uscis fee Public Charge Rule

[PilgrimUS 15]

New Public Charge Rule

 

This impacts everyone who is going through the process of bringing our loved ones closer.

 

You are welcome.

[geowrian 22,335]

1) The article is about proposed fee changes, not the public charge rule. It only briefly mentions it in one short paragraph (without the details, too).

2) The public charge rule changes are widely discussed on this site already in the News section.

3) The public charge rule changes do not impact the K-1 visa itself, but do impact AOS afterwards.

4) The public charge rule changes are not in effect at this time due to court rulings.

5) The public charge rule changes do not impact "everyone" - certain categories of immigrants are exempt from the public charge inadmissibility.

Edited December 30, 2019 by geowrian

[PilgrimUS 15]

(1) This is information about current fees and processes for those researching the topic of USCIS in general. Proposals are proposals and it's nice for people to be forward thinking.

(2) I did not invent the topic. It is in conjunction to the topic of "new public charge rule" authored by someone else. I am providing an additional resource for everyone it helps on the path.

(3) This link actually adds to the information that many are going through. Including marriage based k-1 visa and AOS process. Whom are also researching.  including current fees, steps in process IE; Biometrics, Travel Document, K-1 Marriage, etc.. not just AOS itself.

 

Take what you may from the information as it is helpful to Everyone interested in the process. 

 

Again. You are welcome.

 

Edited December 30, 2019 by PilgrimUS

[geowrian 22,335]

Information on current fees: https://lmgtfy.com/?q=uscis+current+fees

You are welcome.

I don’t see the relation between the public charge rule and the link posted. They are entirely different topics.

[PilgrimUS 15]

Well I guess it is like questioning why the K visas and CR-1 visas are related to other US citizenship paths to citizenship.. I would guess those who would potentially be impacted by the Biometrics portion and the N-400 should find interest in such a rule change.

 

research answers Who would be affected by this policy change? Regarding the link between the link posted and someone's concern regarding the public charge rule and how it is in conjunction to marriage based immigration visas and other USCIS processes. 

 

Why did I even bother posting would have been a better question.

Which my answer is:

Because it is better to prepare and stay aware of how such a change, law, regulation, or practice and how it will impact K visas and anyone charting their path. Including marriage based visa costs, work permits, biometrics, and travel document requirements.

 

The source also provides plenty on What will change under the new DHS “public charge rule” proposal?.  And how one presumably "rule" is projected to impact US immigration.

An I completely understand how it was blocked by a court ruling btw.

But seems this post should be more about puffer fish and why people shouldn't eat them.

 

Probably best to ask the original author's at boundless as to why they posted a entire website related to the topic of USCIS and why in the world they did that? when Visa Journey has resources and forums.

 

My guess is because it's to help those interested with questions.

 

Anyway. There is a link that has a lot of stuff in it for anyone to pick their teeth over.

I would suggest to take it as gobbledygook if you presume it's not important to your own research.

 

 

 

[payxibka 10,044]

20 hours ago, PilgrimUS said:

New Public Charge Rule

 

This impacts everyone who is going through the process of bringing our loved ones closer.

 

You are welcome.

The courts recently blocked a proposal known as the “public charge rule” from taking effect, which would deny green cards and other visas to applicants who are deemed likely to use public benefits

 

thanks for sharing something that is incredibly out of date

Edited December 31, 2019 by payxibka

[PilgrimUS 15]

Retort

 

What will change under the new DHS “public charge rule” proposal?

DHS plans to dramatically expand the definition of “public charge,” so that green card and other visa applicants could be denied not for being “primarily dependent on the government for subsistence” (the current standard) but instead for being “more likely than not” to use certain public benefits at any point in the future.

