Jump to content
KathCali

Mega Thread for All questions regarding Public Charge

 Share

196 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Filed: AOS (apr) Country: Uganda
Timeline
4 hours ago, CarlHamilton said:

Can you point to where the laws or regulations say this?  I understand your logic, but I wouldn't assume anything without a specific legal provision. 

No assumptions are being made. From the horses mouth. There is a checklist of evidence required by USCIS on thier webpage. Only requirement is evidence that marriage was entered in good faith. NOTHING about income.

 

https://www.uscis.gov/i-751

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Other Country: Sweden
Timeline
1 hour ago, azblk said:

No assumptions are being made. From the horses mouth. There is a checklist of evidence required by USCIS on thier webpage. Only requirement is evidence that marriage was entered in good faith. NOTHING about income.

 

https://www.uscis.gov/i-751

The initial I-485 application doesn't require evidence that you haven't received public funds, but that's very much a consideration.  I wouldn't put too much faith in these checklists.

Edited by CarlHamilton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: AOS (apr) Country: Uganda
Timeline
4 minutes ago, CarlHamilton said:

The initial I-485 application doesn't require evidence that you haven't received public funds, but that's very much a consideration.  I wouldn't put too much faith in these checklists.

You are missing the point. You have to file i-485 in conjunction with i-864 ( which tries to ensure your will not become a public charge). There is no such requirement for i-751.

read the attorney answers on this page

 

https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/immigration---public-charge---3100053.html

Edited by azblk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Other Country: Sweden
Timeline
15 minutes ago, azblk said:

You are missing the point. You have to file i-485 in conjunction with i-864 ( which tries to ensure your will not become a public charge). There is no such requirement for i-751.

I think it's you who are missing the point.  The checklist you linked to is "for informational purposes only."  Not something you can take to the bank (or a judge).  We don't have the luxury of reading between the lines and assuming everything will be interpreted in the light most favorable to us in this climate.  You either have a solid legal source for the proposition that ROC doesn't involve a "public charge" determination or you don't.  It's a legitimate question that many are asking, and I haven't seen a good answer yet.  Let us know if you or your lawyer can find it (we're talking about a citation to the US Code or the Federal Register here, not what's included in a checklist, and least of all what's not included).  EDIT: I just saw your edit - those lawyers are talking about the current rules, not the proposed rule, and most of them seem to believe that public charge is relevant to ROC. 

Edited by CarlHamilton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: K-1 Visa Country: Wales
Timeline

No support issues are taken into account when removing conditions, not relevant.

“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: AOS (apr) Country: Uganda
Timeline
30 minutes ago, CarlHamilton said:

I think it's you who are missing the point.  The checklist you linked to is "for informational purposes only."  Not something you can take to the bank (or a judge).  We don't have the luxury of reading between the lines and assuming everything will be interpreted in the light most favorable to us in this climate.  You either have a solid legal source for the proposition that ROC doesn't involve a "public charge" determination or you don't.  It's a legitimate question that many are asking, and I haven't seen a good answer yet.  Let us know if you or your lawyer can find it (we're talking about a citation to the US Code or the Federal Register here, not what's included in a checklist, and least of all what's not included).  EDIT: I just saw your edit - those lawyers are talking about the current rules, not the proposed rule, and most of them seem to believe that public charge is relevant to ROC. 

I am talking from personal experience. I successfully removed conditions on my first green card. I still have my old package. Nothing in it had to do financial standing.  It was all about the validity of my marriage. 

The ‘proposed rule change ‘ is no longer has already been published and is undergoing public comment. I do not have a link right now but it also has nothing to do with removal of conditions. It is limited to the when you first get a green card.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Other Country: Sweden
Timeline
14 hours ago, azblk said:

I am talking from personal experience. I successfully removed conditions on my first green card. I still have my old package. Nothing in it had to do financial standing.  It was all about the validity of my marriage. 

The ‘proposed rule change ‘ is no longer has already been published and is undergoing public comment. I do not have a link right now but it also has nothing to do with removal of conditions. It is limited to the when you first get a green card.

 

The proposed rule is properly called a "proposed rule" until it becomes final (after public comments and any revisions).  I am very aware of it and, for the benefit of other users, the version published in the Federal Register is available here: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-10-10/pdf/2018-21106.pdf

As you can see on the first page, this is a "Notice of proposed rulemaking" (also known as NOPR).

