I-134 Assets - 5 times or 3 times the shortfall?

[riss 12]

Hi All, I've just got a question about the I-134.

I've asked questions about this a few times here and at other forums and people have always responded that if my fiancé (the USC) earns less than the minimum income, he needs to have three times the difference in assets. In the guidelines for the I-134 it says that it needs to be five times. I think it's in the I-864, for the AOS stage, that it needs to be only 3 times because at that stage we would already be married. Can someone help clarify this for me? Are the rules for the I-134 different for K-1 applicants perhaps?

Thank you in advance,

Riss

Edited September 28, 2012 by riss

[aws&ndd 103]

The I-134 isn't used for just the K-1 visa process, it is also used for other visa processes in which case the 5 times rule would apply. Also in this case the I-134 only requires 100% of the federal poverty level however for a K-1 visa applicant they will likely require to see 125%. As a K-1 visa applicant you need to show 125% and or show assets that are equal to 3 times the amount needed. Hope this helps.

[KayDeeCee 4,891]

A K-1 is technically a non-immigrant visa, but yet someone entering with a K-1 is actually intending to marry, adjust status and stay. The consulates know the I-864 affidavit of support will be needed shortly after entering the US with the K-1. They tend to follow the guidelines for the I-864, even when dealing with the I-134 from K-1 visa applicants. They use the 125% poverty guidelines for the I-864, as well as wanting to see at least the most recent tax transcript from all, not just those that are self-employed(like stated for the I-134). The I-864 instructions is where you will find how household size is counted, and they tend to also use assets at 3 times for a spouse or fiance(e). Keep in mind that 3 times the shortcoming in assets is a bare minimum, and the more you can show the better.

[riss 12]

Thanks so much Aws and Jay-Kay. Do you happen to know if they count the equity in a person's home as an asset for these purposes? My fiancé has no income at the moment and probably just about the right amount of equity in his house to cover the 3 times. I spoke to a lawyer about also showing evidence of my own assets together with the I-134 and she said to go ahead and that it might be taken into account. If they do take my things into account we'd be alright, but if not it is down to his house!

We're looking at having a friend be a co-sponsor but she doesn't earn a very high salary so we weren't sure if her I-134 would be compelling, especially given she isn't family. We decided to just try to go with what my fiancé has first up and try to get through on our own steam. If we get asked to have a co-sponsor we'll have the friend lined up and ready to go. It's all getting a bit tricky!

Edited September 28, 2012 by riss

[Anh map 2,098]

Using equity in a primary residence isn't always accepted. Reason being that if the asset needed to be liquidated it would cause considerable hardship to the sponsor.

A friend whose income meets the requirement ought to be ok.

[riss 12]

Thanks Anh Map. I was wondering exactly that, about the primary residence.

We had a one-off session with a lawyer ($660!) and ran our financial situation by her - my fiancé was laid off from his permanent job five months ago, and has since had $8000 of income (before tax) from freelance work. The lawyer thought we should just show his recent earnings together with his I-134 and not use a co-sponsor, as she said she thought we'd get through alright (he'd already earned more than the yearly requirement from his salary this year prior to being laid off). She felt that adding a co-sponsor's I-134 for 'good measure' might just make us get scrutinised more closely, as in, 'why do these people feel the need to cover themselves so much?' Thing is, that was a couple of months ago and L hasn't had any more freelance work, that would help indicate an on-going income.

I have $20,000 in a bank account and I can show part-ownership (with my ex) in a house, of which my share would be around $80K. I plan to provide that evidence when I send off the packet with L's I-134. I'm sort of hoping that's going to really help show that we can afford to support ourselves. But what do you guys think, should I give up the lawyer's advice and just use the co-sponsor up front? I'm guessing she earns around $30K a year, and she has a two-person household. It should meet the requirements with a small margin to spare. Not really sure what to do at this point. My plan was to try this on our own steam, with our co-sponsor ready to go if we're told our finances aren't adequate. Now that I realise L's house wouldn't necessarily carry us over the line, I'm re-thinking. I'd really love to hear other opinions and thoughts on this.

Riss

Edited September 28, 2012 by riss

[aws&ndd 103]

If you aren't sure, you should use the co-sponsor just in case. It will not affect your case any differently and in fact may help you. And also let me say that they don't care what the past income was as much as they care to see what CURRENT income is. So the fact that he EARNED (past earnings) more than the yearly requirement will not get him by, as they want to see that he can continue the same earnings into the future when you are here.

[riss 12]

Thanks Aws, that was my original thinking too and it seems most logical. I was confused when the lawyer advised us not to use the co-sponsor, because everyone here seems to be of the opinion that the more back-up you have the better. I figured a lawyer would know the system better than I would. But then I have had such different responses from people here, who have been through the process themselves and seen many others go through it. Maybe I should just go with the co-sponsor after all.

If you aren't sure, you should use the co-sponsor just in case. It will not affect your case any differently and in fact may help you. And also let me say that they don't care what the past income was as much as they care to see what CURRENT income is. So the fact that he EARNED (past earnings) more than the yearly requirement will not get him by, as they want to see that he can continue the same earnings into the future when you are here.

[LIFE'SJOURNEY 970]

He really should try to get any job for right now that could show that he has the capability to mak the $18,920.00 yearly for two.

Your assests can not be added to his income, either you have enough assest to cover it along or not in this case you don't because the house is a joint ownership. Until it is sold you can not claim that you will have easy access to the money. Your bank statement would have to be 5 X the $18,920.00 = $94,600.00.