Don't worry, buddy. We are pretty much in the same boat - I also didn't send ds230 or pictures. If everything works for me, it's good, but if not, the world won't stop spinning. I really don't care that much.
Dv 2009 - Aos Only
- Thread starter Ausmatt7
- Start date
Don't worry, buddy. We are pretty much in the same boat - I also didn't send ds230 or pictures. If everything works for me, it's good, but if not, the world won't stop spinning. I really don't care that much.
Home ownership
I posted my question in another thread but did not get any clear response. Let's phrase it differently. Are there any benefits for those who own property (house) with 100% equity? Can the title plus property tax receipts support application for adjustment, that is to say, can it be viewed by immigration officer as a proof that the applicant will not be a public charge?
I posted my question in another thread but did not get any clear response. Let's phrase it differently. Are there any benefits for those who own property (house) with 100% equity? Can the title plus property tax receipts support application for adjustment, that is to say, can it be viewed by immigration officer as a proof that the applicant will not be a public charge?
my $0.02: I would say yes. Since you own a house with 100% equity -that would be a sign that you have a source of income.
Speculation: I think all they want to see is that you either have a source of income (job) or an ability to earn income (education).
Side thought: It might be possible to own property but still be a public charge if you don't have income. Example: inherit a $1 million house and have $0.00 yearly income. But never mind me...am bored.
Do you have a job that pays well above the poverty guidelines on I-864P? If yes, and you don't have any other unusual circumstances, I think public charge will not be an issue. You can stop worrying about your house, equity, etc.
If no, you may be asked to provide further evidence by showing some combination of assets that can be converted into cash and affidavits of support.
The total value of your real estate is the fair market value of the house minus your mortgage. That is what you get if you are forced to sell the house. If you do not have any other assets and you have no income, this source should be enought to finance you until your citizenship (according to yearly poverty guideline rates for 6-7 years until citizenship; public charge is OK after those years). That is how the immigration officer figures it all out.
raevsky, so are you saying that the officer will figure out that the poor guy will sell his house and live on the money for 6-7 years???
I think its all based on qualifying income. Like Plus07 said: You gotta job? Your job pays you above poverty line? Your fine!
Right, but if you don't have enough income, you can rely on assets and affidavits of support instead.
The details are not exactly what raevsky said, but there is no point of going into the details if you have enough income.
Well, I am a student with a part-time on-campus employment. This is a sad limitation of a J-1 status... And I don't think the TA's salary is above guidelines
rather below... I can get an affidavit, no problems. Is it better than a house?If you were able to prove you have sources to live on J-1, that means you will be able to prove the same thing for GC. The poverty guidelines are the same. So, if you have income more than poverty level, you will overcome public charge reason for denial. If you do not have that income, you were not able to get J-1.
Well, I am a student with a part-time on-campus employment. This is a sad limitation of a J-1 status... And I don't think the TA's salary is above guidelines
The guideline is $17,500 a year for 2 people (as usual with lots of exceptions), so you may well qualify based on TA salary. Other people did in the past.
That being said, I wouldn't rely on TA salary alone, if at all possible. If you can get an affidavit, this will normally put the public charge issue to rest.
I don't know if an affidavit is "better" than a house. Both are accepted ways of satisfying the public charge requirement. What's "better" depends on your personal circumstances - use your judgment and keep it simple.
For an affidavit sponsor who is not on active duty in the military (etc etc etc) the income requirement is 125% of poverty level, which is $17,500 for 2008.
Well, there is also a probability that the fact that you are in university (and hopefully progressing well) would be enough to show that you are less likely to become a public charge since they know that you have an ability to earn a qualifying income. Remember this is AOS not CP.
That is correct for cases of family immigration, immediate relative immigration and employment immigration in case when your employer is your relative (I-864 affidavit cases).
Other ways of immigration (including dv immigration) do not require 125% rate, because I-864 is not required, and is not acceptible as well (I-134 is needed when there are no other sources of income). 100% of poverty level is needed.
With three kids and a stay-at-home wife it is $31,000. (With %100 it is $24,800.) I heard about another option: if assets (cash value) are five times more than the difference between income and guidlines, it should be OK. Since I do not make more than $15,000 as a TA, that should be about $50,000-80,000. The question is whether it is sufficient for the time of AOS, or it must be enough for several years?
I agree that in principle for an I-134 sponsor the requirement is 100%.
That being said, in this case, we're not talking about the sponsor but the applicant themselves. If you can't meet 125% of poverty guidelines, I would definitely prepare an affidavit or evidence of assets.
By the way, masematn, these figures ($14,000 and $17,500) are for a family of two. If it's just you, then 100% is $10,400 and 125% is $13,000.
This changes the computation completely - you should've mentioned this earlier.
Yes, for I-864, you can use assets that are 5 times the income gap to compensate for that income gap. I-134 is generally less strict than I-864. So I guess this formula will be ok for the applicants themselves.
I don't understand this question - could you rephrase please.
Last edited by a moderator: