Noorah101

Hi All,

Does a DV Lottery winner need to submit an Affidavit of Support? If so, which one...I-134 or I-864? And, can the sponsor be an LPR in the USA or does it have to be a USC?

Thanks!
Rene

hcj1440

Hi Rene,

I found this on the state department's website, looks like it's the I-134 not the I-864. I know for the I-864 you can be USC or LPR, as long as you are domiciled in the US. Not sure for the I-134 though I would think it's the same rules.

http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigra...info_1328.html

"Do applicants who are applying for an immigrant visa in a visa category that does not require the I-864 Affidavit of Support, such as the diversity immigrant visa, need to meet the public charge provisions of Section 213A of the INA?

No. Consular officers will review immigrant visa applicants whose visa categories do not require the I-864 under the public charge guidelines in Section 212(a)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The sponsor will need to show income at 100 percent of the federal poverty guidelines for household size, not the 125 percent required under Section 213A of the INA.

Should diversity (DV) or returning resident (SB) applicants use the I-864 or the I-134?

They should use the I-134. The I-864 can only be used in the specified categories (most family-based and certain employment-based cases). All other applicants must use the I-134 if an affidavit of support is needed."

Noorah101

Oh, thank you! I tried looking at uscis.gov but couldn't find that info. I'm wondering, for people who win the DV lottery, but don't know a soul in the USA....how do they find a sponsor!?

Thanks again,
Rene

fatbrit

Often quoted figure these days is around $25k or up. We just showed 'em the deeds to one of our properties and a valuation from a realtor, and they never ever queried it.

hcj1440

I know, doesn't make sense does it?? My understanding is that DV winners often self-sponsor with assets, maybe even income?

ON EDIT: On second thought, probably not income. I think the CO is supposed to ascertain that the DV winner can survive for at least a little while in the US without a job.

Noorah101

Thanks again hcj. Using assets and self-sponsoring makes sense.

Rene

Maryanne Kehoe

WHY are the income guidelines different? It should be standard for ALL
visa categories!



Maryanne----a 125%er

fatbrit

All animals are not equal!

Noorah101

Yes, that surprised me too. Can't remember now where I read it now.

Rene

scrubbedexpat099

Because they have no sponsors would seem to be the obvious answer.

Noorah101

Huh? You lost me. Maryanne's question was, why are the guidelines different (125% of the poverty level for marrige-based I-134 as opposed to 100% of the poverty level for DV winners I-134). And your answer is "because they have no sponsors"? I don't get it.

Rene

hcj1440

It makes perfect bureaucratic sense to me. I think it's just tied to which form is being used and they haven't all shifted over to the I-864. That's my theory.

Noorah101

Hi hcj,

I'm getting a bit lost here. What is it that makes sense to you? If a person wins the DV lottery, is he required to have a sponsor and submit an I-134 (or even an I-864)? It doesn't makes sense to me that he would need one...what if he knows absolutely no one in the USA at all? Or doesn't even know anyone with USA PR status? It's not like a marriage-based application where there is obviously someone in the USA wanting this person to immigrate and would be willing to sponsor.

Still foggy on this topic.

Rene

hcj1440

Sorry. I had interpreted Maryanne's post to be a slight change of topic. I thought she was just saying it's unfair that some categories are subject to the 125% income requirement, whereas others are only subject to a 100% income requirement. That was the part that made bureaucratic sense to me.

As for why DV winners should need a sponsor at all, it makes bureaucratic sense to me in a different way. Somewhere is the idea that American taxpayers should not be burdened by expenses incurred by immigrants. Therefore all immigrants must have a sponsor who will be responsible for any (federal) public money spent on them. DV winners are still immigrants, hence taxpayers should not have to run the risk of having to pay for them. So even if a DV winner doesn't know a soul in the US, they should still have to have a sponsor. Unless they can qualify with assets on their own, of course. I read it as, the poor and unconnected need not apply. Because, after all, immigration is not for the benefit of the immigrant.

hcj1440

Also... just realized why I confused you. It's because I am confused myself. I had thought all I-134s were at 100% but looks like I was confused about that. So, that's why nothing I was saying made any sense. Sorry!