Does Fiances occupation matter ?

[Glas64 0]

A few questions if I may ? My fiance is a Physical Therapist in the Philippines. She isnt licensed here in the states yet but would easily be qualified to work as a PT aide or something of that nature Being that the occupation is in demand here in the states does the USCIS consider that in it`s decision whether to grant the Visa ? I`m about $2500 short of the 125% of the poverty level requirement. However My condo is paid for in full as is my car. I`m just trying to find anyway I can to meet the income requirements. I know you can get a co sponsor but that would be my last resort.

The thing I find odd is that someone can be almost debt free and easily live on $20,000 per year but they can still be denied the Fiance Visa. However a guy making $50,000 with a lot of debt in which he may be living pay check to pay check would get the visa. Maybe I`m misunderstanding how the affidavit of support works??

Edited November 8, 2010 by Glas64

[thelastpetitioner 218]

i dont think her job matters.

also as far as your condo and car goes,you cant list primary residence as an asset to cover the shortage on your I-134,because IF something happens,and you sell the primary residence,the best bet is you wont be able to replace it.

unfortunately rules are rules,the financial rules are the most brutal,hence i dont get myself involved in the financial aspects of a visa as much as possible

[Used to be broken 143]

i dont think her job matters.

also as far as your condo and car goes,you cant list primary residence as an asset to cover the shortage on your I-134,because IF something happens,and you sell the primary residence,the best bet is you wont be able to replace it.

unfortunately rules are rules,the financial rules are the most brutal,hence i dont get myself involved in the financial aspects of a visa as much as possible

I am curious as to how you came up with that assertion? The form itself has a place to list the Real Estate owned and the amount of the mortgage, not seeing anything in the instructions on the form saying that real estate equity on a primary residence is excluded.

Seems "if something happens" not sure what that is, and you did sell your residence to keep your fiance or by then spouse off public assistance programs .. it would not matter if you would not be able to replace it as ygr suggests. Not sure the government cares if you live in a cardboard box as long as your sponsored immigrant doesn't end up on public assistance.

good luck

[thelastpetitioner 218]

I am curious as to how you came up with that assertion? The form itself has a place to list the Real Estate owned and the amount of the mortgage, not seeing anything in the instructions on the form saying that real estate equity on a primary residence is excluded.

Seems "if something happens" not sure what that is, and you did sell your residence to keep your fiance or by then spouse off public assistance programs .. it would not matter if you would not be able to replace it as ygr suggests. Not sure the government cares if you live in a cardboard box as long as your sponsored immigrant doesn't end up on public assistance.assets need to be convertible into cash without any hardship,automobiles can be used as long as its not a primarily or only automobile in a household

good luck

actually if government did not care about where and how the petitioner plans to live with the beneficiary the poverty guidelines wouldnt matter.it counts as real estate that the petitioner owns,SURE,but would it be enough to cover shortage as far as guidelines go?no.

Edited November 8, 2010 by ygr

[thelastpetitioner 218]

allow me to add this,since i cant edit my post,assets are properties owned my the petitioner that can be turned into cash within one year without physical or financial hardship,selling the primarily residence WOULD in fact cause financial hardship,same goes about automobiles,there for they have to be listed as the owned property,just not the assets to cover the shortage

[Used to be broken 143]

allow me to add this,since i cant edit my post,assets are properties owned my the petitioner that can be turned into cash within one year without physical or financial hardship,selling the primarily residence WOULD in fact cause financial hardship,same goes about automobiles,there for they have to be listed as the owned property,just not the assets to cover the shortage

You are saying selling the primary residence would cause "financial hardship", not sure that is true, a large percentage of Americans do not own any real estate they live in Rentals quite nicely.

I agree on the automobile, I believe I saw that in the I864 instructions not the one being discussed in this post, presumably because in America you need transportation to get to work.

My question was, are you seeing this in some instructions? Or on the USCIS website or the State Department Website, or are you just creating this theory yourself? Where do you see that that equity in the primary residence cannot be used as assets? Give a link if you have it.

Thanks

[sichuan red 5]

allow me to add this,since i cant edit my post,assets are properties owned my the petitioner that can be turned into cash within one year without physical or financial hardship,selling the primarily residence WOULD in fact cause financial hardship,same goes about automobiles,there for they have to be listed as the owned property,just not the assets to cover the shortage

Whoa, there cowboy. I think you misunderstand things just a bit.

On the I-134 it asks the value of your home if you own one. Afterwards, it asks what you owe on the home. The difference between the two is known as equity. If the equity is positive, it is used in calculating the 125% income level. If it were not to be considered they obviously would not ask for that information.

A humble petitioner for my lao po in Sichuan.