Search results for: i-94

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has updated its admission system and has begun issuing I-94 admission records containing employment authorization notations for newly-admitted L2 and E spouses. While CBP has not officially announced the change, effective Jan. 31, 2022, the agency began issuing I-94 admission records with the following notations reflecting work authorization incident to status:

E-1S – Spouse of E-1

E-2S – Spouse of E-2

E-3S – Spouse of E-3

L-2S – Spouse of L-1A or L-1B

Although not required, CBP recommends L2 and E spouses travel with proof of the marriage relationship (i.e., marriage certificate with English translation, if necessary) to assure the correct notation is entered into their I-94 admission record.

For employers, L2 and E spouses who are admitted with this employment authorization notation will be immediately eligible to work in the United States without restriction until the expiration date listed on the I-94. They will no longer be required to apply for an Employment Authorization Document (EAD) from USCIS, although they may continue to apply for the EAD if they wish to do so.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has updated its I-9 policy guidance to confirm that employers can accept the new, revised I-94 containing these new work authorization notations as evidence of employment authorization under List C of the Form I-9.

However, employers should also be aware that CBP is not retroactively updating the I-94 admission records for L2 and E spouses already present in the United States. These individuals will only be eligible to obtain the work authorized I-94 notation the next time they return to the United States after foreign travel, or the next time they file an application to change or extend their nonimmigrant status with USCIS.

L2 and E spouses who have not received an I-94 admission record containing the employment authorization notation must continue to rely on their EAD as proof of their work authorization in the United States. Employers should be aware of this distinction when completing the I-9 process.

Beginning in May 2019, Form I-94 will have a new look. The current 11-digit numerical format will be replaced by alphanumeric characters. The new format will include 11 characters, starting with nine digits, a letter in the tenth position, and a digit in the eleventh position. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) indicated that unexpired I-94 Records issued in the current numeric-only format will continue to be valid until the “Admit Until Date” printed on the paper or digital I-94 Record expires. You can continue to retrieve your electronic Form I-94 here.

For more on I-94, click here.

 

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has announced that its I-94 website will be under maintenance and will not be available during the following periods: (1) March 30, 2017 from 1:30 a.m. to 5:30 a.m. EDT; (2) April 2, 2017 from 1:30 a.m. to 5:30 a.m. EDT; and (3) April 6, 2017 from 1:30 a.m. to 5:30 a.m. EDT. During these times, the ability to view a recent I-94 record, obtain recent travel history, and purchase a provisional I-94 will be disrupted; CBP advises against using the aforementioned functions accordingly.  

Foreign nationals present in the United States in nonimmigrant visa status should note the CBP I-94 website maintenance periods mentioned above and may wish to access any relevant I-94 records and/or travel history records prior to these times. Those planning to return to the U.S. from international travel while the site is unavailable, should access the CBP system after site maintenance is complete to ensure the electronic I-94 record is correct and consistent with the relevant passport entry stamp received during the admission process. Greenberg Traurig can assist with any questions regarding corrections to I-94 entry records or the admission process.

 

CBPOn Sept. 29, 2016, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) announced that it has enhanced the I-94 website for travelers arriving to the United States at land ports of entry.  Travelers now can apply and pay the $6 fee for their I-94 card online up to seven days prior to their entry.

An I-94 form is needed by all persons except U.S. Citizens, returning resident aliens, aliens with immigrant visas, and most Canadian citizens visiting or in transit.  Air and sea travelers will continue to be issued I-94 records during the admission process at the port of entry.  However, for those travelers seeking admission to the United States at a land port of entry, taking advantage of this new enhancement will quicken and simplify the admission process.

The application requires travelers to submit their biographic and travel information; in return, they will receive a provisional I-94 card after submitting the application and payment of the fee online.  The application collects the information that would otherwise be collected during the in-person inspection at the land port of entry, including name, date of birth, country of citizenship, passport details, visa details (if applicable), and petition/SEVIS number (if applicable).  To finalize the I-94 issuance process and admission, the traveler must present him or herself at the land port of entry within seven (7) days of the application, submit biometrics, and be inspected by a CBP officer.  Travelers always should be prepared to show evidence of their residence, employment and/or travel plans to the inspecting CBP officer, depending on the category of nonimmigrant admission being sought.

CBP expects for the new online I-94 application process to increase efficiencies during inspection and admission, decrease paper usage, and streamline the process at the land border, thereby reducing operating costs.  The secure website is easy to use and payment can be made via credit card, debit card, direct debit, or through PayPal.

CBP has automated the I-94 and I-94W process for all travelers applying for admission at U.S. ports of entry. Consequently, nonimmigrants arriving at an air or sea U.S. Port of Entry no longer receive a paper I-94 card from the CBP inspector. CBP provides each nonimmigrant with an admission stamp that is annotated with date of admission, class of admission and status expiration date. After leaving the port of entry, the nonimmigrant can retrieve an electronic copy of his or her I-94 card from the CBP website. As advance information is only transmitted for air and sea travelers, CBP still issues a paper form I-94 at land border ports of entry.

Continue Reading Tips for Resolving Issues I-94 Issues under the Electronic CBP System

Since April 30, 2013, CBP has been implementing I-94 automation by issuing passport stamps and an electronic record to most foreign nationals arriving in the U.S. at sea and air ports rather than paper I-94s. Foreign nationals arriving at land borders will continue to receive paper I-94s from CBP.

CBP will continue to issue paper I-94s to refugees, asylees and parolees at land, sea and air ports. An arriving foreign national may request a paper I-94 from CBP at a land, sea or air port. Those foreign nationals requesting paper I-94s, as well as refugees, asylees and parolees, will be issued paper I-94s in secondary rather than primary inspection. The paper I-94 provided by CBP will be a printout of the electronic record available at www.cbp.gov/I94.

It’s important to note that foreign nationals should enter their name on the I-94 web site as it appears in their passport. The I-94 site instructs individuals to enter their first and last names as they appear on the “travel document used to gain admission to the US.” CBP has clarified that the name on the passport, rather than the visa, should be entered to access the electronic record.

As a general rule, foreign nationals should get in the habit of accessing and printing their I-94 information after each entry as proof of their valid immigration status. An I-94 printout is also important in terms of applications for a driver’s license or social security number. Errors found in the electronic record should be corrected as soon as possible.

Only days after the U.S. Department of State (DOS) made its B-1/B-2 visa bond program permanent, the agency has opened a second, more expensive front in its use of financial guarantees. On Aug. 5, 2026, DOS announced the Immigrant Visa Public Charge Bond Pilot Program, which allows consular officers to invite certain immigrant visa applicants found inadmissible on public charge grounds to post a bond as a condition of visa issuance. Reports indicate the pilot is beginning at the U.S. Embassy in Santo Domingo.

Where the permanent nonimmigrant program caps bonds at $20,000 for business visitors and tourists, this pilot reaches would-be permanent residents and, according to public reporting, contemplates bonds from roughly $100,000 to as much as $250,000. For families pursuing immigrant visas, and the sponsors behind them, it injects a potential six-figure requirement into a process some assumed would depend on the Affidavit of Support alone.

A Bond, Not a Waiver: The Legal Foundation

The legal foundation is longstanding. Section 213 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) has for more than a century authorized the admission of a noncitizen who is otherwise inadmissible as likely to become a public charge upon the posting of a suitable and proper bond, with regulations at 8 CFR 213.1 and 103.6. What has changed is not the authority but the decision to use it at scale in the immigrant visa context, where it has rarely been exercised in the modern era.

The bond is an additional remedy layered on top of, not a substitute for, the Affidavit of Support Under Section 213A of the INA (Form I-864). When Congress amended INA 213 in 1996, it clarified that a bond may be requested in addition to, not in lieu of, a sufficient Form I-864. Nor is the bond a waiver of the public charge ground; it does not erase the officer’s finding but offers a conditional path to a visa despite it.

Who May Be Affected

The pilot reaches a narrow, specifically identified population. It applies only after a consular officer finds an applicant inadmissible under INA Section 212(a)(4) as likely to become a public charge, a determination made under the totality of the circumstances, weighing factors such as age, health, family status, finances, education, and skills. An applicant cannot request the option; the officer decides whether to offer it, and the applicant is notified.

Being offered a bond is not a guarantee of approval; it opens a route around a denial, but the officer retains discretion and the applicant must still be otherwise admissible. The pilot also does not affect immigrant visas already issued, which remain valid; it concerns applicants still in process. Family-based applicants, routinely subject to the public charge assessment, fall within its scope; humanitarian categories generally do not.

Why Santo Domingo Went First

DOS selected the Dominican Republic because of the scope and scale of immigrant visa operations at the U.S. Embassy in Santo Domingo, one of the highest-volume posts in the world, letting it test the machinery, including moving large sums into Treasury-held accounts. The choice is also practical: the Dominican Republic is not among the countries covered by the immigrant visa issuance pause DOS imposed earlier in 2026, so launching there avoids entangling the bond in that litigation. DOS has signaled the program may expand, so Santo Domingo appears to be a starting point, not a boundary.