Whether the proposed rule "also has nothing to do with removal of conditions" is precisely the question folks have been asking.  I've read it and haven't found any specific language addressing this.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (pnd) Country: Pakistan
Timeline
On 10/11/2018 at 9:30 PM, CarlHamilton said:

I think it's you who are missing the point.  The checklist you linked to is "for informational purposes only."  Not something you can take to the bank (or a judge).  We don't have the luxury of reading between the lines and assuming everything will be interpreted in the light most favorable to us in this climate.  You either have a solid legal source for the proposition that ROC doesn't involve a "public charge" determination or you don't.  It's a legitimate question that many are asking, and I haven't seen a good answer yet.  Let us know if you or your lawyer can find it (we're talking about a citation to the US Code or the Federal Register here, not what's included in a checklist, and least of all what's not included).  EDIT: I just saw your edit - those lawyers are talking about the current rules, not the proposed rule, and most of them seem to believe that public charge is relevant to ROC. 

D. Public Charge Inadmissibility Section 212(a)(4) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(4), provides that an alien applicant for a visa, admission, or adjustment of status is inadmissible if he or she is likely at any time to become a public charge. The public charge ground of inadmissibility, therefore, applies to any alien applying for a visa to come to the United States temporarily or permanently, for admission, or for adjustment of status to that of a lawful permanent resident.31

 

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-10-10/pdf/2018-21106.pdf

 

Pages 11-12

 

From my understanding of this newly published guideline thats going into comment period it will apply to adjust of status. I haven't found anything yet on ROC or Citizenship, it'll take me time reading through that cluster of small fonts.

..:::: My Visa Journey Timeline ::::..

2013

  • 10/20/2013 [Married]
  • 12/11/2013 [I-130 Mailed Phoeniz, AZ Lockbox]
  • 12/12/2013 [Priority Date]
  • 12/17/2013 [Received & Money Order Cashed | e-Mail | Text] [Last Update 1]

2014

  • 01/09/2014 [NOA1 (I-797C) Hardcopy Recieved]
  • 05/29/2014 [Alien Registration Number Changed | e-Mail | Text] [Last Update 2]
  • 06/10/2014 [I-130 Approved | e-Mail | Text] [Last Update 3]
  • 06/16/2014 [Shipped to NVC for processing | e-Mail | Text] [Last Update 4]
  • 06/30/2014 [Received at NVC] [Last Update 5]
  • 07/24/2014 [Case, IIN and BIN Numbers received] [Last Update 6]
  • 07/31/2014 [Received AOS Bill & DS-261 | e-Mail | Text] [Last Update 7]
  • 08/02/2014 [Paid AOS Bill] [Last Update 8]
  • 08/04/2014 [Package AOS Sent] [Last Update 9]
  • 09/11/2014 [Received IV Bill] [Last Update 10]
  • 09/12/2014 [Paid IV Bill] [Last Update 11]
  • 09/15/2014 [IV Package Sent] [Last Update 12]
  • 09/18/2014 [DS-260 Completed] [Last Update 13]
  • 10/03/2014 [AOS Check-list Sent] [Last Update 14]
  • 12/03/2014 [Case Complete | e-Mail] [Last Update 15]
  • 12/23/2014 [Medical Exam] [Last Update 16]

2015

  • 01/28/2015 [interview] [Last Update 17]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Filed: AOS (pnd) Country: Canada
Timeline

I was reading the new proposal (https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/18_0921_USCIS_Proposed-Rule-Public-Charge.pdf) after seeing an article that DHS is proposing to add credit score as a factor in determining public charge. On reading the proposed law, I also noticed that they are proposing that lawful permanent residents may be subject to an inadmissability determination  (due to public charge consideration) in some cases when travelling. 

 

1) Credit score: This is true (starts on page 187 of the PDF, "(c) Credit Report and Score" ). "USCIS would generally consider a credit score characterized as “good” or better to be a positive factor as it demonstrates an applicant may be able to support him or herself and any dependents assuming all other financial records are sufficient. A “good” credit report is generally near or slightly above the average of U.S. consumers, and therefore the person may be self-sufficient and less likely to become a public charge. A poor credit report is well below the average of U.S. consumers" (page 188). They also have considerations for people with no or limited credit, and for errors in credit history. I personally think this is not a good proposal, as it will discriminate against those who have relied on credit to remain self-supporting during emergency situations, such as to help pay for large medical costs, or tight times during an unexpected layoff, and fails to account for how fickle the credit score can be to maintain, as it relies on a multitude of factors such as the number of inquiries, age of accounts, balances on those accounts, payments on time, number of lines open, and so on, so conceivably a person could have sufficient income but be impacted by non-monetary factors. Granted, they are proposing that this would be one of a multitude of factors taken into consideration for the public charge benefit determination, but I still think it wouldn't be fair to have credit score counted as a negative if it doesn't accurately reflect the individual's situation. I didn't see this mentioned in precious discussions, but my apologies if it was and I missed it.

