northusa44

To my understanding, once she files for an immigrant visa, and based on long-standing policy, she would be very unlikely to receive a non-immigrant visa in the near future (even if the immigrant visa doesn't get processed because of the ban), since she would then have established the intent to immigrate. So there might be some sense in trying for the tourist visa now so that you can see her before the later immigrant application is filed , especially if you feel that you won't be able to go back and see her in the near future. (as a note, however, there are other factors involved here that complicate this--for example, I'm not clear as to how a possible rejection on the B visa would affect an immigrant visa application? And I suppose it is possible that the ban could make it more likely for those waiting in line for immigrant visas to actually be granted non-immigrant visas since I think the ban takes the AOS in-US option off the table (or am I wrong there)? And, of course, you are probably delaying the immigrant visa application by 6 months once you take into account the non-immigrant application, travel, and return. So others more knowledgeable than I might be able to help assess whether what I wrote makes any sense)

As my in-law's green card interview approaches in Guangzhou (within the next couple of months), I have been reading more about the November administration updates for the consular immigration interviews regarding public charge weighting and other related affairs. As my in-law is over 55, I am wondering if anyone has any thoughts or advice regarding what to expect at the Guangzhou interview in this regard. My in-law is generally healthy, though with the sort of minor health concerns that older people have (they may be pre-diabetic or even diabetic as well, they have gotten conflicting medical advice/results recently, and we are not really sure what the result of the pre-interview medical check will be for that one). I would think that in terms of the recent changes regarding public charge and medical conditions for older people, the only real thing that we can do on our end is to provide evidence that their spouse's insurance here in the US can add them immediately upon arrival? And then trust that their general good health for their age will be enough to render this a none or minor issue? And secondly, I know that the November update allowed for consular interviews to be conducted in English. Does anyone know if this is actually happening in Guangzhou? Other thoughts re those updates and the general situation in Guangzhou would be appreciated. And thank you!

I don't want to go into details but basically it was an issue that is now resolved and that shouldn't cause any effect on the application going forward (obviously the embassy/consulate knows about the situation and they have also concluded that it is adequately resolved). So for all intents and purposes, they are simply a new interviewee (except that it has been years since we filed the NVC paperwork). And thank you for the reply!

After a delay of years, my in-law (who we are sponsoring) will finally have a green card consular interview in Guangzhou, China (somewhere between 2 weeks and 2 months from now). Since we filled out our information with the NVC years ago, both my spouse and I have gotten new, much better paying jobs. We are now way over the minimum income requirements to sponsor (we were over those requirements, but not by much, when we filled out the NVC material). My in-law's spouse is also now here on a green card and has employer benefits, including health insurance that would cover my interviewing in-law. I seem to remember that a few years ago the consensus was that in such a situation (i.e. where we have had changes for the better in financial situation), the general consensus was to not try to update things in the NVC website (since this could cause a delay) but instead to write statement letters (with evidence such as W-2s, etc.) and have my interviewing in-law take copies of these with them to the interview. And then that the consular officer might ask us to update the system afterwards. Is this still the general consensus? Any other tips/advice would be appreciated as well. My interviewing in-law is over 55 and so if there are new things that we should be thinking about in terms of health, insurance or even a letter of interest in hiring them from a prospective employer (my company's cafeteria has expressed interest in hiring them should they arrive with a green card), thoughts/advice would be appreciated. Thank you all!

Here's an article that gets at the heart of what I think is right here. Scroll down and read the section "What are the immigration-related eligibility requirements for premium tax credits and cost sharing reductions in the ACA marketplaces? " Health Insurance Affordability Programs’ Eligibility Based on Immigration Status - Beyond the Basics Am I correct that this article is basically saying that any green card holder under 100% FPL and who is not yet eligible for Medicaid is qualified for the premium tax credits? This is what the Obamacare representative who gave my in-law the tax credits seems to have been going off of. Again, further guidance from those who understand this more than I do would be appreciated. I am still unsure if we need to pay a penalty for the tax credits or not (again, my in-law's income is under 100% of the FPL and they are not eligible for Medicaid based both on our state and the fact they have not fulfilled the five year waiting period). My understanding is that they should not be paying a penalty, but I am nervous about filing without the penalty without more guidance.