That broader pause has since run into trouble. On Jan. 14, 2026, DOS announced it would suspend immigrant visa issuance for nationals of 75 countries deemed at high risk of becoming a public charge. On Aug. 21, 2026, U.S. District Judge Jeannette Vargas of the Southern District of New York struck that policy down, holding in a 61-page decision that it was contrary to law and exceeded the secretary of state’s authority by categorically refusing visas based on nationality and displacing consular officers’ individualized public charge determinations. The bond pilot is a separate mechanism and does not rise or fall with that ruling, but the decision underscores that public charge findings must rest on the individualized statutory factors rather than blanket, nationality-based bars. The government may appeal.

Bond Amounts and How They Are Posted

Public reporting places bond amounts between $100,000 and $250,000, with the exact figure set by the consular officer’s assessment, far above the historical minimums. The mechanics run on the established Form I-945 framework.

An applicant may post a bond only after being invited to do so and must include the government’s invitation when submitting Form I-945, Public Charge Bond. The bond may be cash, secured by a deposit of the full-face value or a surety bond. USCIS administers it, with funds held in a U.S. Treasury account. Cash deposits accrue interest at the Treasury rate; on cancellation, USCIS refunds the deposit plus interest, but on breach the principal is forfeited and only the interest is remitted.

Cancellation, Breach, and Refunds

A public charge bond is not open-ended, but it does not cancel automatically, either. Under INA 213 and 8 CFR 103.6, it may be cancelled when the noncitizen dies, permanently departs, naturalizes, or reaches the fifth anniversary of becoming a lawful permanent resident, provided in that last case the individual did not receive public cash assistance for income maintenance or long-term institutionalization at government expense. It may also be cancelled earlier if USCIS determines the individual is not likely to become a public charge.

Cancellation must be requested. The obligor, an agent or co-obligor, or the noncitizen or their representative may file Form I-356, Request for Cancellation of Public Charge Bond, which USCIS adjudicates. If USCIS denies cancellation, it states the reasons and the right to appeal under 8 CFR part 103, subpart A. A breach, such as receipt of the specified public benefits in violation of the bond’s conditions, forfeits the principal, subject to the administrative process before any demand for payment becomes final.

How It Differs From the B-1/B-2 Visa Bond Program

Though similarly named, the two programs rest on different foundations. The nonimmigrant program rests on INA Section 221(g)(3), reaches B-1/B-2 applicants from designated countries, caps bonds at $20,000, and runs through the consular and DHS bond process. This pilot rests on INA Section 213, reaches immigrant visa applicants found inadmissible on public charge grounds, runs through USCIS on Form I-945, and contemplates larger bonds. The nonimmigrant program is now a permanent regulation; the immigrant program is, for now, a discretionary pilot at a single post. The two programs are easy to confuse but they differ in who selects the applicant, which agency holds the funds, and what conduct triggers forfeiture.

Practical Steps for Petitioners, Sponsors, and Applicants

For families with immigrant visa cases at Santo Domingo, the pilot makes early attention to the public charge assessment essential. Because the bond is offered only after a Section 212(a)(4) finding, the best strategy may be to avoid that finding altogether, through a sufficient Form I-864, a well-qualified sponsor, and documentation of the applicant’s assets, income, education, and skills before the interview. Where a bond is offered, applicants and sponsors might prepare for a possible six-figure cash requirement, the time needed to move funds into a Treasury-held account, and the risk to the principal if the bond’s conditions are later breached.

Employers that sponsor employees for permanent residence, or support relocating key personnel and their families, may wish to weigh how a potential bond might affect timelines, budgets, and relocation planning, and to involve counsel early to strengthen the record against a public charge finding.

Public Charge Is Reshaping the Landscape

Taken together, these developments show public charge moving to the center of U.S. immigration policy. In a matter of months, the concept has driven a permanent bond program for business visitors and tourists, this six-figure bond pilot for immigrant visa applicants, the rescission of the 2022 public charge rule, and the now-enjoined suspension of immigrant visa issuance for 75 countries, alongside stepped-up consular vetting for potential public benefit use. A ground once rarely invoked has become a primary lever over who receives a visa, and the bonds attached to it carry real stakes for families and their U.S. sponsors.

Public charge is also only one front. The same period has brought new fees, tighter adjudication standards, and travel and processing limits across DOS, DHS, and USCIS, with rules, guidance, and litigation shifting the ground almost weekly. Employers, sponsors, and families may wish to plan accordingly: treating immigration planning as dynamic, building the possibility of a bond or other new requirement into timelines and budgets, strengthening the financial record well before an interview, and staying alert to where these programs expand next.

