If you will recall, we have been talking about the Affidavit of Support that is required whenever a person immigrates based on his relationship to a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.    A sponsor (discussed several weeks ago) needs to establish that he can keep the immigrant off welfare.  It used to be that all you needed to do to satisfy this requirement was provide an Affidavit of Support.   By signing the Affidavit of Support, the sponsor or joint sponsor was guaranteeing that he would fulfill the requirements of being a sponsor.

However, that all changed under President Trump.  Under his new regulations there are no clear rules — the Department of State (at the embassies and consulates) and the USCIS are supposed to look at the big picture and decide if they believe the immigrant will not go on welfare.   As part of this process, they look at the relationship between the sponsor and the immigrant to see if the sponsor is likely to keep his promises.

How do they do that?   They look at a number of factors.  Chief among them are how close is the relationship between the sponsor and the immigrant, can the sponsor really afford to help the immigrant and will it cause too much hardship to the sponsor to help the immigrant?  In a sense, these questions were always important, but they never looked too closely at them.   Now, under the new rules, they are supposed to look at these factors more carefully.

Practically, speaking these factors are not too important when the petitioner/sponsor is the spouse of the immigrant.  They most likely will assume that the petitioner wants to fulfill his duties and will sacrifice for the immigrant.  This would also be true if a parent is petitioning for a dependent child or elderly parents.   However, the further the relationship gets attenuated, the more closely immigration will look at these factors.   How likely is it that a brother will sacrifice to help keep his sibling’s family off welfare?

This question becomes more important if you are looking at a joint sponsor.   Is there a strong enough relationship to induce the joint sponsor to sacrifice in order to keep the immigrant off welfare?  If the joint sponsor is only a friend of the petitioner and is only doing it as a favor to the petitioner, that could raise questions in the mind of the reviewing officer.

Therefore, when I am submitting an affidavit of support from a petitioner, I look for a strong affidavit of support so that it is clear that the sponsor can easily support the immigrant.   If it is not a strong affidavit of support, we submit an affidavit of support from a joint-sponsor.

However, when we are looking for a joint sponsor, I look for three qualifications: 1) there is a strong relationship between the joint sponsor and either the immigrant or the petitioner, 2) the joint sponsor has income and assets significantly exceeding the required minimum and 3) the joint sponsor does not need to use the value of his home or business.   We can use the value of the home and business to provide additional support, but I think that immigration will be doubtful that a joint sponsor will sell their home or business in order to keep the immigrant off welfare.

One thing that I always do at this point — because it has been requested by immigration a number of times — is to include a letter from the joint sponsor stating why he is sponsoring and how he is committed to fulfilling the responsibilities of being a sponsor.   The main point of the letter is to show the close relationship between the joint sponsor and the immigrant and/or sponsor.   It usually talks about how often they see the immigrant and/or sponsor and why they feel so strongly about making this commitment.

How important is this now that we have a new President?   I don’t know.   The Department of State (embassies and consulates) was requesting this type of evidence after President Trump was elected and before the new rules went into effect (I felt that they were using a backdoor to apply these rules before they were rules).   Currently, since July 2020, the Department of State was forbidden by a court order to apply these new rules — but how they will follow the court’s order is unclear — especially in view of the fact that they were sort of applying the rules before they were rules.   Also, of course, will President Biden direct them to return to pre-Trump practices or will it just sort of be left to each consulate how they will adjudicate these Affidavits of Support.

Likewise, things are just as unclear with the USCIS.   President Trump introduced these new requirements and made them regulations.   There were court orders forbidding the USCIS to implement the new rules, but they have all been overturned.  So officially, President Trump’s new rules are the law at the USCIS.  However, so far, in my clients’ interviews I have seen no evidence that the USCIS is really doing anything different from what they were doing before — but I still need to prepare to satisfy the new rules because you never know when an officer might decide to be strict regarding the new rules.  Again, President Biden might officially change the rules, but that could take a while, and as of today, he has not changed these rules.

