S2N

The issue is with the classification of foreign taxes paid and whether or not they’re eligible for the credit or other deductions. People also often screw up things like improperly deducting health care withholding/tax or retirement for foreign spouses. There’s just a lot of words that have technical meanings in the Internal Revenue Code that don’t really translate well to taxes where one of the couple lives overseas. TurboTax will guide you through it, but it won’t tell you what counts to put in the boxes for foreign items. Like all things with the government, people are free to DIY it, but just because you can doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to do it.

Re: your last paragraph, It’s a thing. Go to r/passportbros if you want to see the cringier side of international relationships. Not judging any particular relationship or people who find international love online I fall in that camp, so I’d be hypocritical if I was. But there’s a subculture both within the U.S. and in some specific countries of marriages where the older financially established male U.S. citizen marries a younger woman from one of a handful of countries who is madly in love with him. If a 25 year old woman wouldn’t fall in love with a 55 year old man from her own country, I doubt they’d fall in love with a 55 year old man from a foreign country. That’s my view at least.

9 FAM 601.14-5.b(1) and 9 FAM 601.14-12.a(1) allow copies. A printed PDF is the same as a photocopy. You should be fine. Link to relevant FAM chapter

Weird. I’d upload it all again as well as anything else that’s happened since and any additional financial documents you have. Sometimes the easiest solution is just to give them what they want.

When did you submit the I-130? If it was right after the marriage the consulate probably just wants you to submit evidence of a relationship after the marriage (i.e. more than 3 weeks of proof) so they have written documentation of it.

It depends on the specifics of her most recent entry into the U.S. if there was a procedurally correct inspection and admission she might not have to leave. Procedurally correct means that she was physically in front of CBP (or their predecessor), did not lie to them, and was told she could enter. Whether or not they had a legal right to enter isn’t at issue unless they lied. The standard in AOS is procedural correctness. It’s the totality of the circumstances. This would be your third green card marriage. You just ended your last one 4-5 months ago. The person you want to marry and sponsor is out of status. She is also 27 years younger than you. On its own it might raise a concern, but it’s very much not the norm for someone to have two green cards marriages and start on a third one 4 months after a divorce with someone almost 3 decades younger who is here without status.

It isn’t an issue in itself, but it absolutely is an issue the government can take into account when assessing likelihood of immigration fraud. There are plenty of people with age differences that get green cards through AOS or consular processing. Most of them don’t have a petitioner with two former green card marriages that ended in divorce. The age difference is a yellow flag on most applications that can be overcome. I think it’s a pretty large red flag here given the totality of the circumstances and I can’t imagine an ISO or consular officer not giving it significant weight.

Ignoring the other concerns, re: AOS, it’s important to know how exactly she entered the U.S. if we’re talking about someone who overstayed a visa or was waved through at the southern border without questions when that was a thing, then a lawyer might be able to get AOS here. The key is whether she was procedurally inspected and admitted, and that’s why talking with a lawyer matters legally. If she didn’t enter at a point of entry and was never inspected, I’d agree with @Crazy Cat, leaving the US and applying is likely your best option, but still consult a lawyer. Also second everything @appleblossom said about the optics of this. I think you should ask yourself some really tough questions, but if you’re committed to this course of action, this case is not a DIY case and the best thing to do would be consult legal counsel.

This would be a good case to consult with a lawyer on. Aside from the things Crazy Cat brought up, it’s not the norm for 28 year-old Honduran women in the United States without status to marry 55 year-old American men for love. That’s not a judgment on your relationship, but a statement of fact about the overall societal norms here. Combined with the multiple green card marriages and divorces, this is going to raise multiple red flags for USCIS and State.

If you prefer I say it more formally: USCIS doesn’t agree with BIA’s reading of the law on this, but they’re bound by BIA precedent. How they’ve dealt with it in some cases with published internal rulings is they’ve denied AOS for misrepresentation at the POE, like @Crazy Cat mentioned. USCIS cited misrep by omission and stated the BIA precedent on pre-conceived intent isn’t applicable since misrepresentation makes someone inadmissible and as such there was no need for USCIS to perform the balance of equities analysis required by BIA for cases of spousal pre-conceived intent. But you’re correct: the law is that if an intending immigrant is admissible, pre-conceived intent is presumed not to create a bar to adjustment of status for spouses assuming there are no other factors weighing against adjustment when USCIS performs an analysis based on the balance of equities. It’s not fraud and I really wish people would stop saying it was. The better way to phrase it is that for obvious cases of pre-conceived intent that are flagrant, USCIS has claimed that omission is sufficient to create a ban for misrepresentation. I’m not familiar with any BIA precedent ruling on this, but it’s the historical stance of their internal review board.