As discussed elsewhere on this blog, DHS has finalized a new rule governing F-1 status, scheduled to take effect on Sept. 15, 2026. The rule’s core change is to eliminate Duration of Status (D/S) for F-1 students, J exchange visitors, and I foreign media representatives, replacing it with fixed admission periods and requiring extensions of stay where additional time is needed.

Key Changes to F-1 Status and Day One CPT Under the New Rule

That change matters to Day One Curricular Practical Training (CPT) because it operates within the broader F-1 status framework. Even where the Day One CPT rules themselves remain intact, the shift from open-ended status to fixed admission periods might change how employers assess Day One CPT as an option for employees whose Optional Practical Training (OPT) or STEM OPT is expiring, whose H-1B registration is not selected, or whose H-1B strategy needs more time. To be clear, the new F-1 rule does not eliminate Day One CPT and does not make substantive changes to CPT eligibility or the DSO’s role in authorizing CPT. But it does change the planning environment around Day One CPT in ways that may matter for hiring, retention, I-9 reverification, and immigration contingency planning.

The principal change is to the surrounding compliance framework. Because the rule replaces open-ended duration of status for F-1 students with fixed admission periods, if a student needs more time to complete a program, begin a new higher-level program, or continue authorized practical training beyond the current fixed period, the student may need to file an extension of stay with USCIS. Depending on the employee’s I-94 expiration date, travel history, transition-rule posture, and new Form I-20 program dates, moving from F-1 OPT or STEM OPT into a new CPT-eligible program may require a Form I-539 extension-of-stay filing.

Work Authorization, I-94 Expiration, and Extension of Stay: Employer Compliance Considerations

Employers relying on Day One CPT may therefore need to track more than the CPT dates on Form I-20. Under the fixed-period framework, the employee’s Form I-94 expiration date, the I-20 program end date, the 30-day grace period, the DSO-authorized CPT end date, and any timely filed Form I-539 receipt might all matter. This may lead to a major shift for workforce planning. Under the prior D/S model, employers often focused solely on the I-20 CPT authorization dates. Under the new fixed-period framework, while the I-20 is still essential, it is no longer the only timing document that matters. A CPT endorsement that runs beyond the employee’s I-94 expiration date may not be enough by itself. If an extension of stay is required, the employee must file it on time, and the employer must understand what documentation supports continued work authorization.

The new rule also restricts some enrollment strategies historically used for Day One CPT planning. F-1 students below the graduate level generally cannot transfer schools or change educational objectives during the first academic year unless the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) authorizes an exception. Graduate-level students generally cannot change educational objectives during the program and cannot transfer during the program unless SEVP authorizes an exception for extenuating circumstances. The rule also limits use of F-1 status for another program at the same or lower educational level after a student completes a program following the rule’s effective date. This is particularly important because some employees have pursued a second master’s program to obtain Day One CPT after OPT or STEM OPT, or after H-1B lottery non-selection.

Transition Periods, Transfers, and Second-Degree Restrictions for F-1 Students

Employers should also be aware of the transition period to the new rules. F and J nonimmigrants who were admitted for D/S and are properly maintaining status on Sept. 15, 2026, generally may remain in the United States without filing an extension of stay until the program end date or EAD expiration date valid on the effective date, subject to an outside transition limit. For F nonimmigrants, the rule identifies Nov. 14, 2030, as the outside date for this transition period. Certain F-1 students admitted for D/S who timely file post-completion OPT or STEM OPT employment authorization applications on or before March 18, 2027, are not required to file Form I-539 for that requested OPT or STEM OPT period, although travel and readmission under a fixed admission period may change the analysis. Employers might not assume that every current F-1 employee would immediately need a Form I-539 on Sept. 15, 2026, but may wish to review each affected employee’s I-94, I-20, EAD, travel plans, and practical-training timeline.

The rule also creates a limited safety valve for certain timely filed extensions. If USCIS receives the F-1 student’s extension-of-stay application before the start of the 30-day F-1 grace period, current CPT may continue while the extension is pending, for up to 240 days, but only through the CPT end date reflected on the DSO-endorsed Form I-20 and only until USCIS adjudicates the extension. For I-9 purposes, the employee’s I-94, combined with a USCIS receipt notice for the extension-of-stay application and the DSO-endorsed CPT I-20, may be treated as unexpired only within those limits. If the student files during the 30-day grace period, the student may be able to remain and study while the extension is pending but cannot continue or begin CPT employment until the extension is approved. For employers, that distinction is critical. A grace-period filing would create an immediate work stoppage for an existing employee or require a waiting period until USCIS approval to begin work.

