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 Each revision means your 1:1 field mapping breaks and users could submit outdated forms, which USCIS will reject.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.