Thanks! But I think, though I'm not certain, that what you wrote is wrong in our case. I am aware of the 100% poverty level rule. But read through this thread, in which many have gotten Obamacare for 65+seniors with 0 or little income. I've been reading elsewhere online, and from what I can tell, and as with the above cases for 65+, if one is ineligible for Medicaid, they are eligible for Obamacare (there is a long debate in that thread about whether one can choose not to be a dependent if earning under the dependent maximum; this debate does not apply to my in-law since they are in the coverage gap between that dependent maximum and 100% FPL. We called Obamacare and faithfully reported expected income, etc. The reported income was no more than an expected $3000 for the year. We also told them our state. And Obamacare then gave us a near 0 dollar premium quote. There are two possibilities. Either that Obamacare rep was wrong, or the law actually allows Obamacare for those under 100% FPL if they are ineligible for Medicaid (which my in-law is, since we are in a state that has expanded). Again, would love more input (and Tesco, do write back if you've got more info--like I said, I'm not 100% sure on this, thus the query.)

*I think the critical thing here is whether I am right about ACA subsidies being available to immigrants who are under the usual minimum (~15,000) in income in states that have not expanded Medicaid. I've seen references in several places to this, but I have not been able to find this put explicitly. What I am seeing is that Obamacare is basically available to any immigrant who is not eligible for Medicaid (and therefore, in my state that has not expanded Medicaid, this would include those earning under ~15,000). If anyone has more info on this, I would appreciate it!

Before filing taxes for my green card-holder in-law, I just want to double-check that we are OK with what happened last year in terms of Obamacare. My in-law was on Obamacare (with subsidies) for a few months in 2024. At the time, they did not have work, so I believe we estimated their income on the low end (I honestly can't remember if we estimated 0 or a few thousand; whatever it was, we made an honest attempt). Then, in early fall, they were hired full-time. They wound up coming off of Obamacare and onto their employer's plan for the last few months of the year. By the end of the year, they had made more than the dependent maximum (something like $5200 for 2025; i.e. even if we wanted to we cannot claim them as a dependent for tax purposes) but less than the Obamacare minimum of ~$15,000. Without getting into specifics, let's just say they made~10,000 for 2024. We live in a state that has not expanded Medicaid. My understanding is that we are thus OK in terms of taxes because Obamacare is available even if income is under the Obamacare minimum when Medicaid is not available (with the exception that we might be asked to refund the difference between the subsidy we received vs. the estimated income we gave), but I want to see if anyone knows more about this and can either confirm or give more info (or tell me that I am wrong about the Obamacare minimum not applying when Medicaid is not available fit). I.e. if you think that we need to call healthcare.gov to report all of this, do let me know/state why. Secondarily, and with all the stuff going on with immigrants in the US, do also write if there have been any new administration changes to immigrants and Obamacare that would be relevant to this. Thank you!

Most reasonable observers would conclude that there is little risk to the US public from someone who has finished the six-month course of TB treatment and has the negative tests (and multiple trips to the US panel physician) to show it. This is why they want to wait until after the six months treatment is finished to try the waiver. I continue to think that such a waiver would have a chance of approval, as separation from a spouse (plus all of the financial loss they are dealing with due to uncertainty) certainly is an unusual and trying circumstance (I would push back on calling this separation an 'inconvenience'). But it looks like the timing may not work out given how long the waiver process is. In any event, I greatly appreciate the time that you and others have taken to respond to this thread. The info on timing is especially useful and appreciated. If they do file the waiver, I will try to provide an update about how it turned out. But they may not given the timing.