Under the final regulation, DHS would create the following new criteria for denying a green card application from within the United States:

---

(1) Prior use of certain government benefits. Instead of limiting the definition of off-limits government benefits to welfare payments and subsidized long-term institutionalization, the new policy would expand the definition to include a wider range of common government benefits:

• All of the status quo benefits list above (SSI, TANF, general assistance, and long-term institutional care)
• Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly knowns as “Food Stamps”
• Section 8 housing and rental assistance
• Federal housing subsidies
• Nonemergency Medicaid benefits (with exceptions for children under 21, people with disabilities, pregnant women, and mothers within 60 days after giving birth)

A “public charge” denial would be triggered if someone has received one or more of the above public benefits, for more than 12 months in aggregate within any 36-month period. Receipt of two benefits in one month counts as two months.

(DHS will not penalize applicants for use of these benefits by a spouse or child, in a departure from previously reported drafts.)

---

It’s important to note that DHS does not have the authority to make anybody ineligible for these benefits, which are administered by other federal agencies under various acts of Congress. DHS would, in effect, be penalizing visa applicants for using benefits they are allowed to take advantage of under existing law.

And it’s also important to understand that the great majority of people applying for green cards are not even eligible for the very benefits that the DHS public charge rule seeks to penalize. Unfortunately, this rule has created a “chilling effect” that scares many people into disenrolling from public benefits even though they don’t need to.

---

(2) Likelihood of future use of government benefits. Although the following general criteria are defined by Congress, DHS plans to greatly expand the number of specific factors that immigration officers must take into account when determining whether or not a visa applicant is likely to become a “public charge” at any point in the future.

• Age: Applicants could be denied if they are younger than the minimum age for full-time employment (18), older than the minimum “early retirement age” for social security purposes (61), or otherwise at an age that impacts their “ability to work.”
• Health: DHS plans to scrutinize any medical condition and assess whether this condition could affect the applicant’s ability to work, potentially expanding the scope of the required medical examination.
• Family size: Having more children or other dependents could increase the likelihood of a visa denial.
• Skills:  DHS plans to determine whether an applicant has “adequate education and skills to either obtain or maintain employment” (if authorized to work), by looking at employment history, high school degree and higher education, “occupational skills, certifications, or licenses,” and proficiency in English or other languages.
• Financial status: Above and beyond looking at an applicant’s income and assets (see below), DHS plans to assess credit history, credit score, and financial liabilities, plus whether the applicant has private health insurance or enough resources to cover “any reasonably foreseeable medical costs” that could interfere with work or study.

---

(3) Insufficient financial resources. Even if an applicant has never used government benefits in the past and meets all of the above criteria to demonstrate low likelihood of using benefits in the future, they could still be blocked by an entirely new requirement: personal financial resources. DHS plans to require a new form called the “Declaration of Self-Sufficiency” (Form I-944) to accompany most applications for green cards. This form would collect information intended to help immigration officers determine whether the applicant is a “public charge” under the new, more expansive criteria outlined above.

This new form is not to be confused with the “Affidavit of Support” (Form I-864), which Congress has mandated since 1996 to demonstrate the financial resources of the person sponsoring the applicant for a green card or other visa. Until now, immigration officers have typically given great deference to an Affidavit of Support showing that the sponsor has an income (or asset equivalent) of at least 125% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines, since this is a statutory threshold indicating that the visa applicant will have sufficient financial resources to avoid becoming dependent on government benefits.

Under the new policy, however, DHS plans to impose similar financial requirements on the applicant, not just the sponsor. It appears that at a minimum, applicants will have to demonstrate household income (or asset equivalent) of at least 125% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines. But in addition, DHS would set an entirely new and higher household income threshold at 250% of the poverty guidelines, establishing this much higher hurdle as a “heavily weighted positive factor.”

This could mean that, to safely avoid denial on public-charge grounds, an applicant would need to show annual household income of $41,150 (for a couple with no children) on up to $73,550 (for a family of five) or higher.

Who would be affected by this policy change?

Green card applicants

The new public charge rule would apply to the vast majority of applicants for green cards (permanent residence). This includes green cards based on:

• a family relationship to a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident, for which over 800,000 green cards were granted in 2016 (the most recent year for which DHS has published data)
• sponsorship by a U.S. employer (140,000 green cards granted per year)

Temporary visa applicants

Moreover, DHS plans to apply some of the new public charge standards to a wide range of temporary (“nonimmigrant”) visas, whenever a visa holder in the United States needs to extend their visa or change to a new visa category. This includes the H-1B visa for skilled workers. Last year, DHS received over 233,000 applications for an extension or change in nonimmigrant status.

