I guess, my comment would be, are "in-laws", not part of "closest relatives"?
thanks[/QUOTE]
I understand your frustration but most rules made by governmental organizations barely take into account the emotional aspect. Although you do consider your in-laws as parents (which is awesome) but IRCC calls it "Parental Sponsorship" not "In-Law Sponsorship" for a reason.
You can be the co-signer but not the sponsor for your in-laws. As for, why is it this way? I don't think anyone (except the person or committee that came up with it) could provide a concrete answer other than that's how the rules have been made.
Good luck & all the best!
thanks[/QUOTE]
I understand your frustration but most rules made by governmental organizations barely take into account the emotional aspect. Although you do consider your in-laws as parents (which is awesome) but IRCC calls it "Parental Sponsorship" not "In-Law Sponsorship" for a reason.
You can be the co-signer but not the sponsor for your in-laws. As for, why is it this way? I don't think anyone (except the person or committee that came up with it) could provide a concrete answer other than that's how the rules have been made.
Good luck & all the best!