Pump62kin

Hi all,

I have a mortgage-related query in relation to the I-864. After much consideration, my brother has decided *not* to act as my spouse's sponsor for immigration to the USA.

His annual salary more than meets the financial requirements. However, he and his wife would like to buy a house in the near future.

With this in mind, my brother's accountant has advised him that acting as sponsor "would negatively impact his ability to buy a home". (At present, my brother and his wife rent a house).

Is my brother's accountant correct -- or is my brother simply looking for an excuse not to act as sponsor?

Thanks, in advance, for any info provided!

Noorah101

Your brother would be a joint sponsor.

Having filed an I-864 would not negatively affect his ability to get a mortgage. The mortgage company would never even know about it.

Rene

ian-mstm

Your brother would not be a sponsor... he'd be a joint sponsor. The terms are not interchangeable.


No. There will be no negative impact. Rene's comments on this matter are correct.


He's probably not actually looking for an excuse... but, by claiming that his accountant made the suggestion, it's clear that he hasn't actally bothered to familiarize himself with the duties of a joint sponsor. At this point in time I suggest you pity him for relying on someone else's ignorance in the decision-making process, and look elsewhere for a joint sponsor.

Ian

Pump62kin

Hi Rene and Ian,

Thanks very much for the clarification and input. (You're right: my brother would have been 'joint sponsor' and not 'sponsor').

It's a shame he's relying on someone else's (mis)information in the matter. I guess that blood isn't always thicker than water, in this case.

Onwards and upwards....

Guindalf

To be fair to your brother, not everyone is aware of the implications of being a joint sponsor.

The reality is that they are rarely called upon, but an individual is not to know that and it would be an accountant's job to point out the worst-case scenario, which could well scare him off, especially if he does not know your spouse that well.

I was lucky in that my future father-in-law was my joint sponsor and I had no problems, but I could fully understand someone not wanting to be put in that position.

bewildering

Being a joint sponsor is a bit like being a co-signer on a loan. If everything goes well then no problem. But if something goes badly then you can completely destroy family relationships.

There is a good reason why all financial gurus tell people not to be a co signer (And a equally nefarious reason why loan officers tell people to use a co signer).

Personally I think the brother and wife are wise. And they have a good accountant. Accountants will avoid risk, this is a risk.

Also, on legal grounds I wonder if the advice given above is true. As part of the mortgage loan application (done 2 months ago) I had to sign a document saying I had revealed ALL my financial liabilities. It is true the mortgage loan company has no access to the I-864 but I suspect they would view it as a liability. This means you are treading a fine line when signing that disclosure form.

Noorah101

That would be OK if the paperwork doesn't ask for a dollar figure associated with the liability.

Rene

ian-mstm

I'm constrained to point out that there is, in fact, no financial liability associated with being a joint sponsor until such time as two specific events happen. First, the beneficiary would need to accept means-tested benefits. If the beneficiary never accepts means-tested benefits, then the I-864 never comes into play. Even then, the government would look first to the sponsor for repayment (which is why the sponsor also signs an I-864). Second, if the sponsor is unable to pay - then, and only then, would the joint sponsor come into play. Both events must happen before the joint sponsor becomes involved.


No... not really. Indeed, the chances are quite slim that the joint sponsor ever comes into the equation.

Ian

Michael

That may be true according to the documents that a joint sponsor signs but recently the mayor of New York City reimbursed joint sponsors that were charged for city services that were rendered to immigrants since the federal government doesn't enforce the document signed by joint sponsors.

So it is sort of like a co-signer except the government usually doesn't enforce the document signed by the joint sponsor but a lender usually enforces the document signed by a co-signer.