It appears that such applicants will not be subject to the Form I-944 or future-looking tests described above, but still must demonstrate that they have not received the above-mentioned public benefits “for more than 12 months in the aggregate within any 36-month period (such that, for instance, receipt of two benefits in one month counts as two months).”

Again, it’s important to understand that the great majority of people applying for an extension or change of temporary (“nonimmigrant”) visas are not even eligible for the very benefits that the DHS public charge rule seeks to penalize.

Exemptions

The public charge rule will not apply to visa applicants whom Congress has exempted from the public charge test, such as refugees, asylees, individuals who have experienced domestic violence, and other special categories.

Estimated impact

Given that the new public charge rule would create an entirely new income requirement for visa applicants (not just their sponsors) and would set this household income threshold as high as 250% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines, the following possible impacts have been estimated:

• DHS could begin denying up to nearly half of all marriage green card applicants, each year forcing nearly 200,000 couples to either leave the United States together or live apart indefinitely. (Source: Boundless Immigration)
• Some 56% of all family-based green card applicants could be denied under the public charge rule’s unprecedented income requirement — more than the 47% at risk based on prior use of government benefits. (Source: Migration Policy Institute)
• Moreover, this new hurdle would have , blocking 71% of applicants from Mexico and Central America, 69% from Africa, and 52% from Asia — but only 36% from Europe, Canada, and Oceania. (Source: Migration Policy Institute)

---

What about permanent residents seeking U.S. citizenship?

Changes to the definition of “public charge” could ultimately expand the ability of DHS to deport some immigrants who already have green cards (“lawful permanent residents”).

Congress states that a permanent resident can only be deported on public-charge grounds within the first five years of obtaining their green card — and only if they became a public charge based on circumstances that existed before they obtained their green card. (For example, a healthy person who obtains a green card, gets in an accident, and then needs government assistance would not be deportable on public-charge grounds.)

In practice, given the constraints set by Congress and court precedents, plus the fact that recent green card holders are typically ineligible for welfare, very few green card holders have been deported on public-charge grounds.

By expanding the definition of “public charge,” however, the administration could create new uncertainty for millions of immigrants.

Although the public charge proposal announced by DHS does not change the status quo for current green card holders, on Sept. 22, 2018 the agency sent reporters an official notice stating: “The Department of Justice (DOJ) intends to conduct a parallel rulemaking on public charge deportability, and will ensure that the standards are consistent to the extent appropriate.” More recently, Reuters reported further details about this DOJ plan.

Although the final details are likely to be complex, one can imagine a range of troubling scenarios, including some catch-22s.

For example, as part of the marriage-based green card process, the spouse of a U.S. citizen first obtains a green card, and then must wait three years to apply for U.S. citizenship(naturalization). DHS offers a fee waiver for low-income applicants. But if use of this fee waiver suddenly counts as a government benefit triggering a “public charge” finding, it’s possible that the permanent-resident spouse of a U.S. citizen could then be deported.

Without further details about the official Department of Justice plan, however, such scenarios are highly speculative.

[PilgrimUS 15]

Cost comparison: Current fees versus proposed fees

As part of the proposal, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) would remove certain fees, such as the cost for biometrics (obtaining the applicant’s fingerprints and photo) but charge for forms that currently cost nothing. For example, Form I-131 (officially called the “Application for Travel Document”), which allows someone living in the United States to travel abroad while awaiting their green card, is free, but will cost $585 under the new proposal. Here is a breakdown of current fees versus proposed fees, for marriage-based green card and citizenship applications.

