DHS proposes $103,265 fee for cap-subject H-1B petitions

The Department of Homeland Security is proposing an additional $103,265 charge for each cap-subject H-1B petition, creating a potential six-figure filing cost for employers seeking workers through the annual visa cap.

DHS published the proposal on August 25, 2026. It is a notice of proposed rulemaking, not a final fee, so nothing changes immediately solely because the proposal was published. The public comment period runs through September 24, 2026.

Which petitions would face the charge?

The proposed fee would apply to H-1B petitions subject to the annual cap, including petitions eligible for the separate 20,000 advanced-degree exemption. A worker’s U.S. master’s degree would not, by itself, avoid the proposed fee if the petition remains subject to the cap.

The petitioner—the employer or other entity filing the petition—would pay the charge when filing. DHS proposes that it be added to existing H-1B filing and statutory fees, as well as any other applicable payment obligation.

The proposal is not limited to workers entering the United States from abroad. Its text focuses on whether a petition is cap-subject, rather than on whether the case involves consular processing or a change of status.

Who would be excluded?

Cap-exempt H-1B petitions would not be subject to this proposed fee. That category includes many petitions connected to institutions of higher education, nonprofit research organizations and governmental research organizations.

The distinction matters because an employer’s nonprofit status alone would not determine whether the charge applies. The key question would be whether the particular H-1B petition is subject to the annual cap.

Why DHS says it wants the money

DHS says the proposed charge would create dedicated revenue to recover part of the federal government’s costs of administering the lawful immigration system. The agency’s proposed framework covers work by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the Justice Department’s Executive Office for Immigration Review, the State Department and the Labor Department.

The rule describes potential support for adjudications, fraud detection, national-security vetting, information-technology modernization, immigration-court proceedings, consular processing, labor standards enforcement and inspection activities. Those allocations are DHS’s proposed revenue model, not guaranteed appropriations or final spending decisions.

How large could the impact be?

DHS estimates that 85,000 cap-subject filings would pay the charge annually. At $103,265 per petition, the agency projects $8,777,525,000 in annual revenue—about $8.8 billion. That is a projection based on assumed filing volume, not money already collected.

The agency also estimates that 11,051 small entities would experience a significant economic impact. That figure represents 76 percent of the 14,541 small entities DHS identified among affected cap-subject petitioners; it is not a count of every employer that could face the fee.

A six-figure additional cost could weigh more heavily on smaller companies and organizations deciding whether to pursue a cap-subject hire. It could also enter hiring and budget decisions in fields that commonly use H-1B workers, including technology, health care, education and research. The proposal itself does not establish how many employers would abandon petitions or how wages and hiring would change.

What happens next?

Employers, workers, schools, professional groups and others may submit comments through Regulations.gov by September 24, 2026. Comments must identify DHS Docket No. USCIS-2026-0298. Readers should watch for a final rule, implementation instructions and possible litigation.

The proposed fee is separate from an earlier $100,000 H-1B payment policy that has been challenged in court. A First Circuit ruling issued on July 24, 2026, addressed litigation over that earlier policy. The new DHS proposal is a different action and remains subject to the rulemaking process.

Sources

Look for updates to this story

Discover more from Interactive News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.