Jump to content

S2N

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    388

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

S2N last won the day on April 3

S2N had the most liked content!

About S2N

Immigration Info

  • Immigration Status
    IR-1/CR-1 Visa
  • Country
    Chile

Immigration Timeline & Photos

S2N's Achievements

Collaborator

Collaborator (7/14)

  • Very Popular Rare
  • Collaborator
  • One Month Later
  • First Post
  • Reacting Well

Recent Badges

436

Reputation

Recent Profile Visitors

1,793 profile views
  1. S2N
    Assuming you’re referencing the regular I-130: typing your name in the box is a valid e-signature for that form. For form I-130A, any required signatures need to be wet signatures. If the spouse is outside the United States at the time of submission their signature is not required.
  2.    S2N reacted to a post in a topic: Urgent need advise
  3. S2N
    Agree with the above, but if you’re dead set on restarting now, I’d suggesting talking to a competent immigration attorney. You don’t have a straightforward case.
  4. S2N
    Correct. This is not work, even by the overly broad standards a lot of people on the internet apply to the word
  5.    OldUser reacted to a post in a topic: 10 year green card and secondary inspection
  6. S2N
    If you’re really curious you can FOIA the CBP entry/exit records and see what they wrote in their record of the secondary screening. They can black out sensitive parts, but you might be able to gather from the overall narrative what their concern was if there was one.
  7.    TBoneTX reacted to a post in a topic: Withdrawing Pending CR-1
  8.    OldUser reacted to a post in a topic: Withdrawing Pending CR-1
  9.    S2N reacted to a post in a topic: Applied i-130 in Canada but moved to US through L1B before i-130 approved
  10. S2N
    Agree with pushbrk. Approved I-130s never expire. You just need to pay the visa fee within the first year and log in at least once a year to keep it active. The other recommendation is to send NVC an email once a year after logging in noting that you wish to keep the case open and that the email is a record of contact. You don’t absolutely have to do this part, but it will give you a paper trail in case of any glitches. I’d set a calendar reminder every 6 months and log on just to make sure you don’t accidentally forget.
  11.    pushbrk reacted to a post in a topic: I-864 Question – Using Assets to Qualify
  12. S2N
    For clarity on timing on my answer: I’d try to time it so that you have enough time to get your taxes ready and the transcripts generate. Assuming you get all 1099s on 2/15 and you or your tax accountant can do a quick turnaround and get everything filed before 3/15, that’d look like: —12/30: upload everything to NVC —1/31: DQ’d with the asset based form, sent to Madrid. —Between 2/15-3/15: file taxes —2 weeks after taxes accepted: transcripts generate —Day transcripts generate upload new I-864 and new transcripts to CEAC —3/31-4/30: interview in Madrid, bring updated I-864 and transcripts. If needed, you could file 1040-X after the beneficiary moves but it might not be needed here if you originally file MFJ — standard dedication is above the I-864 threshold so if you’re at $31.5k or less there’d be no need to amend for tax reasons. Also for the record, nothing in this post is not legal or tax advice.
  13.    Reynal2m reacted to a post in a topic: I-864 Question – Using Assets to Qualify
  14.    pushbrk reacted to a post in a topic: I-864 Question – Using Assets to Qualify
  15.    Edward and Jaycel reacted to a post in a topic: I-864 Question – Using Assets to Qualify
  16. S2N
    @pushbrk has a lot more experience on this than I do, but speaking personally, I’d try for both the assets method and since we’re so close to tax season relatively speaking, stalling at NVC and talking a less aggressive approach to taxes this year. My assumption on the latter is that the actual tax inflows are a lot more than $14k as you couldn’t pay the property taxes, utilities, and condo fees in Miami and also have enough money for food on $14k. If that’s the case it’s absolutely possible to claim less deductions and then amend once the beneficiary is here. Taking the “both/and” approach will give you more security in case you run into pushback on the assets or make a mistake in the preparation of the I-864 that makes the CO question whether the assets qualify. You can then present a case that both is above the income threshold and has assets to make it stronger if it’s just barely above it.
  17.    OldUser reacted to a post in a topic: New insight on potential changes to citizenship test
  18.    Edward and Jaycel reacted to a post in a topic: DS-160 Passport Issuing Country Mistake
  19. S2N
    The general rule of thumb with the government is that the people adjudicating these forms have seen a lot of them and can tell the difference between a mistake and an intentional omission.
  20. S2N
