2026年9月9日起H-1B/L-1延期全面加收$4,000–$4,500生物识别费：新规详解、影响分析与华人申请人应对策略 Starting September 9, 2026: $4,000–$4,500 Biometric Fee Now Applies to ALL H-1B/L-1 Extensions by Covered Employers — Full Analysis & Strategy Guide

一句话核心总结（TL;DR）：2026年8月10日，DHS/CBP发布最终规则（8 CFR Part 106，RIN 1651-AB48），2026年9月9日生效。核心变化：对于"受管辖雇主"（covered employers——在美国雇用50名以上员工且超过50%持H-1B或L-1身份），9-11生物识别费（H-1B $4,000 / L-1 $4,500）的适用范围从"初始申请和换雇主延期"扩展到"所有延期申请"——包括不换雇主的同一雇主延期（continuation of employment）。这意味着：以前同一雇主为同一H-1B/L-1员工延期不需要交这笔费用，现在每次延期都要交。一名H-1B员工在6年最长停留期内通常每3年续签一次，将多次产生这笔额外费用。影响最大的是IT外包公司（如Infosys、TCS、Wipro等），但对绿卡排期中需要反复续签H-1B的中国和印度申请人也有间接影响。该费用适用于2027年9月30日前提交的申请。新未名律所帮助大华府DMV地区的H-1B/L-1持有人和雇主理解新规并制定应对策略。

TL;DR (English): On August 10, 2026, DHS/CBP published a final rule (8 CFR Part 106, effectiveSeptember 9, 2026) expanding the 9-11 Biometric Fee ($4,000 for H-1B / $4,500 for L-1) to all extension petitions filed by "covered employers" (50+ U.S. employees, >50% in H-1B/L-1 status)—including same-employer extensions that were previously exempt. Previously, a covered employer extending an H-1B/L-1 worker without changing employers did not owe this fee;now every extension triggers it. Over a 6-year H-1B maximum stay with typical 3-year renewals, this creates multiple additional $4,000 charges per employee. IT outsourcing firms are most affected, but the rule also indirectly impacts Chinese and Indian H-1B holders stuck in green card backlogs requiring repeated renewals. The fee applies to petitions filed through September 30, 2027. New Weiming Law Group helps H-1B/L-1 holders and employers in the DMV area understand and navigate this new rule.

新未名律所立足美国首都华盛顿地区，服务大华府DMV地区、马里兰(Maryland)和弗吉尼亚(Virginia)的华人、留学生、博士后及高科技/科研人员。以下是我们对DHS/CBP于2026年8月10日发布的《9-11 Response and Biometric Entry-Exit Fee for H-1B and L-1 Visas》最终规则的全面解读——这项规则影响每一位H-1B和L-1签证持有人以及其雇主。

New Weiming Law Group, based in Washington D.C. and serving the DMV, Maryland, and Virginia Chinese community, provides the following comprehensive analysis of the DHS/CBP Final Rule on the 9-11 Biometric Fee for H-1B and L-1 visas published August 10, 2026—a rule affecting every H-1B and L-1 holder and their employer.

1. 新规到底改了什么？之前和现在有什么区别？ / What Does the New Rule Change? What's Different Now?

用简单的话说：以前，如果你在同一家covered employer工作、雇主为你延期H-1B（不换公司），雇主不需要交这笔$4,000的9-11生物识别费。现在需要交了。这就是这条规则唯一的实质性变化——但这个变化对特定类型的雇主和员工影响重大。

In plain language: Previously, if you stayed with the same covered employer and they filed an H-1B extension for you (no employer change), the employer did not owe the $4,000 9-11 Biometric Fee. Now they do. That is the sole substantive change—but its impact on certain employers and employees is significant.

2. 什么是"受管辖雇主"（Covered Employer）？我的雇主算吗？ / What Is a "Covered Employer"? Does My Employer Qualify?

这是最关键的判断——如果你的雇主不是covered employer，这条新规则对你没有任何影响。

This is the single most critical determination—if your employer is not a covered employer, this rule does not affect you at all.

• 两个条件必须同时满足：
  ① 在美国雇用50名或以上员工（full-time and part-time, "in the aggregate"）；
  ② 超过50%的美国员工持有H-1B、L-1A或L-1B非移民身份。
• 典型的covered employers：大型IT外包/咨询公司（如Infosys、TCS、Wipro、Cognizant等）——这些公司员工中H-1B/L-1比例往往远超50%；
• 不太可能是covered employers的：大多数大学、医院、大型科技公司（Google、Microsoft、Amazon、Meta等）、政府机构、NIH/FDA等——它们虽然雇用大量H-1B员工，但H-1B/L-1通常不超过总员工的50%；
• 中小企业：少于50名员工的直接豁免。有50名以上员工但H-1B/L-1未超过50%的也不受影响。DHS估计最多约16%的提交H-1B/L-1申请的小企业可能受影响，最少为0%。

Two conditions must both be met: (1) 50+ employees in the U.S. (full-time and part-time, "in the aggregate"); and (2) more than 50% in H-1B, L-1A, or L-1B status. Typical covered employers: large IT outsourcing/consulting firms (Infosys, TCS, Wipro, Cognizant). Unlikely covered employers: most universities, hospitals, major tech companies (Google, Microsoft, Amazon), government agencies, NIH/FDA—their H-1B/L-1 percentage rarely exceeds 50% of total staff. Companies with fewer than 50 employees are automatically exempt.