In short, Day One CPT does not disappear, but it is no longer a casual bridge strategy. The new F-1 rule turns timing, documentation, degree progression, and extension-of-stay planning into central workforce planning issues. Employers that rely on international talent should identify affected employees now and build earlier decision points into immigration calendars. As a practical matter, employers might calendar review points well in advance of an I-94 expiration date, separately track the start of the 30-day grace period, the CPT end date, the Form I-539 receipt date, the 240th day after the relevant expiration trigger, and the extension-of-stay decision date.

The chart below summarizes key differences between the prior D/S framework and the new fixed-period framework as they relate to Day One CPT.

Day One CPT ElementPrior D/S Framework for Day One CPTNew Fixed-Period Framework for Day One CPT
Admission periodI-94 generally issued for duration of status while the student maintained F-1 status and had a valid SEVIS/Form I-20 basis for study or practical training.I-94 will reflect a fixed expiration date, generally tied to the I-20 program length and capped at four years, plus the 30-day grace period. OPT and STEM OPT timing may be tied to the EAD or DSO-recommended employment dates, depending on posture.
Work authorization timingEmployers typically focused on the DSO-endorsed Form I-20 CPT authorization dates, along with ordinary I-9 documentation.Employers must track the DSO-endorsed CPT dates, I-94 expiration dates, the start of the 30-day grace period, any Form I-539 receipt, the 240-day automatic-extension outside date, and the extension-of-stay decision.
Extension of stay procedureA DSO-issued or updated Form I-20 generally supported continued F-1 stay without a separate USCIS extension-of-stay filing, assuming the student maintained status.Form I-539 may be required if the student needs time beyond the current I-94 expiration date. To avoid a CPT work stoppage, USCIS should receive the extension-of-stay application before the 30-day departure period begins.
EOS filed during 30-day departure periodGenerally not applicable in the same way under D/S; most F-1 program extensions did not require a routine Form I-539 extension-of-stay filing.The filing may be timely for purposes of remaining and studying while pending, but the student may not begin or continue CPT or other employment while the extension is pending. Work may resume only if the extension is approved.
Transfers and program changesPotentially greater flexibility to transfer schools or change programs, subject to ordinary F-1, CPT, and SEVIS requirements.Below the graduate level, first-year transfers and changes in educational objectives are restricted absent an SEVP exception. Graduate-level students generally cannot change educational objectives or transfer during the program unless SEVP authorizes a narrow exception.
Same-level degreeA second same-level program might sometimes support continued F-1 study and CPT if the program and CPT independently satisfied F-1 and CPT requirements.After completing a program after the rule’s effective date, a student generally may not maintain, be admitted, or otherwise be provided F-1 status for another program at the same or lower educational level.

On July 17, 2026, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a final rule that will impact how F-1 students, J-1 exchange visitors, and I media representatives are admitted and maintained in the United States. The rule eliminates the long-standing “duration of status” (D/S) framework and replaces it with admission for a fixed period.

The regulation may increase government oversight of nonimmigrant status maintenance. The rule is scheduled to take effect on Sept. 15, 2026, subject to congressional review requirements.

What Is Changing?

For nearly 50 years, most F-1 students, J-1 exchange visitors, and I media representatives have been admitted to the United States for “duration of status,” rather than a fixed expiration date. Under that system, individuals generally remain in status if they continue to comply with the terms of their program and maintain valid Student & Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) records.

Under the new rule, DHS will instead admit certain nonimmigrants for a specific period, as reflected on their I-94 admission record. Once that period expires, the individual generally will be required to either:

  • Depart the United States;
  • Obtain an approved extension of stay from USCIS; or
  • Change to another valid immigration status.

According to DHS, the change is intended to provide greater oversight and allow the government to more effectively monitor whether individuals continue to qualify for their nonimmigrant classification.

Increased USCIS Involvement

The rule creates a formal extension-of-stay process for individuals who need additional time to complete their studies, exchange programs, or authorized activities.

Historically, many program extensions were handled through school officials or exchange program sponsors within SEVIS. Under the new framework, additional government adjudication by USCIS will be required in many circumstances.

This means affected individuals may face:

  • Additional filing fees;
  • Longer planning timelines;
  • Potential processing delays;
  • Additional vetting and background review; and
  • Increased compliance obligations.

Impact on F-1 Students

DHS states that F-1 students will generally be admitted for the length of their academic program, subject to maximum admission limits established by the rule. Students who need additional time to complete a degree program, dissertation, research project, or other educational requirements may need to obtain a USCIS-approved extension before their admission period expires. The rule will also reduce certain grace periods available after completion of studies and impose new restrictions relating to program changes and status maintenance.

Impact on J-1 Exchange Visitors

J-1 exchange visitors and their sponsors may also see increased compliance requirements.

