• Hello Members, This forums is for DV lottery visas only. For other immigration related questions, please go to our forums home page, find the related forum and post it there.

Elective cross charging - clarified in rulebook (and other changes)

Britsimon

Britsimon

Super Moderator
For some time now we have discussed several cases where a DV entrant has cross charged to a spouses country to improve their chances - so for example. An African married to an Australian wanted to improve their chance by charging to Australia taking their selection chance from 1 in 200 to 1 in 20. I call this "elective cross charging".

This was suggested in a document by a DV literate lawyer, BUT up to now the 3 examples given for birth country exceptions in the 9 FAM rulebook did not cover this elective cross charging, so their was some element of discomfort with recommending the approach. However, the 9 FAM notes appear to have been updated in the last few days with a fourth example covering elective cross charging.

This is great news to have the clarity and confidence - but anyone wishing to use this approach had better go to their interview fully armed with the printed text and web link ready to point out to the CO.

The new exception example says:-

(4) A principal registrant born in a country, which is among those for which Diversity Visas are available, may derive a more favorable foreign state of chargeability from an accompanying alien spouse. For example, a principal applicant from a DV eligible country from a high-admission region may claim a more favorable chargeability from a spouse, who is from a DV eligible country from a low-admission region, provided the relationship was established prior to submitting the DV entry. In such instances, however, both applicants are considered principal applicants for the purpose of crosschargeability and must be issued visas and apply for admission to the United States simultaneously.

There is also a change in the changeability mistakes section making fraud concerns a bit more clear AND they have added the words "at least a" in front of the high school education or equivalent which might bring some clarity to those who present Higher level degrees and get asked for High School documents.

Mom - any thoughts on these changes?
 
Britsimon said:
There is also a change in the changeability mistakes section making fraud concerns a bit more clear AND they have added the words "at least a" in front of the high school education or equivalent which might bring some clarity to those who present Higher level degrees and get asked for High School documents.
Click to expand...

Can you give a link or elucidate the above too please re the fraud concerns?

Edit: nvm saw in other thread!
 
Might be an idea to add that into the useful links sticky thread too, so it's easier to find later?
 
SusieQQQ said:
Might be an idea to add that into the useful links sticky thread too, so it's easier to find later?
Click to expand...

It is there already. Like most sources on the net (via lawyers etc) the links go back to the source pdf which is updated centrally.
 
Ah, ok.
I see there is a line ref the above about possibly needing to ensure there are visa numbers for the correct country of chargeability. In practical terms probably doesn't affect anyone except - it does show that they don't just keep the wrong country and go by region but change it to correct country - so in rare cases this could result in a denial if the correct country hits its limit I guess, but that is a pretty rare event anyway.
 
Also second last para, I know it's not new but we know posts often don't follow this - and allow people to choose not to continue when they will be disqualified. Which we think of as being "nice" so that people don't spend fees unnecessarily, but they ask that the cases get processed anyway and denied because some of these people then enter the U.S. and try do AOS..
 
SusieQQQ said:
Also second last para, I know it's not new but we know posts often don't follow this - and allow people to choose not to continue when they will be disqualified. Which we think of as being "nice" so that people don't spend fees unnecessarily, but they ask that the cases get processed anyway and denied because some of these people then enter the U.S. and try do AOS..
Click to expand...

Yes - good point. It's also a sort of recognition of AoS being slightly easier in one way - I believe some cases that get denied outside of the USA would be approved through a typical AoS process.
 
Britsimon said:
For some time now we have discussed several cases where a DV entrant has cross charged to a spouses country to improve their chances - so for example. An African married to an Australian wanted to improve their chance by charging to Australia taking their selection chance from 1 in 200 to 1 in 20. I call this "elective cross charging".

This was suggested in a document by a DV literate lawyer, BUT up to now the 3 examples given for birth country exceptions in the 9 FAM rulebook did not cover this elective cross charging, so their was some element of discomfort with recommending the approach. However, the 9 FAM notes appear to have been updated in the last few days with a fourth example covering elective cross charging.

This is great news to have the clarity and confidence - but anyone wishing to use this approach had better go to their interview fully armed with the printed text and web link ready to point out to the CO.

