Canadian Spouse Currently Unemployed

[NikLR 13,234]

Yep I agree.

[__caitlin 2]

I understand the problems with working off the books, and am working towards (and encouraging others I know) to get out of that situation asap. But in terms of the past, it has already happened.

My sense (based on reading some of the other posts in past threads, such as the ones I quoted) was that it is better to be honest, even about off the books work, than to lie and say something like "unemployed." When the question comes up as to how the person supported themselves during, say, the 6-month gap of unemployment, it would be lying to say that they had absolutely no work when they did.

The past threads I read said that it's more important to be truthful about this (and it's more likely to be forgiven) than to not list it and try to hide it (which, if found out, may NOT be forgiven at all). Is that true?

Some of the threads I read were from around 2007. Have times changed, and it's actually more favorable to try to omit/lie about the off the books work?

Edited July 3, 2013 by __caitlin

[NikLR 13,234]

Do what you would like to do that makes you feel what is right and proper. It is good to tell the truth and the likelihood that your husband would have to pay back taxes to CRA is very slim. I've only once worked under the table and it was only because it was my first job and I wasn't aware that they should have been paying the taxes and omitting them from my pay cheque. I was naive and ignorant about it and since then have wised up. Depending on the line of work I look for, depends on whether or not I include that job on my resumé, not because it was unofficial.

Should your husband be working months at a time, or years, at a job, then yes, that's his job. Working under the table was his choice and if the CRA finds out and demands him to pay the back taxes, it's what he will have to do. I agree with being truthful. However, I've never written down that I sealed tile for my brother occasionally because it was maybe 6 times with not even a week's worth of work total. Something occasional like that probably doesn't need to be mentioned, but something that is paying your bills, probably does.

[Gary and Alla 3,696]

Hi all,

I'm a US citizen, and am currently trying to file for my Canadian spouse to come to America via the CR-1 process. I'm currently trying to assemble the I-130 package.

My spouse recently had troubles with his work and is currently unemployed -- but I want to send out the I-130 package quickly, and am not sure it'd be a good idea to wait until he finds a new job.

The thing is that on the G-325A, the biographical form, they ask for employment information. Is the fact that my spouse is unemployed at the time of the I-130 package going to be a detriment? What about if he were still unemployed at the time of the interview, etc.? Will this work against us?

Any and all advice is appreciated!

Your foreign spouses employment status before, during or after the process is of no consequence whatsoever.

[Gary and Alla 3,696]

I understand the problems with working off the books, and am working towards (and encouraging others I know) to get out of that situation asap. But in terms of the past, it has already happened.

My sense (based on reading some of the other posts in past threads, such as the ones I quoted) was that it is better to be honest, even about off the books work, than to lie and say something like "unemployed." When the question comes up as to how the person supported themselves during, say, the 6-month gap of unemployment, it would be lying to say that they had absolutely no work when they did.

The past threads I read said that it's more important to be truthful about this (and it's more likely to be forgiven) than to not list it and try to hide it (which, if found out, may NOT be forgiven at all). Is that true?

Some of the threads I read were from around 2007. Have times changed, and it's actually more favorable to try to omit/lie about the off the books work?

List all work. Nothing has changed. The USA could not possibly care less if he paid tax to Canada. NEVER lie on an immigration form for ANY reason.

FWIW suggesting to do so is a violation of the TOS of this site.

USCIS is not the IRS of Canada or any other country and they are not going to check on that in any case.

Be honest, sleep well.

[Gary and Alla 3,696]

So I take it the above posts I quoted are not accurate? But what about people who work jobs that have a high rate of off-the-books employment? Like the restaurant industry, or my friend works as a nanny -- and that's all off-the-books.

If I just put "unemployed" instead of listing the off-the-books gigs (a couple which range from 2 months to 5 months), is it going to pose a problem to explain those gaps?

Caveat: I know that it's illegal and that this is a problem...but it's also a problem that I know many people have, especially people in the industries I mentioned. What is the best way for us to approach this and fill out our G325A?

I don't care if you want to question me, but Pushbrk is never wrong and I agree with him. List the work ae "self employed" if you like, but list it. Whether the employer and your spouse were "legal" or not is of no concern to the USA. ALWAYS be honest.

There really is no such thing as "unofficial employment" He was employed or unemployed. He can be his own employer (self employed) I would just list his employer and his position. Whether they filled out the proper Canadian paperwork or not is of no consequence to anyone in the USA.

