Immigration Law
Short Answer: A K-1 fiancé(e) case generally involves two different financial sponsorship forms at two different stages. During consular processing, the applicant must show they are unlikely to become a public charge, and the consular officer may require Form I-134, Declaration of Financial Support — generally benchmarked at 100% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines. After the marriage, when the foreign spouse applies for a green card through adjustment of status, the U.S. citizen petitioner generally must submit Form I-864, Affidavit of Support Under Section 213A of the INA — a legally enforceable contract requiring income at 125% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines. The two forms carry different standards and very different legal consequences.
Most petitioners expect one financial form. The K-1 process usually involves two, and they are not interchangeable. The I-134 helps get the fiancé through the visa interview; the I-864 is what makes the green card possible — and it binds the sponsor to an obligation that can outlast the marriage itself.
That two-step structure has always caused confusion. In the current environment, where consular officers are applying public-charge screening with renewed emphasis, treating the first affidavit as a formality is a mistake that can cost a fiancé the visa.
The K-1 process moves through two agencies, and each wants its own assurance that the foreign national will be financially supported. The form, the standard, and the stakes change between them.
Form I-134 (Declaration of Financial Support) comes at the consular stage, before the visa is issued. The K-1 is a nonimmigrant visa, so the fiancé does not yet qualify for the immigrant-visa affidavit. The legal requirement at this stage is to establish that the applicant is not likely to become a public charge; the applicant may do that through evidence of their own resources or the petitioner’s support, and the consular officer may require Form I-134 as part of that showing. When used, the I-134 is generally evaluated against 100% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines. Meeting that 100% benchmark does not by itself guarantee approval, because the officer must also weigh the applicant’s overall circumstances and other public-charge factors.
Form I-864 (Affidavit of Support Under Section 213A) comes later, at adjustment of status, after the couple marries and the foreign spouse applies for the green card. This is the immigrant-stage affidavit, and it is a different instrument entirely: a legally binding contract between the sponsor and the U.S. government, enforceable in court, requiring income at 125% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines for the sponsor’s household size (100% for an active-duty military sponsor petitioning for a spouse or child).
The practical point is that clearing the consular showing does not clear the I-864. A petitioner who looked comfortably sufficient at the interview can still fall short at the green card stage, because the threshold rises from 100% to 125% and the counting rules change. Treating the two as a single hurdle is how couples get caught off guard months into the process.
Form I-864 is not routine paperwork. It is an enforceable support contract, and its obligations are the part petitioners most often do not see coming.
By signing the I-864, the sponsor promises to maintain the immigrant at 125% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines and to reimburse any federal, state, local, or private agency that provides the immigrant a means-tested public benefit. That promise is enforceable by the government and, critically, by the sponsored immigrant personally.
One timing point matters here. The sponsor’s support obligation generally becomes effective when the sponsored immigrant actually obtains lawful permanent resident status based on the affidavit. Merely signing or submitting the I-864 does not, by itself, activate the long-term obligation — a distinction that can matter if a couple separates while the adjustment application is still pending.
Once it is in force, the obligation continues until a specific terminating event occurs. The principal termination events include the immigrant becoming a U.S. citizen, being credited with 40 qualifying quarters of work (about ten years), permanently departing the United States and losing lawful permanent resident status, the immigrant’s death, or the sponsor’s death. A new grant of adjustment based on a new affidavit, in certain removal contexts, can also end the original obligation. This is not an exhaustive list, and the current Form I-864 instructions control — but note what is not on it: divorce does not end the obligation. A sponsor who divorces the person they sponsored can still be sued by that former spouse to enforce support at the 125% level, and courts have allowed exactly that.
The I-134 does not carry this contractual weight. It is a declaration of intent to support, not a Section 213A contract, and it does not create the same enforceable, years-long obligation. This is the single most important difference between the two forms, and it is why the I-864 deserves far more attention than petitioners usually give it before signing.
For the I-864, the sponsor must show income at or above 125% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines for their household size (100% for the active-duty military exception noted above). The specific dollar figures change every year, so the number to rely on is the one on Form I-864P, the HHS Poverty Guidelines chart USCIS publishes for affidavit-of-support cases. As of the date of this article, use the current year’s I-864P and confirm it immediately before filing, because an affidavit built on an outdated chart can be rejected.