The new exception example says:-

(4) A principal registrant born in a country, which is among those for which Diversity Visas are available, may derive a more favorable foreign state of chargeability from an accompanying alien spouse. For example, a principal applicant from a DV eligible country from a high-admission region may claim a more favorable chargeability from a spouse, who is from a DV eligible country from a low-admission region, provided the relationship was established prior to submitting the DV entry. In such instances, however, both applicants are considered principal applicants for the purpose of crosschargeability and must be issued visas and apply for admission to the United States simultaneously.

There is also a change in the changeability mistakes section making fraud concerns a bit more clear AND they have added the words "at least a" in front of the high school education or equivalent which might bring some clarity to those who present Higher level degrees and get asked for High School documents.

Mom - any thoughts on these changes?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I do think the addition of the 4th condition is a great one. The caveat here of course is that both husband and wife will be treated as main applicants and they will be required to attend their interview together, following which they must enter the U.S. together also. The case file cannot be transferred, and the FTJ option cannot be pursued in such a case.

I however do believe some COs may still erroneously deny petitions that fall within that category unless of course the applicant is aware of what 9FAM says and attend their interview fully armed to the teeth and ready to argue their case - an act so many petitioners may not be courageous enough to take.
 
Last edited:
Sm1smom said:
Yeah, I do think the addition of the 4th condition is a great one. I however do believe some COs may still erroneously deny petitions that fall within that category unless of course the applicant is aware of what 9FAM says and attend their interview fully armed to the teeth and ready to argue their case - an act so many petitioners may not be courageous enough to take.
Click to expand...


Yep. This one comes with a warning. Use with caution.
 
Britsimon said:
Yes - good point. It's also a sort of recognition of AoS being slightly easier in one way - I believe some cases that get denied outside of the USA would be approved through a typical AoS process.
Click to expand...

Absolutely right. For instance, it's actually easier to get away with a HS equivalency diploma with AOS unlike CP where closer scrutiny is placed on the actual HS education or the passing marks/grades requirement some embassies demand
 
Britsimon said:
There is also a change in the changeability mistakes section making fraud concerns a bit more clear AND they have added the words "at least a" in front of the high school education or equivalent which might bring some clarity to those who present Higher level degrees and get asked for High School documents.
Click to expand...
Hi Britsimon,

I have read (and keep doing it every day) your superb and awesome blog. You have done a premium quality job by summarizing all topics in a very educational way. I can do nothing but thank you a lot for sharing this info with us. Regarding this excellent update, I find it very interesting because it actually makes me feel more confident to go to my interview.

I would also appreciate if you can share your own personal thoughts about the addition of the wording "at least" to the HS diploma requirements. What impact could be seen on the behavior of the officers doing CPs at posts in South America for instance?

Thanks again (and again...)!
 
Guarapa said:
Hi Britsimon,

I have read (and keep doing it every day) your superb and awesome blog. You have done a premium quality job by summarizing all topics in a very educational way. I can do nothing but thank you a lot for sharing this info with us. Regarding this excellent update, I find it very interesting because it actually makes me feel more confident to go to my interview.

I would also appreciate if you can share your own personal thoughts about the addition of the wording "at least" to the HS diploma requirements. What impact could be seen on the behavior of the officers doing CPs at posts in South America for instance?

Thanks again (and again...)!
Click to expand...

The "at least" could theoretically make some interviews easier (in cases where an applicant cannot show the appropriate grades for high school, but has a bachelors or masters). However, I would not want to rely on this at the moment. Some COs have approved people based on higher degree proof only, but other COs gave been more picky. Sure, this change might help, but it is not explicit and a stubborn CO may want to enforce the old rule. So, don't rely on it unless you have to do so.
 
Britsimon said:
The "at least" could theoretically make some interviews easier (in cases where an applicant cannot show the appropriate grades for high school, but has a bachelors or masters). However, I would not want to rely on this at the moment. Some COs have approved people based on higher degree proof only, but other COs gave been more picky. Sure, this change might help, but it is not explicit and a stubborn CO may want to enforce the old rule. So, don't rely on it unless you have to do so.
Click to expand...
I have the same perception about it. Of course I am doing the best I can to mitigate this, however chances are that my interview will be appointed and I might not this have this document fully ready by then (e.g. with "Apostille") as I have to start from scratch (I lost my original HS diploma somewhere in the time lapse of the last 25 years). My CN is SA2016 in the late 700's; based on the statistics you have tabled I can reasonably expect my interview for January (I submitted my DS260 on May 11) but in my home country (Venezuela) things always change and go in unexpected ways, some for better, some for worse. It was not so difficult 2 years ago, but now the procedure seems to have changed at the Ministry of Education. Let us wait and see...
 