This is in regards to the family acquaintance I wrote about last time. To provide a bit more background, both he and his wife were supposed to come to the US on green cards (sponsored by a family member). Beginning with the pre-interview medical exam in China, he was eventually found to have active TB (after the initial tests, he had to wait two months for the sputum results, which showed active TB). His wife was negative for TB and was able to come and is now here, living with other family (she followed up with a doctor here regarding TB, just in case). He is now a couple months in to a 6 month TB treatment course, under supervision by an embassy-approved doctor. Since he is not in the same city as that doctor, he cannot do DOT (daily observed treatment), and thus needs to wait one year after completion of the six months treatment for the interview to be rescheduled. They are planning to file a I-601 waiver of inadmissibility application, with the argument being that the separation of spouses makes this an extraordinary circumstance that is resulting in undue psychological and financial stress for each due to both the separation and the fact that neither can plan for the future. Before they file, I just want to confirm that the only possible downside to a denial of the waiver is that they have to wait the full year? In other words, and so long as they are honest in the waiver application (which they will be), USCIS/the embassy would not cancel the whole green card application due to denial of the waiver, correct? They realize the waiver is a very uncertain thing, but it is still worth it for them to try so long as the worst-case scenario is just doing the wait that they would have to do anyways. The separation and uncertainty really is very difficult for all involved; we have also contacted the local public health department, and they have expressed that they would be fine with him coming, especially once his treatment is complete and he has negative test results to show it (and his test results are already negative). Thank you! (also, if anyone knows timing for responses to the waivers, that would be great--if these waivers have a three-year wait to be reviewed, it obviously would not make sense to apply)

Just giving this a bump--would love to hear from one or two more with experience, just to confirm the good advice given above.

Thank you! Will be curious to see if others have had the same experience?

Asking for a friend: . We know someone who is applying for a green card (consulate processing, China) but unfortunately was found to have tuberculosis. They do not live in a city with DOT (Directly Observed Therapy) available and the panel physician said they need to go the 6 months of testing + 1 year of waiting route before rescheduling. The panel physician for the consulate has been in pretty close contact. Our friend is now about a month plus into treatment at a local hispitral and the panel physician wants them to come to his city to do sputum testing. This will require a 3.5 hour flight. The panel physician said they will have to do this at least twice. I'm pretty sure that the panel physician is following the guidelines in the Technical Instructions for Panel Physicians (Tuberculosis Technical Instructions for Panel Physicians | CDC). The two relevant sections (scroll down or ctl + f search) are "Tuberculosis Treatment and Monitoring" and "Tuberculosis Treatment Monitoring" (the latter is also linked to "Sputum Collection") .The former section specifies rules for DOT and non-DOT treatment. Again, my friend is doing the non-DOT treatment since there is no panel physician anywhere close to their city My query is whether the panel physician is correct in still asking them to make this very inconvenient/expensive trip to go in-person to the panel physician for sputum testing? We are pretty confused as to why they need to do this if they are doing the non-DOT route. In other words, why can't they do the sputum testing with the treating physician at their treating hospital? (With that said, the above document itself does not seem to clearly state in the latter section whether the sputum testing is DOT/non-DOT and whether it is supposed to be done with the panel physician or not) If anyone has any experience with this we would very much appreciate thoughts. We don't want to inconvenience/upset the panel physician with queries about this unless it is clear that they are incorrectly interpreting the document. (mods: I would very much appreciate not putting this in 'China'--this is such a niche question that I would like to know experiences for people from around the world for)

Just want to give this a boost--can anyone else confirm that legal residents are eligible for Obama Care AND the subsidies that are offered with the plans?

I spoke to healthcare.gov recently about my MIL (new permanent resident). We went through their enrollment procedures and at the end were told that she qualifies for subsidized coverage, with some of the offered plans at a 0 dollar premium. I answered everything asked as truthfully as possible and was frankly shocked at how good of a deal this is. First of all, does this seem right? I did just find a very long, older thread on here in which some reported very low subsidized plans as well, so perhaps new green card holders really are eligible for the subsidies via tax credit? I just want to make sure that they did not somehow misunderstand our situation in a way that will cause headaches for us down the road. Secondly, they stated that her coverage could start soon but that we would need to show the green card to them by mid-spring. My understanding is that if all goes well we should get the green card in the mail by then--does anyone have any experience to report on recent green card times?