I864 and means tested public benefits
Jul 20th 2003, 1:45 am
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
I864 and means tested public benefits
Hello,
I live in Florida and I was on unemployment for two weeks this year
(actually that's it for my entire life). Is that considered a means tested
public benefit? Thanks.
--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
I live in Florida and I was on unemployment for two weeks this year
(actually that's it for my entire life). Is that considered a means tested
public benefit? Thanks.
--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Jul 20th 2003, 2:07 am
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: I864 and means tested public benefits
No....that is basically an insurance benefit (your old company paid premiums
for that)
Ben
"Jeremy" wrote in message
news
[email protected]...
> Hello,
> I live in Florida and I was on unemployment for two weeks this year
> (actually that's it for my entire life). Is that considered a means tested
> public benefit? Thanks.
> --
> Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
for that)
Ben
"Jeremy" wrote in message
news
[email protected]...> Hello,
> I live in Florida and I was on unemployment for two weeks this year
> (actually that's it for my entire life). Is that considered a means tested
> public benefit? Thanks.
> --
> Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Aug 19th 2003, 2:22 pm
#3
Forum Regular
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 267
I864 and means tested public benefits
Just to bring this issue back to the top for a bit...
I understand what Ben is writing saying that unemployment is an "insurance" type plan where both employer/ee were contributing and you were just drawing on funds that were contributed...
However on: http://www.justice.gov/olc/meanstst10.htm
"13. Section 401(c)(1) defines "federal public benefit" as:
(A) any grant, contract, loan, professional license, or commercial license provided by an agency of the United States or by appropriated funds of the United States; and
(B) any retirement, welfare, health, disability, public or assisted housing, postsecondary education, food assistance, unemployment benefit, or any other similar benefit for which payments or assistance are provided to an individual, household, or family eligibility unit by an agency of the United States or by appropriated funds of the United States."
It goes on to define "means test" and how some programs look to both income and resources, other look on only resources etc...
My wife needs to know because she did receive unemployment benefits for about a month in 2001 and we don't want to have anything on this document hang over our heads... I figure we'll probably just answer YES to the question on the I-864 and state she was on UB for whatever time period... she will still be over the 125% mark regardless... and she hasn't been on UB since mid-2001.
I understand what Ben is writing saying that unemployment is an "insurance" type plan where both employer/ee were contributing and you were just drawing on funds that were contributed...
However on: http://www.justice.gov/olc/meanstst10.htm
"13. Section 401(c)(1) defines "federal public benefit" as:
(A) any grant, contract, loan, professional license, or commercial license provided by an agency of the United States or by appropriated funds of the United States; and
(B) any retirement, welfare, health, disability, public or assisted housing, postsecondary education, food assistance, unemployment benefit, or any other similar benefit for which payments or assistance are provided to an individual, household, or family eligibility unit by an agency of the United States or by appropriated funds of the United States."
It goes on to define "means test" and how some programs look to both income and resources, other look on only resources etc...
My wife needs to know because she did receive unemployment benefits for about a month in 2001 and we don't want to have anything on this document hang over our heads... I figure we'll probably just answer YES to the question on the I-864 and state she was on UB for whatever time period... she will still be over the 125% mark regardless... and she hasn't been on UB since mid-2001.
Originally posted by Ben Johnson
No....that is basically an insurance benefit (your old company paid premiums
for that)
Ben
"Jeremy" wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> Hello,
> I live in Florida and I was on unemployment for two weeks this year
> (actually that's it for my entire life). Is that considered a means tested
> public benefit? Thanks.
> --
> Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
No....that is basically an insurance benefit (your old company paid premiums
for that)
Ben
"Jeremy" wrote in message
news
[email protected]...> Hello,
> I live in Florida and I was on unemployment for two weeks this year
> (actually that's it for my entire life). Is that considered a means tested
> public benefit? Thanks.
> --
> Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Aug 19th 2003, 4:04 pm
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: I864 and means tested public benefits
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------000609030306030205090206
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
eiloo wrote:
> Just to bring this issue back to the top for a bit...