It needs a bit more nuance in there. It is a matter of settled immigration law that intent to adjust at the POE is not sufficient grounds for USCIS or an IJ to deny AOS to the spouse of a USC if preconceived intent is the only bar to AOS. People like calling this fraud here and on other parts of the immigration internet for some reason. It’s not. BIA has a precedent ruling on this, so you’re correct to that extent. USCIS does not like this ruling so they rarely cite preconceived intent as a reason to deny adjustment. If they think you had preconceived intent and don’t want to grant AOS they now will claim misrepresentation at the POE as no one says “I’m going to adjust status since BIA says I can on balance of equities creating this grey area in the law!” when CBP asks why they’re visiting. This is where a lot of the fraud confusion online comes from. I’m not aware of a BIA precedent ruling dealing with USCIS finding thus loophole to the previous BIA ruling. In OP’s case it wouldn’t matter as there’s precious little evidence that anything was misrepresented. They usually only claim that in egregious cases of straight from the airport to the courthouse to the post office.

Theres no real risk of deportation, which is what you seem to be most worried about. There’s reports of notices to appear in adjustment from ESTA cases, but that would just end in the I-485 being adjudicated by an IJ and not by USCIS. It’d cost more money but the result would be the same — a green card would be granted. I don’t know why you’d go the K-1 route. It has almost all of the negatives of adjusting status from VWP and all of the negatives of spousal visas with none of the positives of either.

1) You would need to fill out 1040X and all the additional applicable schedules, which would include schedule 1 to declare your wife’s foreign income and the schedule/form for the foreign tax credit. As I mentioned on my post I would highly recommend paying a CPA to do this as claiming the foreign tax credit is probably the most technical tax accounting heavy thing that most people will encounter on their 1040. 2) You cannot claim the FEIE. It’s not applicable in your case and my response on that was for you and any others searching afterwards to say DO NOT try to claim it and also make the 6013(g) election to treat your spouse as a tax resident and file jointly. It’s specifically not allowed in your circumstances. 3) Take your taxable income (box 15) for those years and add your wife’s income in USD. Then subtract the standard for that year (the number in box 12) from the number you just calculated. Then go to This page for 2023 and this page for 2024. Using the number calculated find your bracket: subtract the lowest end of the bracket from your taxable income and multiply what is left over it by the % indicated. Then add it to the dollar amount in the dollar plus XX% box. This is your estimated tax before any credit. Go to box 33 on your 1040. Subtract the estimated tax you just calculated from that amount. This is your overpayment. Then subtract from that what is currently in box 34. This is your additional refund. Subtract from that amount $700 for a CPA to prepare it (being conservative and assuming you don’t have anything else complicated.) This is the net amount you would receive back by amending before the foreign tax credit which would probably be an additional $50-$200 based on your wife’s income. For someone with a spouse who has more income it’d be more. I’m not including it in the calculation as that’s highly technical and depends on the tax structure of your wife’s country of origin and any treaty. This is the basic math, and you see how many steps it is. This is why you should hire a CPA. 4) It would have no tax disadvantage. It could potentially impact social assistance or other government programs you qualified for. Given you sponsored her and she made so little, it’s unlikely to impact you; but putting it out there for anyone else searching this thread. Also disclaimer that this is not tax advice and you should consult your own tax advisor.

Also worth pointing out FEIE does not apply in this case since they’re getting the benefit of the doubled tax brackets and double standard deduction. The choice would be to treat the foreign spouse as a U.S. resident for tax purposes via a 6013(g) election, which excludes the ability to claim FEIE. They’d report then claim credit for any eligible tax paid in the foreign country. This is a common mistake for DIYers.

I’d say the main factor here would be the cost to have a CPA prepare the return. The foreign tax credit part is pretty technical and while you can DIY, I would not advise you to: knowing what foreign taxes can be deducted, how to treat any retirement plans, etc. are things that having a professional is useful for. It’s not hard to type the numbers into TurboTax, what’s difficult is knowing what box in TurboTax you should be typing the numbers into and what counts. Our return swung me from owing $98 if I had filed MFS to getting a $3800 refund. My husband and I also have very different incomes so it was very beneficial for me. If your spouse had a similar income to you overseas and was in a low income tax country, it might not benefit more than the cost of preparation. I’d say for the overwhelming majority of people MFJ with a foreign spouse is the best way to do it, but since you previously turbo taxed it and asked for the cost-benefit analysis, also thought it worth noting the circumstances where it might not make sense.