Suggesting to conceal information or lie is a TOS violation

[__caitlin 2]

Okay, I think I get it now. Thank you so much!

[NikLR 13,234]

On a side note, I find it interesting the we be honest when you're not being honest by working under the table because to do so is avoiding tax and is illegal. (I've since paid my taxes due for that job FYI.)

A bit of a moral conundrum.

I was under the understanding it was a day here or there, not actual employment, but true employment should be mentioned. Honesty is the best policy.

[The Mean Lady 604]

I wouldn't report every babysitting gig i'd had since age 16.

[NikLR 13,234]

I wouldn't report every babysitting gig i'd had since age 16.

LOL me either!

[Gary and Alla 3,696]

I wouldn't report every babysitting gig i'd had since age 16.

Of course not. But if you were a "self employed babysitter" within the last five years you should report that. You do not have to report every "gig", a part itme job may be only a few hours a week but they don't ask for how many hours or how many clients you had.

The purpose of this form for this visa (and the K-1) is as a way to sort out a person with the name "John Dillinger" from THE John Dillinger. It is also used in interviews to verify indentity. Interviewers often ask the names of parents, job history etc. This verifies the person sitting with them is the same one on the form. They did this to Alla for her initial green card interview and for her citizenship interview. The more you give them, the more likely it is the form can help you. Better to clear up a "name hit" in the USCIS office rather than have it turned over to the FBI for checks which can take weeks or months

There is no moral irony. If you falsify material information anywhere in the process you can lose benefits at any point downstream. If you lie on your G-325a and it is found out 10 years later, you could, in theory, lose your citizenship. We hear about people losing their citizenship all the time though usually for lying about participation in genocide and other particular nasty things. But why take a chance?

With the upcoming addition of 11 million or so new applications, USCIS is looking for ways to streamline things and make processing faster. Off loading background checks and RFEs are among those ideas...and I am not guessing. There is no requirement for them to send you an RFE, current USCIS rules call for that, but they make the rules and can change them. They can easily say if your petition is not correct..."toughski shitski" as they say in Ukraine and reject your petition and you start over and lose your money. It would save millions of man hours not having to adjudicate petitions TWICE because someone didn't bother to read instructions.

It behooves the petitioner and/or applicant to be as precise and complete as possible, there is NO downside to taking a little more time and filling it out completely

The US is not going to report you to the Canadian authorities, the US has no way to know if the employment was official, reported, taxed or anything else and they do not care.

[The Mean Lady 604]

Of course not. But if you were a "self employed babysitter" within the last five years you should report that. You do not have to report every "gig", a part itme job may be only a few hours a week but they don't ask for how many hours or how many clients you had.

The purpose of this form for this visa (and the K-1) is as a way to sort out a person with the name "John Dillinger" from THE John Dillinger. It is also used in interviews to verify indentity. Interviewers often ask the names of parents, job history etc. This verifies the person sitting with them is the same one on the form. They did this to Alla for her initial green card interview and for her citizenship interview. The more you give them, the more likely it is the form can help you. Better to clear up a "name hit" in the USCIS office rather than have it turned over to the FBI for checks which can take weeks or months

There is no moral irony. If you falsify material information anywhere in the process you can lose benefits at any point downstream. If you lie on your G-325a and it is found out 10 years later, you could, in theory, lose your citizenship. We hear about people losing their citizenship all the time though usually for lying about participation in genocide and other particular nasty things. But why take a chance?

With the upcoming addition of 11 million or so new applications, USCIS is looking for ways to streamline things and make processing faster. Off loading background checks and RFEs are among those ideas...and I am not guessing. There is no requirement for them to send you an RFE, current USCIS rules call for that, but they make the rules and can change them. They can easily say if your petition is not correct..."toughski shitski" as they say in Ukraine and reject your petition and you start over and lose your money. It would save millions of man hours not having to adjudicate petitions TWICE because someone didn't bother to read instructions.

It behooves the petitioner and/or applicant to be as precise and complete as possible, there is NO downside to taking a little more time and filling it out completely

The US is not going to report you to the Canadian authorities, the US has no way to know if the employment was official, reported, taxed or anything else and they do not care.

Sure, but the OP said "In the past he had a couple of temporary gigs"

She indicated herself that these were "Babysitting Gigs" and not long term stable employment.

It's up to their own discretion to supply what that means.

If he worked 3 days laying someone's hardwood floor 5 years ago, I don't know how your memory would even begin to recall that.