 

2) LPR's and travelling: I noticed this gem buried in the document: under section 1. Applicants for Admission (which starts on page 57 of PDF; quote is on page 59): "Additionally, although lawful permanent residents generally are not considered to be applicants for admission upon their return from a trip abroad, in certain limited circumstances a lawful permanent resident will be considered an applicant for admission and, therefore, subject to an inadmissibility determination.  This inadmissibility determination includes whether the alien is inadmissible as likely to become a public charge, which will be determined upon the lawful permanent resident's return to the United States." (quote is from page 59) I couldn't find a statement clarifying what those limited circumstances are, which doesn't make me very comfortable. It seems like this vague language would give point-of-entry the right to apply the public charge rules, and so even LPR's may need to bring financial supporting evidence with them when travelling, in the event that one of the "certain limited circumstances" pops up? I am full-on speculating here, of course, (and I didn't read the whole 447-page document, so it's possible they define it much later on, but they didn't for the 100 or so pages that I did glance through). But as is,  the proposal statement seems vague and open to interpretation. Thoughts? 😅

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
On 9/23/2018 at 1:12 PM, usmsbow said:

 

Well if you get health insurance through the marketplace without a subsidy, then you're not getting any benefit, and are OK. If you're getting a subsidy, yes, it is debatable from what I've read. It's a grey area as of right now (vs SNAP or other clear "public benefits"). 

 

 

What is a subsidy? How do I ensure I don't accidentally choose it?

 

Is there a definite list somewhere to show what is a public charge and should be avoided at all cost?

Edited by little immigrant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Indonesia
Timeline
54 minutes ago, little immigrant said:

What is a subsidy? How do I ensure I don't accidentally choose it?

 

Is there a definite list somewhere to show what is a public charge and should be avoided at all cost?

 

Well I am honored you chose my post as the one to quote! It looks like you are a citizen now, so I'm not sure why you are worried. This discussion was about AOS applicants. 

 

That being said, a subsidy is the amount the government pays for your health insurance premium. For example, if the health insurance company charges $500/month, and you pay $250/month for that insurance, your subsidy is $250/month. 

 

According to other posts on this thread, it sounds like a lot of health care exchanges do not provide that info to you (and instead would just say you'll be paying $250/month). 

 

And lastly, if you currently have insurance through your employer (or your spouse's employer), then this is also a non-issue for you. 

 

 

Removing Conditions Timeline

Aug. 10, '17: Mailed in I-751

Aug. 21, '17: NOA1

October 23, '18: NOA2- approval

October 30, 18: 10-year GC received

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, usmsbow said:

 

Well I am honored you chose my post as the one to quote! It looks like you are a citizen now, so I'm not sure why you are worried. This discussion was about AOS applicants. 

 

That being said, a subsidy is the amount the government pays for your health insurance premium. For example, if the health insurance company charges $500/month, and you pay $250/month for that insurance, your subsidy is $250/month. 

 

According to other posts on this thread, it sounds like a lot of health care exchanges do not provide that info to you (and instead would just say you'll be paying $250/month). 

 

And lastly, if you currently have insurance through your employer (or your spouse's employer), then this is also a non-issue for you. 

 

 

Haha, you're welcome!

 

Well I'm a citizen but my husband is a LPR on a 10 year GC (approved AOS applicant). I'm currently keeping my insurance with COBRA but it will be very expensive to keep it through the year. I would like to switch to healthcare.gov before my qualifying event runs out of time. Hence the question :)

 

So if they won't tell me that there is a subsidy then it's a risk enrolling on healthcare.gov for us. I don't want any issues for my husband once it's time for him to naturalize.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...
On 8/7/2018 at 10:52 PM, Highmystic said:

"The new policy will go into effect on October 1. Under the directive, people applying for green cards based on their employment or for refugee and asylee relatives will be subject to an interview."

https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/28/politics/trump-administration-green-cards-interviews/index.html

 

F1783EB9-26E9-4773-8491-D5885A956207.png

3DA6C1DC-47D0-4B12-B0E2-E5FD6C4A6264.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/7/2018 at 2:12 PM, KathCali said:

Does anyone know how this would affect immigrants who are on Obamacare? I am on my husband's Obamacare (after checking with our lawyer that it would be okay, as I wasn't sure about the public charge rule, and he said yes because it's not a cash benefit). Would this affect my pending I-485 or only future citizenship? Would I need to get off Obamacare and then it would be fine? It seems kind of crazy to just change the rule that people were following and then punish them for breaking that rule? 

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/now-trump-administration-wants-limit-citizenship-legal-immigrants-n897931 

Obamacare isn’t considered as a public charge according to USCIS and is not included under the new proposal. Don’t trust other sources unless it’s from USCIS or the DHS. People like to spread false rumors! 

56A8EED1-EAD6-4C06-9D10-8911CFD55051.png

C1FA2BD8-1C68-4745-BCB6-9BE5798BB07D.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Didn't find the answer you were looking for? Ask our VJ Immigration Lawyers.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...