Jump to content

PRC Rabbit

Members
  • Content Count

    120
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About PRC Rabbit

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday December 8
  • Member # 254331

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • City
    NYC
  • State
    New York
  • Interests
    Surviving the K1 process.

Immigration Info

  • Immigration Status
    Adjustment of Status (pending)
  • Place benefits filed at
    Chicago Lockbox
  • Local Office
    New York City NY
  • Country
    Singapore
  • Our Story
    unfolding now

Recent Profile Visitors

2,162 profile views
  1. Oh I made a mistake, I don't have a 401k it's a TDA. Combined assets are available for meeting difference at 3x.
  2. This thread led me to find Part 213a of CFR (current as of Dec 20, 2018): Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1183a; 8 CFR part 2. Source: 62 FR 54352, Oct. 20, 1997, unless otherwise noted. (B) Significant assets. The sponsor may submit evidence of the sponsor's ownership of significant assets, such as savings accounts, stocks, bonds, certificates of deposit, real estate, or other assets. An intending immigrant may submit evidence of the intending immigrant's assets as a part of the affidavit of support, even if the intending immigrant is not required to sign an affidavit of support attachment. The assets of any person who has signed an affidavit of support attachment may also be considered in determining whether the assets are sufficient to meet this requirement. To qualify as “significant assets” the combined cash value of all the assets (the total value of the assets less any offsetting liabilities) must exceed: (1) If the intending immigrant is the spouse or child of a United States citizen (and the child has reached his or her 18th birthday), three times the difference between the sponsor's household income and the Federal poverty line for the sponsor's household size (including all immigrants sponsored in any affidavit of support in force or submitted under this section); To think someone would use the regurgitated version of the law set forth in the I-864 instructions to argue that "your income" means anything other than "household income" is duplicative beyond belief.
  3. There is a lot of misinformation about Section 8 circulating on VJ. There are also different types of Section 8 programs administered by different states. According to HUD, Section 8 is not Means-tested although there may be a State with a local program that placed an income threshold on their version of the program. https://www.nationallatinonetwork.org/asscessing-resources/public-benefits/federal-benefits/federal-means-tested-public-benefits A separate source of income is required to be eligible for Section 8 because the benefit is paid on a percentage basis directly to landlord. Recipients never see any of the money. With federal funding drying-up in recent decades, Section 8 funding has been 're-directed' to help private industry renovate old housing developments. The actual Section 8 funds paid monthly go directly to landlords paying off the Notes that financed the renovations. More often than not, Section 8 is now a mechanism to finance housing renovation owned entirely by private sector companies.
  4. The manipulation of social media to push a political agenda was incontrovertibly documented after the last US presidential election. Immigration policy is an extremely contested issue ($5 billion wall) and there is no reason to believe those same political forces are not posting on Visa Journey trying to stop immigration, 1 case at time. Be careful do your own research.