> I understand what Ben is writing saying that unemployment is an
> "insurance" type plan where both employer/ee were contributing and you
> were just drawing on funds that were contributed...
> However on: http://www.justice.gov/olc/meanstst10.htm
> "13. Section 401(c)(1) defines "federal public benefit" as:
> (A) any grant, contract, loan, professional license, or commercial
> license provided by an agency of the United States or by
> appropriated funds of the United States; and
> (B) any retirement, welfare, health, disability, public or assisted
> housing, postsecondary education, food assistance, unemployment
> benefit, or any other similar benefit for which payments or
> assistance are provided to an individual, household, or family
> eligibility unit by an agency of the United States or by
> appropriated funds of the United States."
> It goes on to define "means test" and how some programs look to both
> income and resources, other look on only resources etc...
> My wife needs to know because she did receive unemployment benefits for
> about a month in 2001 and we don't want to have anything on this
> document hang over our heads... I figure we'll probably just answer YES
> to the question on the I-864 and state she was on UB for whatever time
> period... she will still be over the 125% mark regardless... and she
> hasn't been on UB since mid-2001.
I would think that it was not federal unemployment!
--------------000609030306030205090206
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
eiloo wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="[email protected]">Just
to bring this issue back to the top for a bit...<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I understand what Ben is writing saying that unemployment is an<br>
"insurance" type plan where both employer/ee were contributing and you<br>
were just drawing on funds that were contributed...<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
However on: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.justice.gov/olc/meanstst10.htm">http://www.justice.gov/olc/meanstst10.htm</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
"13. Section 401(c)(1) defines "federal public benefit" as:<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
(A) any grant, contract, loan, professional license, or commercial<br>
license provided by an agency of the United States or by<br>
appropriated funds of the United States; and<br>
<br>
(B) any retirement, welfare, health, disability, public or assisted<br>
housing, postsecondary education, food assistance, unemployment<br>
benefit, or any other similar benefit for which payments or<br>
assistance are provided to an individual, household, or family<br>
eligibility unit by an agency of the United States or by<br>
appropriated funds of the United States."<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
It goes on to define "means test" and how some programs look to both<br>
income and resources, other look on only resources etc...<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
My wife needs to know because she did receive unemployment benefits for<br>
about a month in 2001 and we don't want to have anything on this<br>
document hang over our heads... I figure we'll probably just answer YES<br>
to the question on the I-864 and state she was on UB for whatever time<br>
period... she will still be over the 125% mark regardless... and she<br>
hasn't been on UB since mid-2001.</blockquote>
I would think that it was not <b>federal</b> unemployment!<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------000609030306030205090206--
--------------000609030306030205090206
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
eiloo wrote:
> Just to bring this issue back to the top for a bit...
> I understand what Ben is writing saying that unemployment is an
> "insurance" type plan where both employer/ee were contributing and you
> were just drawing on funds that were contributed...
> However on: http://www.justice.gov/olc/meanstst10.htm
> "13. Section 401(c)(1) defines "federal public benefit" as:
> (A) any grant, contract, loan, professional license, or commercial
> license provided by an agency of the United States or by
> appropriated funds of the United States; and
> (B) any retirement, welfare, health, disability, public or assisted
> housing, postsecondary education, food assistance, unemployment
> benefit, or any other similar benefit for which payments or
> assistance are provided to an individual, household, or family
> eligibility unit by an agency of the United States or by
> appropriated funds of the United States."
> It goes on to define "means test" and how some programs look to both
> income and resources, other look on only resources etc...
> My wife needs to know because she did receive unemployment benefits for
> about a month in 2001 and we don't want to have anything on this
> document hang over our heads... I figure we'll probably just answer YES
> to the question on the I-864 and state she was on UB for whatever time
> period... she will still be over the 125% mark regardless... and she
> hasn't been on UB since mid-2001.
I would think that it was not federal unemployment!
