[quote=“Northcoast Surfer”][quote=“cyberguppy”]My question is based on the following: (I meet all APRC requirements but I’m stuck here)
[b]I started working in March 2012 and up till now (May 2013), I make about $55,000 a month. I can prove this easily with company salary details, bank accounts etc.
However, my tax statement from 2012 (Jan-Dec 2012) does not exceed the $450480. The tax office cannot give me a tax statement for Jan 2013 to April 2013 - I’ve asked my company, tax office etc. My company called Immigration who said it’s too bad and I can only apply in 2014 when I have a full year tax statement. This sounds fishy to me.
So I can only prove with company documentation, bank accounts etc. that for the last 12 months (March 2012 -April 2013) that I meet the requirements.
Am I still eligible to apply or does immigration believe that the “most recent year” refers to Jan to Dec only? Anyone with similar experience, kindly advise:[/b][/quote]
There are more ways to skin a cat and all may not be lost. However, I need some clarification before I can give you any proper advice.
According to your statement above, you only started working in March 2012 until present.
What have you been doing for the past 5 years of residency?
Are you certain that have met the required 5 years of residency on either an employment based ARC or a JFRV ARC?
Have you already been to the NIA to run your residency record to ensure that you are in fact qualified to apply for the APRC at this time?
What is the exact date that you cross the 5 years residency requirement and are eligible to apply for the APRC?
Are you married to a Taiwanese citizen and on a JFRV ARC?[/quote]
1. Flawless 5 years + 7 months in a row in Taiwan on ARC, no breaks, no problems, not our country for more than 3 months, - English teacher 4.5 years, most recent year from March 2012, white collar corporate job- Sales manager for Engineering firm.
cyberguppy wrote:Early 2012, I was doing some job hunting and not really working
If you were on an employment based ARC during this time, but not working, that would not be legit.
2. There was some work involved. Salary in each month but about $10k per month for Jan-March 2012.
cyberguppy wrote:I asked the NIA if I was legit last time I applied for my ARC and I got a positive yes but they didn't ask for tax, salary etc.
This makes no sense.
[b]The NIA gave me sheet of paper with the requirements and told me to go check - their sheet says salary certificate OR tax statement (possibly outdated info)
Last year September I crossed the 5 year mark.
Single, just on an ARC.[/b]
cyberguppy wrote:From Mar 2012- April 2013 I realized my salary averaged 70k per month.
Irrelevant for applying for the APRC in 2013 as you can’t use the January through April 2013 income.
How so? The law doesn’t specify dates as far as I can see. It states the “most recent year” - does not state tax year. My company can’t seem to provide a tax statement from Jan - April 2013, only for all of last year
cyberguppy wrote:Why they'd only accept a tax year (Jan-Dec) seems to point to laziness rather than wanting to add up numbers.
It’s just the rules. Nothing personal.
I will accept it if I can find it written in the rules. So far, it seems like a grey area.
cyberguppy wrote:In my case, my high paying salary job started at a time other than the first of January. I don't see why I should be disadvantaged and have to work 1.8 years instead of 1 year to get this APRC. The law is really unclear here and I can't seem to see where it states the the "last year" must refer to a Jan- Dec period.
It’s always been this way since the APRC first came into being in 2000.
Perhaps that is so but it’s not stated.
Thanks for the advice and comments thus far.
The law’s rationale seems to be that if you’ve earned your due in terms of meeting salary requirements + other criteria, you should be fine. IMHO it should take into account partial years too since it hasn’t specified a Jan - Dec period as far as I can see.
I’d be curious if someone else has managed to succeed. Any advice on how to approach the NIA with this case would be most welcome too.