Under 40grand

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

You are oversimplifying the issue. The requirement is that the visa applicant demonstrate that he/she will not become a public charge in the US. One way to do that is to have someone else vouch for him/her with an I-134. That is not the only way. For example if the visa applicant has significant personal assets or a job offer in the US, that can also be used as evidence that the applicant will not become a public charge.

215056[/snapback]

Not sure how much more simple the issue can be. There is nothing to read into this that is NOT there. The only financial requirement for a US citizen petitioner must fulfil is proving they have earned 125% above the current US poverty guideline. If the petitioner has insufficient income, they will need either a sponsor, or sufficient personal assets to ensure the beneficiary will not become a public charge.

 

There is no magic formula, no secret man behind a curtain, no one that is out to get you. The law is the law, and that is it. In the US, we have laws, and these laws have been the bedrock of our nation since it's inception in 1776.

 

Anyone that has evidence of their petition being discriminated or being denied for insufficient income, should examine very carefully how they present their case.

 

If one or both partners have poor communication and documentation skills, they stand a good chance of being misunderstood at the interview. This is the reason that everyone on candle strongly recommends the importance of carefully preparing for the interview. This means reading and understanding what is about to happen, as well as having all the required documents, signatures, notarizations, and proof of relationship on hand.

Edited May 15, 2006 by ShaQuaNew (see edit history)

[warpedbored]

The requirement is 125% of the federal poverty guidelines period. This is one of the few areas of the visa requirements that is not shades of gray.

214306[/snapback]

although for the I-134 (K# visas), it is 100% of the poverty level...

 

 

I-864 FAQ:

http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/info/info_1328.html

 

Do the same income requirements apply to all immigrant visa applicants even if they use the I-134?

 

No. The 125 percent minimum income requirement, the need for the last three years income tax returns and other requirements only apply when an I-864 is needed. Applicants using the I-134 will need to show that their sponsor's income is 100 percent of federal poverty guidelines as required under Section 212(a)(4) of the INA.

214960[/snapback]

Since you must file the I-864 eventually it is a moot point whether or not the I-134 requires 125% of the federal poverty guidelines. When it comes right down to it the I-134 is not even required for a K visa

http://candleforlove.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=15273

[izus]

The SO working later on at a hypothetical job is not a factor. The earnings of the petitioner are, as others have pointed out, a clear cut requirement. This is perhaps the only thing you can be sure of in the process.

215003[/snapback]

from my understanding from our lawyer we were told that if VO asks if she plans on working in the US she is to say no...

[obxtrainman]

The SO working later on at a hypothetical job is not a factor. The earnings of the petitioner are, as others have pointed out, a clear cut requirement. This is perhaps the only thing you can be sure of in the process.

215003[/snapback]

from my understanding from our lawyer we were told that if VO asks if she plans on working in the US she is to say no...

215101[/snapback]

I don't understand why a lawyer would say that. Our So's will most certainly have the right to work. If you, and your So, decides other wise, so be it.

 

I don't understand why a VO wouldn't want your wife to work either. They could probably care less, as long as the petitioner is above the guideline.

[Yuanyang]

The SO working later on at a hypothetical job is not a factor. The earnings of the petitioner are, as others have pointed out, a clear cut requirement. This is perhaps the only thing you can be sure of in the process.

215003[/snapback]

from my understanding from our lawyer we were told that if VO asks if she plans on working in the US she is to say no...

215101[/snapback]

That sounds like the same quality of bogus legal advice I received from my lawyer.

(K3s are waste of time and money; they don't process them. "Wrong!")

Edited May 16, 2006 by Yuanyang (see edit history)

[Guest pushbrk]

The SO working later on at a hypothetical job is not a factor. The earnings of the petitioner are, as others have pointed out, a clear cut requirement. This is perhaps the only thing you can be sure of in the process.

215003[/snapback]

from my understanding from our lawyer we were told that if VO asks if she plans on working in the US she is to say no...

215101[/snapback]

I don't understand why a lawyer would say that. Our So's will most certainly have the right to work. If you, and your So, decides other wise, so be it.

 

I don't understand why a VO wouldn't want your wife to work either. They could probably care less, as long as the petitioner is above the guideline.

215131[/snapback]

Anybody who advises you to lie to a government official in the visa process is not your friend. If your attorney does it, fire them.

 

Fortunately, this doesn't appear to be a common question.

[warpedbored]

If the beneficiary seems too eager to work the VO might think the motive for going to the US is economic rather than marriage.