    There’s theoretically more on the way, but as I said in another post on a similar topic… I don’t see much changing. USCIS can only take administrative measures. Like making it 12/20 instead of 6/10 and increasing the pool of questions. Small stuff like that has to go through all the standard red tape, but is relatively straightforward. They really can’t really do much more, and while changing the test is an administrative measure, a full revamp of the naturalization exam would take significant time: they’d have to both remake it and then probably have to go through the rule making process and then deal with inevitable challenges in court. Honestly 12/20 is easier than 6/10 because it gives you more room for errors (i.e. bad luck of the draw is less likely to disqualify you.) My read of the noise the USCIS director is making on the changes he wants to see on this and other issues is that he’s making a lot of noise to signal to those in the West Wing he’s ready for the big leagues when the DHS secretary spot opens up in a year or two.
  21.    Reynal2m reacted to a post in a topic: I-864 Question – Using Assets to Qualify
  22. S2N
    So quick turnaround. Still, that brings us pretty close to tax filing season. If going through your 2024 taxes you see areas where you were being aggressive on deductions that would bring you above the income threshold for 2025, it might be worth stalling at NVC until November/December and then uploading a new I-864 with the 2025 tax return in February if you want to avoid the ambiguity of the assets. How you want to handle it is your choice and not trying to dissuade you from trying to qualify on assets or with a joint sponsor. Just trying to provide options.
  23. S2N
    IIRC from another post OP was trying to have the interview in Madrid. Does anyone know how long that usually takes? If the issue on income was being aggressive on business deductions, we’re getting around the timeframe where the 1040 for 2026 might be able to resolve the issue. Being less aggressive with deductions and then doing a 1040-X once immigration is complete might be a path forward that makes the asset question not an issue.
  24.    S2N reacted to a post in a topic: Is it true that K-1 fiancé visas are not approved for Tunisian citizens, or for people with a background related to Islam?
  25. S2N
    The thing is, as much as USCIS might like to try to be more than this, they’re functionally a paper pushing organization within the immigration system that has limited discretion in what they can actually do on their own. What their director wants has limited actual impact on anything other than the administrative levers he can pull because so much of immigration is decided by other parts of the government. Those can impact the timing and process for people in the system, but there’s little substantial policy impact for the system. Most of USCIS’ functions are ministerial or are collecting information to be provided by them to other agencies that actually have power. In all honesty they’re in need of a total overhaul and it’d make the most sense to transfer them and ICE back to DOJ into a unified immigration agency with direct quasi-judicial oversight by BIA. That way the entire domestic side would be all under one roof and you might have an agency that can tackle stuff in a timely and consistent manner. Don’t get me wrong, I read the transcript of this and wasn’t exactly pleased by it, but I’m skeptical there’s much USCIS can do without congressional intervention. They’re an almost powerless agency outside of being the first line customer service people that we all get frustrated with. There’s only so much their director can do.
  26.    S2N reacted to a post in a topic: Delayed MARCH 2024 filers!!!!!
  27. S2N
    Ask USCIS for an expedite. Then contact your senator or member of Congress and explain the situation. If you have a Republican senator or representative those are apparently getting preferential treatment by USCIS legislative affairs now from what I’ve heard through the grapevine. USCIS tracks cases with congressional inquiries in a different system than they track cases without inquiries. It doesn’t guarantee approval, but it does guarantee more scrutiny in a positive sense. Also, yes, check this page for the category that describes you and see if you meet the physical presence test to see if your children are already citizens: link
  28. S2N
    I wouldn’t upload the remittances personally. Chile’s a very low fraud risk country with a stable economy. Remittances can be a double-edged sword on the fraud factor so no need the put them there when you have plenty of other evidence for a country where the consular officer isn’t likely to ask that many questions once it gets to the Santiago consulate stage. We upload plane tickets for every trip I take down there and his I-94 for every time he enters the U.S. with some photos. We filed taxes jointly so uploaded that as well as some additional estate planning stuff. Does your wife speak English or do you speak Spanish? Might be worth uploading some basic text messages showing you have a way to communicate since Chile has a very low English-speaking level. I uploaded some certifications I had in Spanish as well as a few WhatsApp discussions in Spanish (my husband has extremely basic English so we communicate in Spanish.)
  29.    S2N reacted to a post in a topic: Notice of Intent to Deny just received
  30.    S2N reacted to a post in a topic: Notice of Intent to Deny just received
  31.    S2N reacted to a post in a topic: K1 or CR1 Visa Choice -- Met Fiance 5 Months Ago
  32.    S2N reacted to a post in a topic: I-130 Tax, filed as single instead of married.
  33. S2N
    Transcripts from the IRS are preferred, but if you need to send in W-2s the downloadable W-2 transcripts from the IRS reflect what the employer reported to them so should be fine.
×
×
  • Create New...