  5. Thanks to all for your input. I find the reading of "your assets" to eliminate combined assets to be a disingenuous stretch of logic and the English language. I've seen worse decisions and rulings so I realize it's probably true. I'm going to search the decisions on this and be back in day or 2. Ned
  6. I would never have read these rules to differentiate ownership of 'cash assets' between husband & wife to apply different standards within the same household. The concepts of Equitable Distribution and Marital Property from 'divorce-land' come to mind. This reading of the rules is prehistoric. I do recognize that the "intended meaning" in promulgating a rule and USCIS' subsequent "applied meaning" can be profoundly different. I don't think anyone could read these rules in that manner. Thanks for pointing it out Carmel34 . For couples married & living together in USA via K1, the USC's name on all cash accounts defeats the 5x criteria? Sounds too easy to circumvent yet I've spent that much pre-marriage on travel to Singapore. Our accounts are co-mingled already and she's already Beneficiary of my Life Ins (Whole Life). I need to ponder and search this for awhile. Thanks Carmel34 for cluing me into what I missed.
  7. I appreciate your patience (Nitas Man / K1VisaHopeful), thank you. I'm just not seeing what you are suggesting. Am I using the wrong Instructions?? I am using the I-864 Instructions dated 3/6/2018 and it states: Page 10, Part 7, para 2 "Use of Assets to Supplement Income": "However, if you are a U.S. citizen and you are sponsoring your spouse or child age 18 years of age or older, the total value of your assets must only be equal to at least three times the difference" Page 12 "What if I cannot meet the income requirements?" subd 3: 'The value of your assets, ..any household member...or the assets of the intending immigrant's... may be combined' Page 9, Part 7, para 1: "If total household income does not meet the income requirement, you may submit evidence of the value of your assets, the sponsored immigrants ..... and the assets of all these persons may be combined" We have over 100% FPL Income but less than 125%. Our cash assets exceed 3x the difference. What am I missing or misunderstanding? Ned
  8. I'll re-read the instructions on Link you posted
  9. I suspect you may be confusing 5x for Visa and 3x for AOS/Spouse as we're already married. In fact, the RFIE itself states 3x for Spouse (top page 3). You're correct about the cash value of Life Insurance policies is markedly less than the payout value. My Whole Life with Prudential has a stated cash value printed on the 1099-R that I receive each January and the stated cash value is what I used. It's an old policy I've had for 30+ years that pays dividends and can be borrowed against. Thanks again.
  10. I'm not military and yes, I submitted proof of cash-value assets that exceed 3x the difference between my income (which is over 100% FPL for a household of 2) and 125% of the FPL for household of 2. 3x the difference between income and 125% equals about $10k and we documented over $15k in assets. As I re-read the RFIE I see they request 12 months of statements for the assets and we can't comply with that exactly because. Two of my assets only provide annual statements (401k and Whole Life Insurance) have owned for decades. Beneficiary received a bonus from work before she left Singapore so she has not had the money more than a year yet but it was deposited in US bank since June, 2018. She just arrived in the USA! I'll post the RFIE. RFIE p2.pdf p3 RFIE.pdf
  11. Hi folks. We're applying for AOS from a k1 and got an RFIE for income. It was very general/broad as if I did not submit anything or somehow cannot establish a fundamental and basic requirement (RFIE vs RFFE). The only specific note was about my failure to provide a "written explanation for why I don't file tax returns". I'm reluctant to believe that the 'missing explanation' issue requires only a sentence or 2 to fix and frankly, it's obvious from my paperwork (1099-R's filing requirement exempt under $25k). That would suggest that the rest of the RFIE was boilerplate used on every RFIE about income. I'm starting to go batty and I need advice on if I'm overthinking this. My income is over the 100%FPL for a household of 2 but below 125%FPL. There is not much wiggle room on income such that depending on year, it's $200 - $750 above the threshold so every dollar counts. The cash assets are better and in August 2018 we easily had over 3x the difference between income and 125%. Now that we've spent some money it's not as comfortable as it was in August. So question #1: Does USCIS acceptance of my I-864/I-485 in August preserve the value of my assets and the income criteria applied when submitted in August 2018? The New Year brings up my next question. As it's January, I got my 1099-R from 2018 and my new 2019 Annual Benefit Statement which increases each year as does the FPL. Am I required to meet the current FPL figures with last years income or my current 2019 income? Now that I write the question, it sounds silly but could USCIS exclude my current 2019 income and only apply what was reported last year, 2018? Perhaps I am over thinking this but we have years into getting this far and getting an NOID would be horrible. ned
  12. PRC Rabbit

    Section 8

    Foster Care benefits? They're orphans good sir! Would you have US build walls and let the orphans starve? Emergency Disaster Relief, really? Fellow citizens made homeless from storms, fires and floods? Job Training Programs too? What happened to 'Pick yourself up by your own bootstraps'? No net is too wide when casting for a scapegoat
  13. PRC Rabbit

    Section 8

    There lots of misinformation being written here about Section 8. There are different types of Section 8 vouchers and they all are not needs based. Section 8 is often too tempting a subject for people to spout-off about in order to press their own agenda. Many people get Section 8 benefits through no fault of their own. For example: When a large housing development owned by a private corporate entity need renovations (in the millions) that the corporations cannot afford, Uncle Sam steps in and uses the Section 8 3rd Party Transfer Program to award vouchers to pay the newly increased rents that pay off the renovations (a private Note financed by private banks) for the properties owned by private Corporations/Landlords that were too poor to finance the renovations without some government Corporate Welfare.
  14. The further I get in this process (K1 to AOS) the more sense it makes.
  15. PRC Rabbit

    PREPARING TO MEET THE CONSULAR

    There a big gap between the established K3 Visa process (reality) and where the OP apparently presumes he is within that K3 process. From the original post it sounds as if USCIS' initial approval has already been granted. If that were the case, you would be far enough in the process to not be asking your original question. That's why the replies here on VJ are not productive / skeptical. I note OP also listed his visa Petition as K1 (Edit to K visa type)
×