Some J-1 participants currently rely on program extensions managed through exchange sponsors. The final rule introduces a more formalized process with greater federal oversight, potentially requiring USCIS involvement for extensions beyond the authorized admission period. Organizations that host researchers, trainees, interns, physicians, professors, and other exchange visitors should consider evaluating how the new requirements may affect program timelines and future planning.

Impact on Employers

While the new rule primarily targets students, exchange visitors, and media representatives, employers may feel collateral impacts. Companies employing F-1 students pursuant to OPT or STEM OPT programs may see:

  • More frequent status monitoring;
  • Additional extension filings;
  • Potential work authorization disruptions if extension requests are delayed; and
  • Greater need for immigration compliance tracking.

Employers that hire international graduates may wish to review onboarding and workforce planning processes to address the new admission structure.

What About Individuals Already in the United States in D/S Status?

An important question for employers is whether the rule will immediately affect F-1 students and J-1 exchange visitors who are already in the United States under the current duration of status (D/S) framework. Based on the transition provisions, many individuals already in D/S status will not need to depart the United States or obtain a new admission period solely because the rule takes effect. However, the practical impact may be most evident when they travel internationally, seek a new admission, begin a new program, require additional time beyond their current authorization, or otherwise interact with the immigration system after the effective date.

For employers that hire F-1 students on OPT or STEM OPT, the rule’s most practical impact may be less likely to involve current employees than future hires, as well as employees who travel abroad, require extensions, or otherwise need renewed immigration authorization after the rule takes effect.

Potential Unlawful Presence Consequences for Individuals Already Out of Status

The rule may have consequences for certain F, J, and I nonimmigrants who have already completed or otherwise ceased participating in their authorized program but have remained in the United States while benefiting from the current D/S framework. Under existing policy, individuals admitted in D/S generally do not begin accruing unlawful presence solely because they fall out of status; unlawful presence typically begins only after a formal status violation finding or other triggering event. Under the final rule, however, such individuals may begin accruing unlawful presence as of the rule’s Sept. 15, 2026, effective date if they remain in the United States without a valid immigration status or other authorization. As a result, foreign nationals who have remained in the United States following completion or termination of their program should consider evaluating their immigration situation before the rule takes effect, as the accrual of unlawful presence may lead to immigration consequences, including three-year and ten-year bars to reentry after departure from the United States.

Why DHS Made the Change

DHS stated that the purpose of the regulation is to provide additional protections, increase oversight, and allow the government to better evaluate whether F, J, and I nonimmigrants continue to maintain lawful status while in the United States. The agency also cited concerns that the duration-of-status system made it more difficult to monitor compliance and identify individuals who remained in the United States beyond the period intended by their immigration classification.

Takeaways

The elimination of D/S marks a shift in U.S. immigration policy, affecting international students, exchange visitors, educational institutions, sponsors, and employers alike.

Organizations may wish to prepare by:

  • Reviewing populations currently holding F, J, and I status;
  • Developing systems to track I-94 expiration dates;
  • Anticipating additional extension filings;
  • Budgeting for increased filing costs and processing times; and
  • Providing proactive guidance to affected foreign nationals.

Although the rule does not become effective immediately, its implementation may require adjustments from both institutions and individuals that have long operated under the duration-of-status framework. Stakeholders should monitor additional DHS and USCIS guidance as implementation approaches.

On July 4, 2025, President Trump signed into law H.R.1, known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (Public Law 119-21), introducing new U.S. immigration fees that will affect employers and foreign nationals. One of the new provisions is the “visa integrity fee,” a $250 charge that will be added to every nonimmigrant visa issuance. While this fee became law over two weeks ago, implementation details remain unclear, creating uncertainty for businesses and visa applicants planning for the months ahead.

Understanding the Visa Integrity Fee

The visa integrity fee represents a fundamental shift in U.S. immigration fee structure. Unlike traditional processing fees, this charge is designed as both a revenue generator and compliance mechanism, applying to all nonimmigrant visa categories at the point of visa issuance by the Department of State (DOS).

Key features include:

  • Universal Application: The fee applies to every nonimmigrant visa category – H-1B, L-1, O-1, F-1, J-1, B-1/B-2, and all others.
  • Per-Person Charge: The fee applies to each individual visa issued, including dependents (H-4, L-2, F-2, J-2, etc.).
  • One-Time Payment Per Visa: The fee is charged once “at the time of visa issuance” by the DOS, not as an additional U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services (USCIS) charge.
  • Tied to Actual Visa Issuance: The fee only applies when a physical visa stamp is issued by a U.S. consulate abroad, not for USCIS change of status applications within the United States. 
  • No Fee for Denied Applications: Since the fee is charged “at the time of issuance,” applicants whose visa requests are denied will not be charged the fee.
  • Minimum $250: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) can set the fee higher through regulation.
  • Annual Inflation Adjustments: Beginning in fiscal year 2026, the fee will increase annually based on the Consumer Price Index.
  • Additional Cost: The fee is imposed “in addition to” existing visa application fees, reciprocity fees, and other charges.