I know. I was just saying that one of the reasons IR-1/CR-1 is easier is that there’s a certain suspicion of K-1 within the government that doesn’t exist, at least not to the same level, for IR-1/CR-1.

There’s a view of some in the foreign service community that K-1 visas are a hotbed of fraud so they tend to enter the interview much more skeptical than for CR-1/IR-1. Have a friend who works at one of the European consulates and he’s told me a few times he’s never seen a K visa where he thought the relationship would work out. At the end of the day, that’s what you’re fighting against more than a “Muslim ban.”

If you want to save money without the translation you can contact your congressman or senator’s office for help with this. That should get it resolved quickly. You’ll need a translation eventually but if you’re trying to delay that cost this’ll do it.

Definitely true. It’s not a prevention against questions or secondary if you’re flagged on the pre-arrival screening list. It has less of a chance of either because of the pre-vetting and automation, so it’s still beneficial, imo, but if one of the pre-arrival people flags you the CBP officer in the GE line will ask the questions.

Another reason to plug global entry to any immigrant who qualifies. All LPRs can get it and if they are lucky enough to get a conditional approval some airports have walk-in interview on departure these days in addition to arrival.

Late post but also worth clarifying what the changes people are worried about are for anyone searching. USCIS is giving NTAs to some people with authorized stays to initiate removal proceedings if they’re out of status when the I-130/I-485 was filed. They are fully aware those people will never be deported: a claim to adjust status is a valid defense to removal. What the change in procedure amounts to is that they are requesting that immigration judges (IJ) adjudicate I-485s rather than adjudicating the cases themselves. The IJ has the option of adjudicating the I-485 themselves or dismissing the removal proceedings and sending the I-485 back to USCIS for adjudication. There are two likely reasons for this change: first, if the judge adjudicates the I-485 and denies it a removal order can be issued more quickly, second, it’s a deterrent to what many in the current administration view as a loophole in the immigration law that is fraud-prone. Going through an IJ essentially requires a lawyer and a lot more waiting. For all but a handful of countries it incentivizes doing consular processing over overstay and adjustment. This wouldn’t impact someone in OP’s case adjusting from an in status K-1.

The FAM language makes it safer, but it’s worth pointing out that FAM is non-binding on CBP or USCIS as they aren’t under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of State. Especially as K-1s are non-immigrant visas, CBP could refuse to honor it if the port of entry doesn’t think it’s a valid use of that class of admission. I’d classify this with the non-existent “90-day rule” of FAM procedures that you shouldn’t assume DHS will automatically agree with. Especially in the current environment. Hopefully/probably it’ll be fine, but wouldn’t be something I’d recommend to anyone. Spousal/Fiancee immigration has three or four steps: 1) proving entitlement to sponsor an intending immigrant (USCIS, I-130/I-129F, non-discretionary) 2) applying for the visa and proving the relationship and no bars to admissibility (Department of State, discretionary) 3) Seeking admission to the U.S. under a specific class of admission (CBP, discretionary) 4) K-1 only: Adjustment of Status (USCIS, discretionary except for specific refugee cases) The government can say no at any of the stages so it’s usually best not to give any of the agencies reason to second guess what the one before it did. Like I mentioned before, the risk isn’t with AOS since AOS cures any defect upon procedurally correct admission into the US even if the admission was in error on the part of CBP. The risk is that CBP has a different interpretation of the law than the State Department does. That might be a low risk, but it’s also not one I’d be comfortable advising anyone to take, especially in the current climate.

Not sure what you’re asking, but unsolicited evidence has no impact on processing time at the USCIS stage. All it does is add more evidence to the case file. Cases are sent to ISOs based on priority date. The my progress estimate is useless. I’ve been at 19 months since I filed 1/1/25. Based on current speeds of approximately 3 weeks per month the first approvals for January 2025 will start to trickle in around January 2026. It’ll likely still say I have 19 months left then.

To give an exact quote of the USCIS legislative affairs officer I got drinks with today, “all an I-130 says is you’re related. The Department of State can always say 'mmmmmm, you’re a bad person, no thanks.'” Obviously no judgment on OP or their situation, but there’s likely more at issue here than passport photos that could benefit from an immigration attorney.

Talking to both of them was the right call: I’m sorry you’re in this situation. I don’t do tax myself, but very familiar with it for a few reasons and have someone do my returns because of a variety of complexities that just make it easier to have someone with time in March to do the research and paperwork for me. Now you’re educated and you can have a discussion with your tax advisor(s) about what makes sense for you.