(5) do place a requirement on asylees, but that requirement has to do with asylees seeking evidence of employment authorization rather than employment authorization itself. - "[a]sylees are among the categories of persons who are eligible for employment incident to their status but must nevertheless apply for an employment authorization document's also incorrect. Section 274a.12(a)(5) lists asylees not as aliens who are eligible for employment incident to their status, but, instead, as aliens who are authorized for employment incident to their status. - "ince authorization for employment is a discretionary immigrant benefit's likewise incorrect. Because of the mandatory language in the statute, the Attorney General has no discretion to withhold employment authorization once an individual is granted asylum." "By policy directive, asylees are provided with the Form I-94 containing an endorsement of their work-authorized asylee status which, therefore, constitutes an endorsement of their work authorized status." [ It should be noted that each section of 8 C.F.R. ?274a.12(a) contains this same quoted language ("as evidenced by an employment authorization document issued by the Service,"), and thus the interpretation of this is not exclusive to asylees; K1s are contained in 8 C.F.R. 274a.12(a)(6) ] See: http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/han...ylees031003.pdf 8) British ExPat Thread: K1 and EAD Citation to the US Code of Federal Regulations would require a depth step-by-step analysis in order to provide explanation of how all of the provisions implicated by this question interrelate. In general, however, the progression is as follows: 1. K-1 classification may last no longer than 90 days. 2. K-1 classification is for fiance(e)s of US citizens only. 3. As soon as a K-1 alien marries, he/she is no longer a fiance(e). 4. K-1 aliens are work authorized incident to status, per 8 CFR 274a.12(a)(6). 5. K-1 work authorization may last no longer than the status lasts, whether the documentation issued to the K-1 alien has expired or not. 6. An employment authorization document is required under 274a.12(a)(6) to K-1 aliens, although INS General Counsel takes the position that 274a.12(a) aliens (unlike 274a.12 aliens, for example) are work authorized incident to status (i.e upon INS-issued proof of status). However, the public has not been formally advised of this interpretation. 7. Some K-1 aliens who are unaware of this interpretation apply for EAD's at INS Service Centers, where the processing period of 90 days essentially eviscerates the work authorization and the document may arrive after the fiance(s)'s status has already changed to spouse. Some K-1 aliens are issued EAD's at INS field offices. Some are issued Forms I-94 stamped "employment authorized." This varies from area to area within the US. 8. An EAD is automatically invalidated if the status which entitled the alien to the employment authorization ceases, whether or not the EAD has expired. [source of this was mentioned as possibly USCIS Office of Business Liason, but I could not verify that] See: http://britishexpats.com/forum/showthread.php?t=313634

Ok, Jie received her SS# card today. As I remember, from the www.SSA.gov website, they said "The K-1 symbol on your immigration document indicates that you are the fiancee of a U.S. citizen and you are eligible to work. We, therefore, can assign you a number and card so that you can work." I assumed that once she got the # and the card, she can work. However, on her SS card they typed the following: "VALID FOR WORK ONLY WITH DHS AUTHORIZATION" Did I miss something, or did they miss something? Is there another step now? Shouldnt she already be eligible according to the SS website?

does anyone know that if i can use a tax payer id instead of a social security number to file my income tax jointly? we married on 2005 and she is here on January, 2006. thanks for your help!

We shipped off the AOS, EAD and AP paperwork on Saturday and this morning I remembered we had not submitted for a name change on Mins SSN or State ID and we had submitted the name change on the AOS paperwork. Figured it would be just our luck to have USCIS get funny about having a Social Security number in her maiden name. So off we go with papers in hand, the lady at SSA examined our marriage certificate, state id, birth certificate, passport, visa and I-94 and proceeded to inform us that we didnt have anything from immigration showing the name change was valid. I asked her how I would provide that information for her and she told me I had to go to the immigration office to do this. I explained that the name change was performed on the I-485 Adjustment of Status form that had recently been sent to the USCIS Lock box in Chicago and this dear lady informed me that when they finished processing the forms we could come back for a name change. She was shocked when I busted out laughing, and told her that could be up to 2 years and we might need to conduct business in her married name before that might happen. She stood firm on this, so I asked if it was possible to speak with a supervisor. I then had to somewhat restrain my lovely wife when this lady grabbed up our paperwork in her fist, crumpling the Social Security Card, Passport, birth certificate and Certified Marriage Certificate and wandered off. She returned about 5 minutes later and punched a few things up in the computer and walked away with our paperwork in her fist again. She returned a few minutes later with the supervisor who explained to me that it was not legal to change a name for a visa holder without USCIS permission. I asked her if she understood what a K-1 visa represented. She was not aware that this was a fiance visa and I asked her if she understood that the USCIS expected us to be married within 90 days of entry to the US and it might be consider appropriate to change her name when married and that possibly the USCIS was quite used to this occurrence. I also explained that I was aware that a large number of SSA offices indeed had absolutely no problem with this. She held firm and I then asked if I should have medical bills submitted to her attention as our insurance was in her married name and also if she would personally be willing to guarantee my wife could write checks on our joint checking account as her ID showed her maiden name, or perhaps she could come by this office and they would cash them for her. I was really starting to have too much fun as she was obviously uncomfortable by now. She then stated it was USCIS policy that had been given to the SSA and I did the unforgivable, I asked if she would mind printing up this directive or memo for me for my files. The two ladies disappeared for about 5 minutes and the clerk returned and started punching things into the computer. She told me that she was changing my wifes name in the computer and it would only generate a letter telling us we could not have a name change, but when it printed out it was the standard letter stating she would receive her card in 2 weeks, so she tried again and got the same letter. She also photocopied every piece of evidence we had and stapled the application and social security card together. I asked why they were keeping the old card and she said they needed it for their files. Again I asked the unforgivable and requested she provide us something showing she indeed had a SSN so we would have proof of the number when asked. She then printed out a form showing the number. Total time spent 35 minutes Cost $0.00 Look on the clerks face when the standard letter printed out of the system twice, priceless.