Payment Timing and Denial Protection

Unlike most other visa fees that are paid upfront during the application process, the visa integrity fee is uniquely structured to be collected only upon successful visa issuance. This creates an important protection for applicants.

Traditional Fees vs. Visa Integrity Fee

  • Machine Readable Visa (MRV) Application Fee: Paid before the interview; not refunded if visa is denied.
  • Visa Integrity Fee: Paid only when visa is issued; no charge if application is denied.

This structure suggests that consular officers would first approve the visa application, then collect the visa integrity fee as part of the actual visa issuance process. Denied applicants would not reach the “issuance” stage where the fee is collected.

Change of Status vs. New Visa Issuance

Understanding when the visa integrity fee applies requires distinguishing between change of status and new visa issuance:

No Fee for Change of Status Within the United States

  • When an individual changes classifications while remaining in the United States (e.g., F-1 to H-1B), USCIS processes this as a “change of status.”
  • No new visa is issued during this process; the person receives an I-797, Approval Notice.
  • Since no visa is “issued,” the visa integrity fee should not apply. 

Fee Required for New Visa Issuance

  • The person who changed their status travels abroad and applies for a visa stamp in their new classification at a U.S. consulate.
  • The DOS issues an actual visa stamp. 
  • The visa integrity fee applies because a new visa is being “issued.”

Practical Examples

  • No Additional Fee: F-1 student changes to H-1B status while in the United States and remains in the country. 
  • Fee Required: Same individual later travels abroad and must obtain an H-1B visa stamp to re-enter. 
  • Extension Scenarios: H-1B extensions processed by USCIS within the United States do not trigger the fee, but obtaining a new H-1B visa stamp abroad would. 

Implementation Uncertainty May Create Planning Challenges

Despite being enacted into law, the visa integrity fee is not yet operational. USCIS issued a brief statement July 11, 2025, indicating they “will soon begin to collect new fees for certain immigration benefit requests” with details to follow “in the coming days.” A July 22 Federal Register notice confirmed that the visa integrity fee “requires cross-agency coordination before implementing” and will be addressed “in a future publication.”

This implementation gap creates several practical challenges:

  • Budget Planning: Employers cannot definitively calculate visa costs for pending applications. 
  • Timeline Uncertainty: No clear implementation date has been announced. 
  • Collection Mechanism: While DHS sets the fee amount, it remains unclear whether DOS or DHS will collect the fee, though the statutory language suggests collection at the point of visa issuance. 
  • Retroactive Application: It remains unclear whether the fee will apply to visas issued after July 4, 2025, or only after formal implementation. 

The Refund Provision

An unusual aspect of the visa integrity fee is its potential refundability, a concept virtually unprecedented in U.S. immigration fee structures. The statute provides that visa holders who fully comply with their visa terms may receive reimbursement of the $250 fee.

To qualify for a refund, visa holders must:

  • avoid all unauthorized employment;
  • either depart the United States promptly at the end of their authorized stay; or
  • obtain a lawful extension or adjustment of status.

However, this potential benefit comes with caveats. The Congressional Budget Office projects that only “a small number of people would seek reimbursement” and expects that “the DOS would need several years to implement a process for providing reimbursements.” Given the historical difficulty of obtaining refunds from government agencies, employers and foreign nationals should treat this fee as non-refundable for planning purposes.

Cost Impact on Business Immigration

The visa integrity fee will significantly increase the cost of employing foreign nationals, particularly when accounting for family members. Consider these examples:

  • H-1B Worker with Family: An H-1B visa holder with H-4 spouse and child will face $750 in visa integrity fees ($250 × 3 people) plus existing application fees.
  • L-1 Executive Transfer: An L-1A executive with L-2 spouse and two children will incur $1,000 in visa integrity fees ($250 × 4 people).
  • International Students: F-1 students already paying $535 ($185 application fee + $350 SEVP fee) will face $785 total cost, with F-2 spouses adding another $250.
  • Tourist Families: A family of four applying for B-1/B-2 visas will pay $1,000 in visa integrity fees alone.

