[junaid_97]

I'm building a free alternative to SimpleCitizen (YC S16).

It's a free USCIS form-filling web-app(no Adobe required). USCIS forms still use XFA PDFs, which don’t let you edit in most browsers. Even with Adobe, fields break, and getting the signature is hard.

So I converted the PDF form into modern, browser-friendly web forms - and kept every field 1:1 with the original. You fill the form, submit it, and get the official USCIS PDF filled.

https://fillvisa.com/demo/

I found out simplecitizen offers a DIY plan for $529 (https://www.simplecitizen.com/pricing/)

So, a free (and local-only) version might be a good alternative

[murderboard]

The form-filling piece is smart and clearly solves a real pain point with XFA PDFs. But the strategic risk here isn't technical, it's liability. Immigration forms are high-stakes documents where a wrong answer can trigger a denial, RFE, or worse. SimpleCitizen's $529 isn't just paying for form filling. It's paying for guided logic ("if you answered X, you probably need to also file Y"), error checking against known USCIS rejection patterns, and a company standing behind the output. A free tool with no guidance layer exposes users to silent errors they won't discover until months later at their interview. The "free alternative" positioning also creates a distribution problem. The people who most need this (first-time filers, non-native English speakers, people who can't afford a lawyer) are the least likely to find a developer's side project on HN or GitHub. SimpleCitizen's real moat isn't the PDF conversion. It's the SEO, the trust signals, and the hand-holding. Competing on price against $529 sounds compelling, but the actual competition is immigration attorneys at $2,000-5,000 and free legal aid clinics. Those are the alternatives your users are actually weighing. One more operational risk worth flagging: USCIS revises forms regularly and without much warning. The I-130 alone has had multiple revisions in the last few years. Each revision means your 1:1 field mapping breaks and users could submit outdated forms, which USCIS will reject. That's a maintenance commitment that scales with every form you add. Might be worth thinking about how sustainable that is before expanding the form library.

[junaid_97]

Idk if your comment was bot/AI generated. Nevertheless, I'll reply:

1. Our web forms are exactly based on the official USCIS's PDF, with smart logic. If you fill A -> section B is hidden -> jump directly to section C (you get the point)

2. Regarding high risk: When a user fills our form, they get the official USCIS PDF filled. All the instructions are given in the PDF. At the end, the user has to submit the form by themselves.

3. "The "free alternative" positioning also creates a distribution problem..." "The people who most need this are the least likely to find a developer's side project on HN or GitHub" - you are right. I just shared what I'm building on HN. I share my project on immigration subreddits + FB groups. Thats where my audience is. So far, I've received positive review. In the long run, I'm leaning on: community + word of mouth + SEO

4. "..., but the actual competition is immigration attorneys at $2,000-5,000 and free legal aid clinics". Fillvisa is aimed at DIY applicants. People who need legal advise should absolutely hire legal help.

5. "One more operational risk worth flagging: USCIS revises forms regularly and without much warning..." - fillvisa.com is 100% free. That said, I'm also building a paid version (plus.fillvisa.com) for immigration lawyers/law firms. Both the apps utilize the same form + mapping. Thus that cares of revenue + I have incentive to maintain the forms.

[YourPostIsSlop]

.