The more common error is not the income figure — it is the household size, the denominator that sets the required income. It includes more people than petitioners expect: generally the sponsor, the sponsor’s spouse, dependent children, anyone else claimed as a dependent, the intending immigrant, and immigrants the sponsor previously sponsored whose I-864 obligations remain in effect. The counting rules have qualifications and exceptions, so the current Form I-864 instructions should be treated as the controlling source rather than any short summary. Undercount the household, and a sponsor can appear to meet the threshold on paper while actually falling short — a frequent trigger for a Request for Evidence.
If the sponsor’s income does not reach the threshold, there are established paths: counting qualifying assets, or bringing in a joint sponsor.
There is also a favorable rule worth knowing for K-1 couples. When the intending immigrant is the spouse of a U.S. citizen, qualifying assets generally need to equal only three times the shortfall between the sponsor’s income and the required threshold — rather than the usual five times. For example, if the required income is $35,000 and the sponsor earns $30,000, the $5,000 gap can generally be covered by showing about $15,000 in qualifying net assets. For a petitioner with savings but modest annual income, this rule can be the difference-maker.
A common assumption is that a joint sponsor functions the same way throughout. It does not, and the difference matters for petitioners who do not meet the income benchmark on their own.
At adjustment of status, a qualifying joint sponsor can submit their own separate Form I-864 and independently assume the Section 213A contract — the joint sponsor must meet 125% for their own household size plus the immigrant being sponsored.
At the K-1 consular stage, the mechanics are different. A third party may offer financial support and provide a Form I-134, but the consular officer evaluates that support as one factor within the discretionary public-charge determination. An additional I-134 from another person is not the equivalent of a statutory joint sponsor under INA § 213A, and does not automatically satisfy a sponsorship requirement the way a qualifying I-864 joint sponsor does later. A petitioner counting on outside help should understand that its weight is discretionary at the consulate and only becomes a firm statutory backstop at the I-864 stage.
Public-charge screening is not static, and it has been a moving target through 2026. A November 2025 State Department directive instructed consular officers to weigh a broader range of factors in public-charge assessments — including an applicant’s age, health, financial resources, education, English proficiency, and potential medical expenses — across both immigrant and nonimmigrant adjudications. That guidance reaches K-1 applicants and the I-134 directly, and the State Department’s subsequent public-charge guidance has continued to emphasize this multi-factor review.
Scope matters here, and the picture has changed recently, so this needs to be stated precisely and as of this article’s date. In January 2026, the State Department separately paused immigrant-visa issuance for nationals of 75 countries on stated public-charge grounds. A federal court struck that policy down, and the pause has been lifted: as of August 21, 2026, in accordance with the court’s order in CLINIC v. Rubio, that nationality-based pause is no longer in effect, and the State Department has confirmed as much. The K-1, as a nonimmigrant visa, was never directly covered by that immigrant-visa pause in any event.
Two things remain true despite that ruling. First, the heightened public-charge screening from the November 2025 guidance was not struck down and continues to apply, including to K-1 applicants. Second, separate nationality-based travel restrictions can still affect a K-1 applicant’s eligibility independently of any affidavit of support. These measures are recent and fast-moving — the litigation is ongoing and policies have shifted within months — so verify the current status before relying on any of it. For background on these developments, see my earlier coverage of the State Department’s 75-country immigrant visa pause and the practice realities under the recent travel bans.
The practical takeaway for the affidavit of support is concrete: given the State Department’s continued emphasis on public-charge screening, K-1 applicants should not assume that meeting the minimum income benchmark will be enough. Strong documentation of the petitioner’s finances, paired with evidence addressing the applicant’s overall financial circumstances, can be particularly important in this climate.
Treat both affidavits as substantive from the start. Prepare the consular I-134 as a genuine demonstration of support rather than a box to check, and look ahead to the I-864 before the interview, so a sponsor who is near the 125% line can line up qualifying assets or a joint sponsor early instead of scrambling after a Request for Evidence. The most avoidable delays in a K-1 case are the financial ones, because they are almost always visible — and fixable — well before they become a problem.
If you are preparing a fiancé case and you are not sure whether your income clears the thresholds, whether you need a joint sponsor, or how current public-charge screening affects your situation, contact me at SG Legal Group to review the specifics before you file. Consultations are available in English, Russian, and Romanian.
For how the affidavits fit into the larger picture, see my guides to the K-1 visa to green card timeline and choosing between the K-1 and the I-130 spousal petition.
Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration laws and policies are subject to change, and individual circumstances vary. For advice specific to your situation, please consult with a qualified immigration attorney.
Oleg Gherasimov, Esq.
Stay informed with our latest articles and resources.