Importantly, this fee is separate from and in addition to USCIS petition filing fees (such as I-129 or I-140 fees), meaning employers will face the visa integrity fee as a distinct cost at the consular processing stage. However, the fee structure provides some protection since denied applicants will not be charged the visa integrity fee, unlike traditional application fees.

For multinational corporations regularly transferring employees or universities hosting international students, these increases represent substantial budget impacts. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the provision will generate $28.9 billion in additional revenue over the 2025-2034 period.

Strategic Considerations for Employers

Employers should consider several immediate steps to address this development:

  1. Budget Adjustments: Update immigration budgets to reflect the additional $250 per visa issuance for each family member, recognizing that a single employee transfer could result in $500-$1,000+ in additional fees depending on family size, separate from existing USCIS petition costs.
  2. Travel and Timing Strategies: Consider the implications of the change of status versus visa issuance distinction when advising employees about travel timing and status change strategies.
  3. Risk Assessment: Factor in the protection that denied applicants will not pay the visa integrity fee when evaluating application strategies and budgeting.
  4. Policy Reviews: Consider whether higher visa costs warrant changes to international assignment policies, family accompaniment benefits, or hiring strategies.
  5. Communication Plans: Prepare to explain substantial cost increases to foreign national employees and their families, particularly the difference between change of status (no additional fee) and new visa issuance (fee required).
  6. Implementation Monitoring: Establish processes to track when agencies announce implementation procedures, as the fee could become effective with minimal notice.
  7. Documentation Systems: Begin developing procedures to track visa compliance for potential refund eligibility, even though reimbursement remains uncertain.

Changes to the Broader Fee Landscape

The visa integrity fee is part of a comprehensive fee restructuring under Public Law 119-21. Other changes include:

  • Form I-94 Fee: Increased from $6 to $24 for arrival/departure records
  • ESTA Fee: Increased from $4 to $13 for Electronic System for Travel Authorization applications under the Visa Waiver Program (note that ESTA applicants are exempt from the $250 visa integrity fee since no visa is issued)
  • EVUS Fee: New $30 fee for Chinese B-1/B-2 visa holders using the Electronic Visa Update System
  • Asylum Applications: New $100 application fee (previously free)
  • TPS Applications: New $500 application fee
  • Various EAD Fees: Multiple new employment authorization document charges

These cumulative changes represent the most significant immigration fee increases in recent memory, reflecting the administration’s focus on generating revenue for enhanced enforcement activities. Notably, while ESTA travelers’ authorization fee more than tripled (from $4 to $13), they remain exempt from the much larger $250 visa integrity fee, preserving some cost advantage for Visa Waiver Program countries compared to traditional visa applicants.

Looking Ahead: Implementation and Compliance

As agencies work to implement these new fees, employers should prepare for operational changes that may include:

  • New Payment Systems: Agencies must update technological infrastructure to collect the fees.
  • Revised Forms and Instructions: Application procedures will require updating.
  • Interagency Coordination: The visa integrity fee requires collaboration between DHS (which sets the fee) and DOS (which issues visas and likely collects the fee).

The delay with implementation details suggests the complexity of operationalizing these fee changes. However, given the statutory mandate, employers should expect these fees to take effect sooner rather than later.

Additional Considerations

In this period of implementation uncertainty, employers should consider taking the following steps:

  1. Monitor Official Announcements: Regularly check USCIS, DOS, and Federal Register publications for implementation notices. 
  2. Engage Immigration Counsel: Consult with your immigration attorneys to develop response strategies that account for the change of status versus visa issuance distinction. 
  3. Update Financial Planning: Incorporate higher visa costs into budget projections and employee relocation packages, accounting for all family members and the separate nature of this fee from USCIS petition costs. 
  4. Review Existing Cases: Assess pending visa applications and upcoming travel plans to understand potential fee implications for employees and dependents. 
  5. Develop Strategic Guidance: Create protocols for advising employees about travel timing relative to status changes to minimize unnecessary fee exposure. 
  6. Prepare Communication Materials: Develop explanations for employees about cost increases, including the protection that denied applicants will not pay the fee. 

Conclusion

The visa integrity fee represents a significant shift in U.S. immigration policy, introducing cost increases while creating an unprecedented refund mechanism tied to compliance. The per-person application of the fee means that families will face particularly substantial financial burdens, with costs potentially reaching $1,000 or more for larger families. The distinction between change of status and new visa issuance creates strategic planning opportunities for employers and foreign nationals to minimize fee exposure through careful timing of travel and status changes. Additionally, the protection that denied applicants will not be charged the fee provides some risk mitigation compared to traditional visa application fees.

As we await formal implementation procedures, employers should consider taking proactive steps now to understand and prepare for these changes and minimize disruption when the new fee structure becomes operational.