Update, September 29, 2026: The comment period closed on September 24, 2026. DHS must review the comments before it can issue a Final ruleThe version of a federal regulation that an agency publishes in the Federal Register after reviewing public comments on a proposed rule. It sets an effective date, which generally falls at least 30 days after publication, and its text is added to the Code of Federal Regulations.See it in the glossary, so the fee remains a proposal and not law unless and until that happens. See our article on the earlier payment for the separate $100,000 proclamation measure.
The Department of Homeland Security published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal RegisterThe daily journal of the U.S. government where proposed and final rules, notices and executive orders are published.See it in the glossary on 25 August 2026, after appearing on public inspection on 24 August. It would establish a new fee of 103,265 dollars on every cap-subject H-1B petition, payable at filing and in addition to all existing Cap-subject and cap-exempt (H-1B)The H-1B category has an annual limit of 65,000 new visas or statuses per fiscal year, plus 20,000 more for people with a U.S. master's degree or higher. Petitions counted toward that limit are cap-subject. Petitions from higher education institutions, their related or affiliated nonprofits, and nonprofit or governmental research organizations are cap-exempt.See it in the glossary fees. The docket is RIN 1615-AD20, CIS No. 2861-26, DHS Docket No. USCIS-2026-0298.
Start with the most important fact: this is a proposal, not law. Nothing changes until DHS reviews comments and issues a final rule.
What it would cover
The fee would apply to petitions filed under the regular 65,000 cap and to those filed under the 20,000 advanced degree exemption. It would be codified at 8 CFR 106.2(a)(3)(xii).
Cap-exempt petitions would not be covered. That exclusion reaches petitions filed by institutions of higher education, nonprofit research organizations and governmental research organizations.
If finalized as written, the fee could apply to cap-selected petitions as early as 1 April 2027.
How DHS arrived at the number
The fee is not calculated from the cost of adjudicating an H-1B petition. DHS divided roughly 8.78 billion dollars in projected annual immigration-system costs across the federal government by the 85,000 annual cap numbers.
Most of the projected revenue would fund agencies other than USCIS. DHS proposes allocating it as follows: USCIS 34.2 percent, about 3.0 billion dollars; EOIR 33.7 percent, about 2.96 billion; the Department of Labor 13.8 percent, about 1.21 billion; ICE 11.9 percent, about 1.05 billion; the State Department 5.5 percent, about 484 million; and CBP 0.9 percent, about 76.2 million.
For scale, the proposed fee is more than one hundred times the current base filing fee for an H-1B petition. If finalized as written it would be the largest fee ever imposed on an immigration benefit request in the agency’s history.
What DHS concedes
The agency’s own regulatory analysis estimates a significant economic impact on 11,051 small entities, which it puts at 76 percent of the small entities that filed cap-subject petitions in fiscal year 2025, and identifies no alternative that would reduce that burden.
The proposal does not address whether the fee would be returned if a petition is denied, rejected or withdrawn.
The comment window
DHS opened a thirty-day public comment period on publication, closing 24 September 2026. After reviewing comments the agency will decide whether to finalize, revise or withdraw the rule. Anyone may comment through the federal docket.
This proposal is separate from the 100,000 dollar payment established by Presidential proclamationA formal statement from the President addressed to the public. In immigration, proclamations are often issued under INA 212(f), which lets the President suspend or restrict the entry of noncitizens when the President finds their entry would be detrimental to the interests of the United States. The Supreme Court read that authority broadly in Trump v. Hawaii (2018), though courts have said it cannot override other parts of the INA.See it in the glossary in 2025, which a federal court vacated in June 2026 and which is currently unenforced. We cover that litigation separately.