DHS Proposes $103,265 Fee for Cap-Subject H-1B Petitions
The Department of Homeland Security has issued a proposed rule that would impose a $103,265 fee on each cap-subject H-1B petition.
2 reports on this incident · first at Aug 25, 2026, 9:21 p.m. ET
Earlier reports
Aug 25, 2026, 9:21 p.m. ETFirst report
DHS Proposes $103,265 Fee for Cap-Subject H-1B Petitions
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has proposed a new fee of $103,265 for each cap-subject H-1B petition, according to a report by the National Law Review. The proposal is part of a proposed rule in an administrative forum, as reported by the outlet.
The proposed rule is currently at the proposed rule stage, and the development is ongoing. Further details have not been disclosed.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
- DHS Proposes $103,265 Fee for Cap-Subject H-1B Petitionsnatlawreview.com
Revision history
- Version 126 Aug 2026, 01:23current
First published.
- Version 126 Aug 2026, 01:21current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.