I hope this is interesting and helpful.   Remember that this is not legal advice.  It is just a summary of certain aspects of immigration law which may or may not apply to your situation.   I encourage you to consult an attorney if you think any of this may apply to your situation.

Gunnar Armstrong

If you will recall, we have been talking about the Affidavit of Support that is required whenever a person immigrates based on his relationship to a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.    A sponsor (discussed several weeks ago) needs to establish that he can keep the immigrant off welfare.   Two weeks ago, we discussed what are the obligations that a sponsor undertakes.  Today I will talk about how long the sponsor’s obligations will last.

The rules are very strict.   This is not a sign-it-and-forget-it document.   It is not just to last a few years — unless the person becomes a U.S. citizen.   Once the person becomes a U.S. citizen, the responsibilities under the Affidavit of support end.   But if the person does not become a U.S. citizen, the sponsor’s responsibilities last until one of the following six circumstances occur:

1. The immigrant becomes a US citizen (as stated above).
2. The immigrant has worked 10 years.
3. The immigrant loses his lawful permanent resident status and no longer lives in the United States.
4. The immigrant goes through deportation (removal) proceedings and gets a new grant of adjustment of status.
5. The Immigrant dies.
6. You die.

Divorce DOES NOT terminate either the sponsor’s or the joint sponsor/household member’s liability under the Affidavit of Support.

I hope this is interesting and helpful.   Remember that this is not legal advice.  It is just a summary of certain aspects of immigration law which may or may not apply to your situation.   I encourage you to consult an attorney if you think any of this may apply to your situation.

Gunnar Armstrong

I have been writing about the Affidavit of Support that is required whenever a person immigrates based on his relationship to a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.    A sponsor (discussed several weeks ago) needs to establish that he can keep the immigrant off welfare.   Today, I want to discuss what are the obligations that a sponsor undertakes.

The purpose of this Affidavit of Support originally was so that if Immigrants would try to sign up for welfare, the welfare department would count the income of the petitioner and deny welfare to the immigrant.   The sole responsibility of the sponsor was to prevent the immigrant from going on welfare — the  sponsor wasn’t actually required to do anything.

However, these affidavits are written broadly.   They state that the government can sue the sponsor if the immigrant gets welfare or other government benefits.  The affidavits even include language stating that the immigrant can sue the sponsor to require him to support her at 125 percent of the poverty level.   And the joint sponsor or household member is equally liable.

Originally, it was disputed as to what this all meant, and who could sue.   It is not clear to me that any of the Federal or state governments have passed the regulations allowing them to sue over this affidavit, but I do not know that for a fact.   President Trump had stated that he would enforce these Affidavits of Support to recoup any welfare-type payments that are paid to or on behalf of the sponsored immigrant — but I don’t believe that any steps were taken in that direction.  In addition, it was originally understood that the immigrant could not sue the sponsor, but over the past twenty years, more and more courts are stating that the immigrant can sue the sponsor for support based on this Affidavit. Again, it is likely that this is true of joint sponsors and household members as well — that they can be sued like sponsors.

There is discussion in the new rule passed by President Trump that it is expected that the sponsor will voluntarily take steps to make sure that the immigrant will not need to go on welfare.    Part of the new requirements is to establish that the sponsor has the intent to support the immigrant if necessary.  There are no clear rules that say that a sponsor actually needs to do that, but the consulates, at least, have started looking for evidence showing that there is a reason to believe that the sponsor not only has the necessary income and assets but also is committed enough to the immigrant to carry through with the promise of support.

I hope this is interesting and helpful.   Remember that this is not legal advice.  It is just a summary of certain aspects of immigration law which may or may not apply to your situation.   I encourage you to consult an attorney if you think any of this may apply to your situation.

Gunnar Armstrong

Just a reminder, I am writing about the Affidavit of Support that is required whenever a person immigrates based on his relationship to a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.    A sponsor (discussed several weeks ago) needs to establish that he can keep the immigrant off welfare.  The basic requirement is that the sponsor needs to establish that between his income and assets, he can keep the immigrant off of welfare for three years (if the immigrant is a spouse of a US citizen) or five years for all others.

