Final public charge rule

[Soul Mates 44]

K1 does the new form at AOS.

[Nitas_man 3,100]

31 minutes ago, Hemutian said:

What are you basing the statement "K1 seems to be exempt" on?

From reading through this entire thread, the consensus of the vast majority of people on here seems to be that K1 applicants are NOT exempt. 

AOS is not exempt.  The visa itself?  They’re going to eyeball both sides.  The immigrant’s household gets checked out at AOS stage.

Edited August 17, 2019 by Nitas_man

[Hemutian 68]

3 hours ago, Nitas_man said:

AOS is not exempt.  The visa itself?  They’re going to eyeball both sides.  The immigrant’s household gets checked out at AOS stage.

And at AOS stage, the K1 immigrant has already married his or her sponsor, so the immigrant's "household" is the immigrant plus the sponsor, right? So if the sponsor has income and assets and a good credit score but the immigrant personally has none, that shouldn't count against the immigrant because the immigrant's household income, assets, and credit score are all going to be based on the sponsor, right?

Edited August 17, 2019 by Hemutian
clarification

[Crazy Cat 39,266]

Credit scores are based on an individual's credit....but I'm not sure how it will used on the new form.  Generally, it takes about 3 months of credit reporting for a new resident to even have a credit report and score. 

[fascinating123 38]

11 hours ago, Nitas_man said:

No health insurance will add a parent, brother, sister, or any other non-spouse or child relative to a plan.

WTH?

They are responsible for their own insurance, or their sponsor can buy a separate policy 😂 at ruinous expense

Yes, this is correct as far as I understand. As far getting her a private plan of her own, we have looked into getting something very basic covering LTC or chronic illness (maybe as a rider to life insurance policy) but due to the non-LPR status and Yemeni citizenship it's been hard. At least with the companies I'm appointed with.

[Crazy Cat 39,266]

Found a couple of nuggets in the final rule (highlighted and underlined by me) which I found interesting (especially the last sentence)

 

https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2019-17142.pdf

Page 556

 

"Other commenters stated that certain visas, such as the K-1 fiancé visa, do not permit a grantee to work.

 

Another commenter stated that the use of an employability factor in a public charge determination would put many immigrants in a catch-22 where their options would be to either work illegally and be denied citizenship or not work and be denied immigration status due to lack of employment.

 

Another commenter suggested that an applicant should be given time to enter the country and work before being subject to the public charge test.

 

Response: As discussed in the NPRM, DHS recognizes that not everyone subject to this rule is authorized to work in the United States. Although an applicant may not be authorized for employment in the United States at the time of filing the adjustment of status application, he or she may have employment history in a foreign country, or volunteer work experience in the United States, that will be considered as part of the totality of the alien’s circumstances.

 

However, DHS notes that it would consider any employment history outside the United States as part of the public charge inadmissibility determination. Moreover, USCIS would also review the likelihood that the alien will work upon filing for or being granted adjustment of status, i.e., when authorized to work.

 

In addition, USCIS would consider whether the alien may have sufficient assets and resources, including a pension or a household member's assets and resources, which may overcome any negative factor related to lack of employment. The assets and resources would include those of the household, which may include a sponsor when the sponsor is part of the household.

 

DHS will not, however, include provisions in this rule to provide aliens subject to this rule time to enter the country and work before being subject to the public charge inadmissibility determination. As noted previously, the public charge ground of inadmissibility applies at the time of the alien’s application for a visa, admission, or adjustment of status"

Edited August 17, 2019 by missileman

[Mrsjackson 300]

How are they going to verify an alien’s employment history in their own country?

[geowrian 22,335]

13 minutes ago, Mrsjackson said:

How are they going to verify an alien’s employment history in their own country?

Presumably the same way they do so in the US? Take them at their word + cross referencing info they do have access to + investigation if there is reason to believe it is false.

[yuna628 9,530]

17 hours ago, Nitas_man said:

Discriminatory?

 

How?  

 

Since when did parents and other relatives qualify for family health insurance?  

In any household?

 

 

 

Denials to add a parent or other relative to health insurance is not discriminatory sure. However denying the individual because of their national origin as the basis alone should be discriminatory. There should be no problem adding her to a private insurance plan or through the exchange though.

[yuna628 9,530]

22 minutes ago, Mrsjackson said:

How are they going to verify an alien’s employment history in their own country?

Well as I said this info is typically entered on the DS160 anyway, so there must be some way for them to verify.

[Mrsjackson 300]

21 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Well as I said this info is typically entered on the DS160 anyway, so there must be some way for them to verify.

Entered is not the same as verify. If they’re using it as a basis to approve or deny I would assume they’re going to want to verify. Like ok cool I’m an engineer? 

[Mrsjackson 300]

36 minutes ago, geowrian said:

Presumably the same way they do so in the US? Take them at their word + cross referencing info they do have access to + investigation if there is reason to believe it is false.

I would think that it would be much easier and reliable to verify that kind of information in the US than some of countries they would have to now? It just seems odd to me. I can see them asking for academic credentials in the form of a university transcript which I plan on bringing to my AOS interview. But cross referencing various companies all over the world? 

 

I guess I’m thinking of the time I was a reference for my friend. She had given my number and I pretended to be her superior when the prospective employer called. Not proud! I was very young. I just don’t see why they think it would add any credibility. A US company’s legitimacy seems easier to verify. 

[yuna628 9,530]

37 minutes ago, Mrsjackson said:

Entered is not the same as verify. If they’re using it as a basis to approve or deny I would assume they’re going to want to verify. Like ok cool I’m an engineer? 

I always assumed that if they asked such questions, to take it seriously, as in they would make some attempt to verify, or else they wouldn't ask it at all.

 

I betcha if you put down ''NUCLEAR SCIENTIST" or something like that, they'd put some scrutiny in it.

 

Edited August 17, 2019 by yuna628

[Mrsjackson 300]

1 minute ago, yuna628 said:

I always assumed that if they asked such questions, to take it seriously, as in they would make some attempt to verify, or else they wouldn't ask it at all.

 

I betcha if you put down ''NUCLEAR SCIENTIST" or something like that, they'd put some scrutiny in it.

 

I’m still in contact with my former employer and she would have told me if she’d been contacted. Other than that I don’t know how they would have verified anything, as I didn’t provide them with my taxes. Who knows. 

[Allaboutwaiting 2,500]

3 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

I always assumed that if they asked such questions, to take it seriously, as in they would make some attempt to verify, or else they wouldn't ask it at all.

 

I betcha if you put down ''NUCLEAR SCIENTIST" or something like that, they'd put some scrutiny in it.

 

Certain areas are actually scrutinized. Some people, are asked for their full curriculum vitae at embassy interviews due to their profession.