J1 Hardship Waiver 2021-2022 Timeline

[Kalaz 0]

what type of funding is considered government funding?

[nmanc33 8]

1 hour ago, Kalaz said:

what type of funding is considered government funding?

There are many, but examples could be the various bureau's of the government. Not sure what category Fulbright falls under.

[Sabina Bart 28]

10 minutes ago, nmanc33 said:

There are many, but examples could be the various bureau's of the government. Not sure what category Fulbright falls under.

It’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs by the Dept of State.

[Wyboxcx 45]

At this point this thread should be renamed "J Hardship 2021- forever state of agony timeline". 

[lennikov 34]

Quote

what type of funding is considered government funding?

Sometimes, it is pretty straightforward: if you work for any governmental institution, NIH, FDA, NASA, DOD, etc, under your J-1, you receive a salary provided by taxpayers from these institutions, thus governmental funds. Many government-sponsored study and exchange programs are usually short-term but also processed through J-1 and come with 2YHR and 2Y repeat participation bars, even though you sometimes spend only a few weeks or months in the US. It is usually less harmful as subjects of such programs are typically young. The program is short-term, so they stay in their home country long enough to fulfill the requirements.  In other cases, it is less clear; for instance, if you worked in some private institution that governmental funds support, i.e. you were a post-doc working under the PI who received NIH or NASA funds, does that constitute governmental funding? You received nothing directly from the government, but your salary is still technically from the taxpayer's funds. I don't have a clear answer for it.

In some cases, DOS doesn't know itself. You may or may not be a subject, and your passport's DS forms or statement may not correctly reflect it. You need to file for an Advisory Opinion for them to decide in each case.  

 

If you are curious, you can fulfill the 2Y-participation bar and not complete 2YHR. i.e., by living and working in a country that is not your home country. In this case, you can only get another J-1. The good news is that the J1 2YHR does not stack, so even if you get 2 or 3 J-1, you will not have to spend 4 or 6 years in your home country. The bad news is that all your accumulated time in your home country will be reset back to 24 months as soon as you enter again as the J-1. Oh, and by the way, O-1 trumps the 2YHR and participation bar but its requirements are seriously insane and it only allows you to work in the US indefinitely as soon as you retire, or somehow lose your O-1 sponsored job you need to leave. 

[nmanc33 8]

Do you believe that they weigh the short term programs (few weeks) - in which the participant didn't get paid more lightly than Fulbright?

[hideaki 10]

11 hours ago, nmanc33 said:

Do you believe that they weigh the short term programs (few weeks) - in which the participant didn't get paid more lightly than Fulbright?

Yes of course!!! If the money is significantly low, then the bar for the waiver should be much more relaxed...

[lennikov 34]

40 minutes ago, hideaki said:

Yes of course!!! If the money is significantly low, then the bar for the waiver should be much more relaxed...

I honestly doubt it, there is no indication that waiver involving less money invested into scholar are handled differently. It’s not really about money even few hundred thousands spend on 5 years J-1 scholar is nothing in the grandiose of US gov economy. It’s more about the promise you made (even if you did not fully understand this promise at the time) and now trying to break. 

[extreme_hardship 22]

45 minutes ago, hideaki said:

Yes of course!!! If the money is significantly low, then the bar for the waiver should be much more relaxed...

Yeah… if one looks at this from the ordinary, non legal perspective, it would make sense that the amount of funding involved would dictate the bar for the approval, but if you look at this from the legal side, they can not employ such approach, since it would be in a direct contradiction with the whole idea of the Exceptional Hardship. 
Whether they approach this with legal mindset is another question that I dont think we can answer. 
However, I would refrain from making statements with such high confidence like above  🙂

 

[nmanc33 8]

12 hours ago, lennikov said:

I honestly doubt it, there is no indication that waiver involving less money invested into scholar are handled differently. It’s not really about money even few hundred thousands spend on 5 years J-1 scholar is nothing in the grandiose of US gov economy. It’s more about the promise you made (even if you did not fully understand this promise at the time) and now trying to break. 

This is where the whole thing becomes subjective in my eyes. The promise that was made may be broken, but based off of changes in life that were unforeseen - just like they offer the waiver in the first place, it's from their understanding that things do change in life. Particularly in hardship cases, my personal opinion is that it is about protecting their citizens from going through a legitimate, documented hardship. Whether it's been on-going or caused by the program home residency rule itself (the US citizen never signed up for it, very important to keep this in mind).

 

The most confusing part to me is when a program no longer exists or doesn't operate yearly because there aren't enough participants - not sure if they treat that more lightly or not.

[MayurSh 0]

Any recent approvals?

[asevstr 20]

Looks like estimated times have been updated.

 

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/study/exchange/waiver-of-the-exchange-visitor/how-to-apply-waiver.html

 

[Wyboxcx 45]

8 minutes ago, asevstr said:

Looks like estimated times have been updated.

 

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/study/exchange/waiver-of-the-exchange-visitor/how-to-apply-waiver.html

 

wait is this another new update? The latest update from a few weeks ago had a footnote about how hardship cases are taking longer because of the volume. If we are to believe this latest update it gives us hope!

[worrieduser 1]

any recent approvals ??? 

[extreme_hardship 22]

not mine but a recent one