In order to do this, he needs to establish that his U.S. income is at 125% of the poverty level when you add together his family (including all dependents) and the immigrant.   If the sponsor (or joint sponsor) does not have enough income, he can use assets that are in the US or easily brought to the U.S.   The calculations get a little complicated here, so I will try to keep it as simple as possible.   We will assume that the immigrant is the spouse of a U.S. citizen.   The sponsor, if he is unemployed, will need to demonstrate that he has enough assets to equal three years of income at the 125% level.   In other words, if 125% of the poverty level is $50,000, the sponsor will need to demonstrate that he has $150,000 in assets.

If the sponsor has some income, but not enough, he can use assets to supplement his income.  Using the last example — suppose the sponsor had $40,000 of income per year.   He is short $10,000 per year.   Over three years, that will total $30,000.   So, the sponsor will need to demonstrate that he has $30,000 in assets in addition to his $40,000 per year income.

It is important to add that these calculations are not the end of the conversation.   It used to be that 125% of the poverty level is all that you needed to demonstrate.   Under the new rules enacted by President Trump — and still in effect — that is just the minimum.   The USCIS could require more if they felt that 125% of the poverty level will not be enough to ensure that the immigrant will not go on welfare.   The rules state that income at 250% of the poverty level is a much better indication that the immigrant will not need to go on welfare.   Due to this new rule — and the uncertainty that it causes — there really is no clear guide anymore, I encourage people to present as strong an affidavit of support as they can — and, if it is not clearly well above the 125% level, to also have a joint sponsor.   I discussed joint sponsors a few weeks ago.

I hope this is interesting and helpful.   Remember that this is not legal advice.  It is just a summary of certain aspects of immigration law which may or may not apply to your situation.   I encourage you to consult an attorney if you think any of this may apply to your situation.

Gunnar Armstrong

As stated in my recent posts, in order to be a sponsor (whether a main sponsor or a joint sponsor) for an Affidavit of Support you need to establish domicile in the U.S.    Remember, an Affidavit of Support is needed whenever a person immigrates based on his relationship to a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.  To be honest, domicile is a slippery concept.   It does not mean,”residence”, which is where your intent to live is.  Domicile is where you actually live (I guess that means you can intend to live in one place and actually live in another).   But it does not automatically mean where you are living — if you can follow that.   Let me give you an example.   Joe goes to Germany for two years.   He keeps his real residence in Pennsylvania with his parents and that is where he has all his financial ties and what he views as home.  Both his residence and his domicile are in Pennsylvania and his stay in Pennsylvania is decidedly temporary, even though it is two years.   Now, same situation, and he still views his parents’ home in Pennsylvania as his permanent home with relationship and financial ties there, but he starts to view Germany as his home away from home — you might say that while his residence is in Pennsylvania, his domicile is in Germany.

This is very important.   If the petitioner (and any joint sponsors) want to file an Affidavit of Support, they need to show that they are domiciled in the US.   If they are living in the US, that is easy to show.    If they are living abroad for more than a relatively short visit, it is a more difficult issue to prove.

One way to prove that your domicile is in the US is to show that you are just temporarily abroad, even if it is for an extended period.  You will want to show proof of a US address and ties to that US address — especially financial ties, but also other ties as well — I often include pictures of my client’s room in the US and pictures of their personal effects that are still at that address.

However, the longer you are out of the country, the harder it is to prove that you are out of the US temporarily.   One way around this situation is to show that you will be returning to the US by proof that there is a job waiting for you in the US.  I also usually include a letter from the people where you will be staying stating that you will be living with them.  It is even better if you can get a lease — but getting a lease and a job offer can be very difficult when you don’t know how long it will be until you come to the US.