Marriage-based green card:

Costs for Spouse Seeking a Marriage Green Card from Within the United States
Fee Type	Current Fee	Proposed Fee	$ Change	% Change
Family Sponsorship Form (I-130)	$535	$555	$20	3.74%
Green Card Application Form (I-485)	$1,140	$1,120	-$20	-1.75%
Financial Support Form (I-864)	$0	$0	$0	0.00%
Work Permit Application Form (I-765)	$0	$490	$490	N/A
Travel Permit Application Form (I-131)	$0	$585	$585	N/A
Biometrics (Fingerprints & Photo)	$85	$0	-$85	-100.00%
Total	$1,760	$2,750	$990	56.25%

Learn more with our marriage green card guides, for applicants living within the United States and married to a U.S. citizen, and for applicants living in the U.S. and married to a green card holder.

Costs for Spouse Seeking a Marriage Green Card from Outside the United States
Fee Type	Current Fee	Proposed Fee	$ Change	% Change
Family Sponsorship Form (I-130)	$535	$555	$20	3.74%
Online Green Card Application (DS-260)	$0	$0	$0	0.00%
Financial Support Form (I-864)	$120	$120	$0	0.00%
Biometrics (Fingerprints and Photo)	$0	$0	$0	0.00%
State Department Processing	$325	$325	$0	0.00%
USCIS Immigrant Fee	$220	$200	-$20	-9.09%
Total	$1,200	$1,200	$0	0.00%

Find out more with our guides for applicants living abroad and married to a U.S. citizen, and for applicants living abroad and married to a green card holder.

Naturalization:

Costs for Green Card Holders Seeking Naturalization (U.S. Citizenship)
Fee Type	Current Fee	Proposed Fee	$ Change	% Change
Naturalization Application (N-400)	$640	$1,170	$530	82.81%
Biometrics (Fingerprints and Photo)	$85	$0	-$85	0.00%
Total	$725	$1,170	$445	61.38%

Learn more about navigating the U.S. citizenship application process and requirements with our naturalization guide.

 

[payxibka 10,044]

What does any of this have to do with getting a k1 visa?

[PilgrimUS 15]

Anyway it's blocked by a court.

So I guess nothing to worry about.

I mean until it isn't blocked or another prescription to the whole immigration thing comes along to replace what is current.

[payxibka 10,044]

About 2.5 months ago 

[PilgrimUS 15]

Not sure where any of this post has to do with " obtaining a k1 visa."

 

I don't think I posted anything to do with how obtaining a k1 visa is of concern.

 

However, if anyone does decide to take the path... It may be of use.

I mean eventually those people may come in contact with this whole researching of AOS and biometrics and costs and citizenship.

 

Think you came up with how applying for a k1 came out of how the link posted would effect everyone going through the process.

 

But guess it seems the statement is true.

Seems it's affecting you.

 

 

[geowrian 22,335]

10 minutes ago, PilgrimUS said:

Not sure where any of this post has to do with " obtaining a k1 visa."

10 minutes ago, PilgrimUS said:

Think you came up with how applying for a k1 came out of how the link posted would effect everyone going through the process

"Home -> Forums -> Family & Marriage Based US Visa Immigration Discussion -> K-1 Fiance(e) Visa Process & Procedures -> K-1 Fiance(e) Visa Case Filing and Progress Reports -> Public Charge Rule"

 

[payxibka 10,044]

13 minutes ago, PilgrimUS said:

Not sure where any of this post has to do with " obtaining a k1 visa."

 

I don't think I posted anything to do with how obtaining a k1 visa is of concern.

 

However, if anyone does decide to take the path... It may be of use.

I mean eventually those people may come in contact with this whole researching of AOS and biometrics and costs and citizenship.

 

Think you came up with how applying for a k1 came out of how the link posted would effect everyone going through the process.

 

But guess it seems the statement is true.

Seems it's affecting you.

 

 

 

Do you know that every forum has a "purpose"

 

Did you even bother to read?

 

Several other forums that are more suited for this thread, and had you bothered to look, you would have noticed a mega thread on this exact topic that was started many months ago 

[PilgrimUS 15]

Yep correct forum topic.

Still not as you mysteriously came up with " obtaining a k1".

But sure does relate to k1 type marriages who graduate to exploring AOS and other instances of the whole marriage based visa and how it impacts the topic.