letter of employment for self employed.

[sai9]

Dear Immihelp and all other members ,

mY IN-LAWS have an appointment on 2oth of september.
i am a self employed as a doctor in chicago.

and i want to sponsor for visitors visa to my in- laws,

i am not quite sure what kind of letter i should be sending for the employment letter , all though i am sending my tax returns.
and i am not sure what is the " meaning of report of commercial rating" is.

kindly let me know and please help

thank you,
sai

[pons1]

If you are self-employed, the tax returns, a statement of your earnings by your CA and the I-134 will suffice to prove your work status.
Plus you can also send a letter addressed to the consular (send it to your
in-laws) on your letter head explaining your self-employed physician status.

[sai9]

thanks a bunch.....

Thank you for your reply pons. this is sai9,

i am also having few questions about filling the I-134 form, if u can please help me i would greatly appreciate it.

my doubts are:
1. on form I-134 , section 9 is asking , "if i have previously submitted affadavit of support for the following persons":

i have submitted for my in-laws in 2003 but they got rejected then, so should i write yes or no for that question,

If you are self-employed, the tax returns, a statement of
your earnings by your CA and the I-134 will suffice to prove your work status.
Plus you can also send a letter addressed to the consular (send it to your
in-laws) on your letter head explaining your self-employed physician status.

[pons1]

You should not lie on the form. Anyway the consular's decision
will not come to rest on this small point. Mostly, they decide
on the basis of answers to their interview questions before even looking
at the I-134 or any other documents.

[veena_swsh]

Hi Sai9,
On your question as to whether you should mention the previous sponsorship in 2003 for your in-laws, who were anyway rejected, i would say you do not have to mention it on the present I 134, because they never depended on your finances at any point of time. This would not amount to lying on the form.