A final option is for M-ssionaries only.   There is a sort of exception for M-ssionary workers abroad.  I say “sort of” because they still need to prove that they are abroad “temporarily” which is the same as what I discussed above.   However, the advantage is that historically, there is sort of an assumption that m-ssionaries maintain their residence (and domicile) in the US and are on the “field” only temporarily.   However, since the Consulates don’t always properly apply this rule, I always provide as much evidence of ties to the US as I can.

I hope this is interesting and helpful.   Remember that this is not legal advice.  It is just a summary of certain aspects of immigration law which may or may not apply to your situation.   I encourage you to consult an attorney if you think any of this may apply to your situation.

Gunnar Armstrong

There are a number of considerations as to who can submit an affidavit of support.   The first requirement is that it has to be a person.    A company or a ch-rch or m-ssion organization cannot submit an Affidavit of Support.

On the other hand, anybody can submit an Affidavit of Support.  It doesn’t have to be a close relative.   It can be a friend.   However, I will add this.  Lately, they have been taking into consideration the motivation that the sponsor has to support the immigrant.   They are looking for blood or relationship ties that will motivate the sponsor to carry through with his promise to provide the support.

In order to submit an Affidavit of Support, however, the sponsor also needs to be a U.S. citizen or a U.S. lawful permanent resident.  The sponsor also needs to be “domiciled” in the U.S.  That means that he has to actually be living there (or intends to be living there).   There are some exceptions to this rule, such as a missionary temporarily stationed abroad.   But I have heard of at least one case where a U.S. spouse was told to go live in the US before they would allow her to be a sponsor.   But I think that a carefully prepared case presentation will usually resolve this issue.

The Sponsor also generally needs to have sufficient U.S. income to equal 125% of the poverty level for his household and the immigrant.   If his income is insufficient, sometimes he can make up the difference using his assets — but you usually need quite a bit of assets to successfully do this.   I will talk about doing this in a later posting.

The Sponsor also needs to have filed US taxes for the past three years.  If he has not, then he has to provide a reasonable explanation for why he has not filed — such as insufficient income.  However, of course, if he has had insufficient income in the past three years, that will probably disqualify him from being a sponsor.

I hope this is interesting and helpful.   Remember that this is not legal advice.  It is just a summary of certain aspects of immigration law which may or may not apply to your situation.   I encourage you to consult an attorney if you think any of this may apply to your situation.

Gunnar Armstrong

There has always been the question of whether or not immigrants should be able to access welfare.  There are those who think it is fine.  There are those who are strongly opposed to it.

A couple of decades ago, those who were opposed to the idea of immigrants getting welfare came up with the idea of an Affidavit of Support.  The Affidavit of Support they created has since become an important part of the immigration process.

This Affidavit of Support is required for every person, with limited exceptions, who obtains permanent resident status in the United States through a relative-based visa petition.   It even applies to certain beneficiaries of an employment petition if a relative of theirs owns a 5% or greater interest in the company that is sponsoring the immigrant.  It does not apply to most employment petitions or to Special Immigrant R-ligious worker petitions.

One of the few exceptions for relatives is if the immigrant is an adopted child who will automatically gain citizenship upon entry to the United States.  In that case the child will not need an Affidavit of Support.

The Affidavit of Support is a promise to keep the immigrant off welfare.  Among other things, the Sponsor, the person signing the Affidavit of Support, needs to demonstrate that he has the income and/or assets necessary to keep the immigrant off welfare.  Originally, the idea was simply that the Sponsor’s income and assets would be counted in determining if the immigrant was able to access welfare — if you don’t know, a person cannot access welfare if he, or his sponsor, has a certain level of income or assets.

As with most things, Affidavits of Support have changed in how they are applied.  Over the years, courts have expanded the effects of signing an Affidavit of Support.  There have been cases where the immigrant have even successfully sued the Sponsor for financial support — which I think clearly was not the original intent.

I hope this is interesting and helpful.   Remember that this is not legal advice.  It is just a summary of certain aspects of immigration law which may or may not apply to your situation.   I encourage you to consult an attorney if you think any of this may apply to your situation.

Gunnar Armstrong