USCIS Fees – Common Problems and Mistakes

The USCIS Ombudsman has released a recommendation report which urges overhaul of the USCIS fee payment system.  USCIS is considered a “pay-for-service” government agency where petitioners pay for the provision of a particular service.  However, the current system which accepts checks or money orders for most, and credit cards for a few e-filing-enabled forms, has many flaws which in some cases result denial of benefits to petitioners who are otherwise eligible.

Numbers of Fee Rejections

The numbers of fee-based rejections of immigration petitions are  staggering.  Alhough most of the service centers do not keep track of rejections solely based on fees, the potential numbers are alarming.  In December 2008, there were up to 4,000+ possible fee rejections in the California Service Center, 5,000 in the Nebraska, 7,000 in Texas and slightly over 6,000 in Vermont.  The Chicago Lockbox Operations Division,  however, keeps track of the fee rejections and it estimates that 3.2 percent of the 10,000-12,000 filigs per day are rejected for fee-related reasons.  This adds up to 300-400 petitions rejected per day and this is only for the Chicago Lockbox.

Common Mistakes and Problems

There are  few common problems and mistakes which contribute to the majoriry of rejected petitions:

  • No amount written – please make sure you write the exact amount of the fee, USCIS will not write the amount for you;
  • Incorrect amount – verify that the fee is correct and that there are no additional fees, such as biometric, etc.
  • Written and numerical amounts do not match and missing signature – this is most likely an oversight by the check drafter but, unfortunately, it is common;
  • Stale-dated checks – in some cases USCIS would delay the receipting of a petition and will not deposit the check for a number of months and the check will become “stale” – to avoid this, make sure the check is dated as of the date the check is sent to USCIS or shortly in advance;
  • Incorrect payee – most of the USCIS filing fees should be issued to Department of Homeland Security but this can vary and the instructions for each form should be consulted before writing the check;
  • Check or money order not submitted through a U.S. bank or in U.S. dollars – the checks or money orders must be in U.S. dollars and drafted on U.S. bank.

Recommendations

The report has several recommendations for USCIS with which we, at the Capitol Immigration Law Group, agree fully:

  1. Institute a batch filing system that would enable high volume filers to pay USCIS fees online;
  2. Institute an online shopping cart mechanism that would simplify the process of identifying appropriate USCIS forms, calculating related fees, and submitting payments;
  3. Expand the payment options within the e-Filing system to include all USCIS fees; and
  4. Implement additional visual and written aids within current instructions to ensure that payments are submitted correctly.

Additionally, language barriers and complicated instructions sometimes contribute to one or more of the above mistakes.  The Ombundsman urges USCIS to revise its fee collection procedures to address not only the mechanics of the fee collection but also the complexity of the immigration filings system and the applicable fees.

By | Last Updated: April 2nd, 2009| Categories: News|

About the Author: Dimo Michailov

Dimo Michailov
Dimo has over 15 years of experience in US immigration including employment-based immigration benefits, corporate compliance and family based immigration. He represents corporate and individual clients in a wide range of cross-border immigration matters including mobility of key foreign executives and managers, specialized knowledge workers, and foreign nationals with extraordinary ability.

The Capitol Immigration Law Group has been serving the business community for over 15 years and is one of the most widely respected immigration law firms focused solely on U.S. employment-based immigration.   Disclaimer:  we make all efforts to provide timely and accurate information; however, the information in this article may become outdated or may not be applicable to a specific set of facts.  It is not to be construed as legal advice.