Britsimon said:
For some time now we have discussed several cases where a DV entrant has cross charged to a spouses country to improve their chances - so for example. An African married to an Australian wanted to improve their chance by charging to Australia taking their selection chance from 1 in 200 to 1 in 20. I call this "elective cross charging".

This was suggested in a document by a DV literate lawyer, BUT up to now the 3 examples given for birth country exceptions in the 9 FAM rulebook did not cover this elective cross charging, so their was some element of discomfort with recommending the approach. However, the 9 FAM notes appear to have been updated in the last few days with a fourth example covering elective cross charging.

This is great news to have the clarity and confidence - but anyone wishing to use this approach had better go to their interview fully armed with the printed text and web link ready to point out to the CO.

The new exception example says:-

(4) A principal registrant born in a country, which is among those for which Diversity Visas are available, may derive a more favorable foreign state of chargeability from an accompanying alien spouse. For example, a principal applicant from a DV eligible country from a high-admission region may claim a more favorable chargeability from a spouse, who is from a DV eligible country from a low-admission region, provided the relationship was established prior to submitting the DV entry. In such instances, however, both applicants are considered principal applicants for the purpose of crosschargeability and must be issued visas and apply for admission to the United States simultaneously.

There is also a change in the changeability mistakes section making fraud concerns a bit more clear AND they have added the words "at least a" in front of the high school education or equivalent which might bring some clarity to those who present Higher level degrees and get asked for High School documents.

Mom - any thoughts on these changes?
Click to expand...


Hi, I am new to this forum and was hoping you could give me your opinion on my situation. My was born in New Zealand and we have been married for 19 years, however she does not have a HS diploma, she only has a GED diploma (which does not qualify her). She does not have either any of the required experience. She is at the moment though doing a College course in Orlando Florida. I am from Brazil and I have an american HS diploma, as well as a Mechanical Engineer diploma, and a Msc diploma, and also several yeras of relevant experience. My question to you are:
1-Is my wife elegible, considering that she is studying at College now, but has not graduated yet?
2-If she is not, can I apply using her country of elegibility and my diplomas and experience?
3-Can we apply while she is studying (F1 visa) and living in USA?

Thank you for the help.
 
wander almeida said:
Hi, I am new to this forum and was hoping you could give me your opinion on my situation. My was born in New Zealand and we have been married for 19 years, however she does not have a HS diploma, she only has a GED diploma (which does not qualify her). She does not have either any of the required experience. She is at the moment though doing a College course in Orlando Florida. I am from Brazil and I have an american HS diploma, as well as a Mechanical Engineer diploma, and a Msc diploma, and also several yeras of relevant experience. My question to you are:
1-Is my wife elegible, considering that she is studying at College now, but has not graduated yet?
2-If she is not, can I apply using her country of elegibility and my diplomas and experience?
3-Can we apply while she is studying (F1 visa) and living in USA?

Thank you for the help.
Click to expand...

You can apply using your wife's country of birth BUT if you do it this way both of you need to qualify. So both of you can enter this way, but will still face the same problem re her education regardless of which spouse wins, should one of you get selected.

We haven't really seen any cases on the new rules but I would doubt that anything less than a graduated college diploma could be argued to be sufficient. This is because if the person fails or drops out of college, they still do not have any education qualification that is acceptable for DV. So unless your wife will graduate before your interview, should you win, I personally don't see that this can be a successful application.
 
SusieQQQ said:
You can apply using your wife's country of birth BUT if you do it this way both of you need to qualify. So both of you can enter this way, but will still face the same problem re her education regardless of which spouse wins, should one of you get selected.

We haven't really seen any cases on the new rules but I would doubt that anything less than a graduated college diploma could be argued to be sufficient. This is because if the person fails or drops out of college, they still do not have any education qualification that is acceptable for DV. So unless your wife will graduate before your interview, should you win, I personally don't see that this can be a successful application.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your clarifications. Considering that she will be graduated before the interview, can we, then both apply (two different applications) in order to increase our chances? And can we apply while we are physically in the USA? If so can we nominate an interview location in the USA?
 
wander almeida said:
Thank you for your clarifications. Considering that she will be graduated before the interview, can we, then both apply (two different applications) in order to increase our chances? And can we apply while we are physically in the USA? If so can we nominate an interview location in the USA?
Click to expand...

Yes, yes, and your interview will be based on where you live.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top