--------------000609030306030205090206
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
eiloo wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="[email protected]">Just
to bring this issue back to the top for a bit...<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I understand what Ben is writing saying that unemployment is an<br>
"insurance" type plan where both employer/ee were contributing and you<br>
were just drawing on funds that were contributed...<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
However on: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.justice.gov/olc/meanstst10.htm">http://www.justice.gov/olc/meanstst10.htm</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
"13. Section 401(c)(1) defines "federal public benefit" as:<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
(A) any grant, contract, loan, professional license, or commercial<br>
license provided by an agency of the United States or by<br>
appropriated funds of the United States; and<br>
<br>
(B) any retirement, welfare, health, disability, public or assisted<br>
housing, postsecondary education, food assistance, unemployment<br>
benefit, or any other similar benefit for which payments or<br>
assistance are provided to an individual, household, or family<br>
eligibility unit by an agency of the United States or by<br>
appropriated funds of the United States."<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
It goes on to define "means test" and how some programs look to both<br>
income and resources, other look on only resources etc...<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
My wife needs to know because she did receive unemployment benefits for<br>
about a month in 2001 and we don't want to have anything on this<br>
document hang over our heads... I figure we'll probably just answer YES<br>
to the question on the I-864 and state she was on UB for whatever time<br>
period... she will still be over the 125% mark regardless... and she<br>
hasn't been on UB since mid-2001.</blockquote>
I would think that it was not <b>federal</b> unemployment!<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------000609030306030205090206--
Aug 19th 2003, 5:05 pm
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: I864 and means tested public benefits
"eiloo" <[email protected]> wrote:
> (B) any retirement, welfare, health, disability, public or assisted
> housing, postsecondary education, food assistance, unemployment
> benefit, or any other similar benefit for which payments or
> assistance are provided to an individual, household, or family
> eligibility unit by an agency of the United States or by
> appropriated funds of the United States."
Unemployment benefits are state-run schemes. You would have to look up the
specifics for your state to find out if it was a means-tested benefit but no
unemployment program I know is.
Andy.
--
I'm not really here - it's just your warped imagination.
> (B) any retirement, welfare, health, disability, public or assisted
> housing, postsecondary education, food assistance, unemployment
> benefit, or any other similar benefit for which payments or
> assistance are provided to an individual, household, or family
> eligibility unit by an agency of the United States or by
> appropriated funds of the United States."
Unemployment benefits are state-run schemes. You would have to look up the
specifics for your state to find out if it was a means-tested benefit but no
unemployment program I know is.
Andy.
--
I'm not really here - it's just your warped imagination.
Aug 20th 2003, 2:58 pm
#6
Forum Regular
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 267
I-864
The question about the means-tested public benefit was on an "old" form that I was sent from DHS. I looked online on the BCIS web site and the form is dated 11/05/01 rather than the 1998 version I had. The question is not on the most recent form.
I do have a question which is found on both the old and the new form.
I entered on K-1 and am adjusting status. My question is with Part 2 of the I-864 where it asks:
I am filing this affidavit of support because (check one):
a. I filed/am filing the alien relative petition.
b. I filed/am filing an alien worker petition on behalf of the intending immigrant, who is related to me as my _________.
c. I have ownership interest of at least 5% ___(name of entity)___ which filed an alien worker petition on behalf of the intending immigrant, who is related to me as my ___________.
d. I am a joint sponsor willing to accept the legal obligations with any other sponsor(s).
I would think the option my wife chooses is A... but then it sounds like she would've filed I-130.
B would be ok except I'm not sure what they are referring to about an alien worker petition...
C and D are not the choices...
Please advise...
Thanks!
I do have a question which is found on both the old and the new form.
I entered on K-1 and am adjusting status. My question is with Part 2 of the I-864 where it asks:
I am filing this affidavit of support because (check one):
a. I filed/am filing the alien relative petition.
b. I filed/am filing an alien worker petition on behalf of the intending immigrant, who is related to me as my _________.
c. I have ownership interest of at least 5% ___(name of entity)___ which filed an alien worker petition on behalf of the intending immigrant, who is related to me as my ___________.
d. I am a joint sponsor willing to accept the legal obligations with any other sponsor(s).
I would think the option my wife chooses is A... but then it sounds like she would've filed I-130.
B would be ok except I'm not sure what they are referring to about an alien worker petition...
C and D are not the choices...
Please advise...
Thanks!