3. DHS为什么要做这个改变？法律依据是什么？ / Why Did DHS Make This Change? What Is the Legal Basis?

DHS引用了最高法院的Loper Bright Enters. v. Raimondo, 603 U.S. 369 (2024)案——这个推翻Chevron deference（谢弗伦尊重原则）的里程碑判决。在Loper Bright之后，法院不再默认尊重行政机构对模糊法规的"合理解读"，而是要求确定法规的"最佳解读"（best reading）。

具体的法律论证逻辑：

• 2010年的旧法（Pub. L. 111-230）只说"the filing fee and fraud prevention and detection feeshall be increased"——DHS解释为：只有在Fraud Fee适用时（即初始申请和换雇主延期）才收附加费；
• 2015年的新法（Pub. L. 114-113）做了两处关键修改：加入了"including an application for an extension of such status"（包括延期申请），并加入了"combined"（合并）一词；
• DHS现在认为："including an extension"是实质性修改——国会刻意将费用范围扩展到所有延期；"combined"是澄清性修改——确认每份申请只收一次；
• 当Fraud Fee不适用时（同雇主延期无需缴纳Fraud Fee），"合并的申请费和Fraud Fee"等于申请费+ $0+ 对应的9-11生物识别费——即申请费 + $4,000（H-1B）或 $4,500（L-1）。

DHS also cited the fact that actual collections fell dramatically below Congressional Budget Office estimates ($420M/year projected vs. actual highs of only $158M in FY2016declining to $25.6M in FY2025), attributing the shortfall primarily to the prior exclusion of same-employer extensions. The rule is framed as correcting a prior misinterpretation, not creating new authority.

4. 对H-1B持有人有什么实际影响？尤其是绿卡排期中的中国/印度申请人？ / What Is the Practical Impact on H-1B Holders — Especially Chinese/Indian Applicants in Green Card Backlogs?

直接影响——费用由雇主支付：

• 根据法律，9-11生物识别费由雇主（petitioner）支付，不是员工。而且H-1B雇主被明确禁止通过减少员工薪资来抵消这类申请相关费用；
• 对于在covered employer工作的H-1B员工，一名H-1B员工在6年最长停留期内通常每3年续签一次，每次延期将新增$4,000。如果因为I-140已批准（AC21）而获得第七年及以上的H-1B延期，则需要更多次续签——每次都要$4,000。

间接影响——对绿卡排期中的中国申请人尤为重要：

• 中国出生的EB-2/EB-3申请人面临较长的绿卡排期（priority date backlog），可能需要在H-1B身份上停留多年甚至十几年。如果雇主是covered employer，每次H-1B延期额外$4,000的费用累积下来金额可观——雇主可能在某些情况下考虑是否继续承担多次续签费用，从而间接影响员工的就业稳定性；
• 但DHS的立场是：H-1B年度申请量长期超过65,000的年度上限（加上20,000硕士豁免），说明需求远超供给。DHS不认为这$4,000会改变雇主的雇佣决策，认为这相对于工资、搬迁等总成本是"最低额外支出"；
• DHS还强调：这条规则不改变H-1B的年度上限（65,000+20,000）、不改变L-1的发放数量（L-1无上限）、不影响绿卡排期、不改变签证审批标准。

Directly, the fee is paid by the employer, not the employee. H-1B employers are prohibited from reducing wages to recoup petition-related fees. Indirectly, for Chinese-born EB-2/EB-3 applicants facing lengthy priority date backlogs who need repeated H-1B renewals, the cumulative $4,000-per-extension cost may factor into some employers' decisions about continued sponsorship. However, DHS maintains that H-1B demand chronically exceeds the 65,000+20,000 annual cap, and that this fee is minimal relative to total employment costs. The rule does not change H-1B/L-1 caps, green card backlogs, or visa adjudication standards.

5. 对IT外包公司的影响最大？具体影响数据是什么？ / Are IT Outsourcing Firms Most Affected? What Are the Numbers?

是的——这条规则的实际设计目标就是这类公司。

• 以Infosys、TCS、Wipro、Cognizant等为代表的IT外包公司，其美国员工中H-1B/L-1比例往往远超50%——完全符合covered employer的定义；
• 这些公司每年申请大量H-1B延期（同一雇主续签），过去这些延期不需要缴纳9-11生物识别费——现在每一次延期都要缴纳$4,000；
• 数据对比：2018-2025年间，仅27%的covered employer H-1B申请需要缴纳这项费用。如果新规则在同期生效，这个比例将上升到75%——意味着近三倍的申请将被收费；
• 预计新增收入：FY2026约$3,790万+ FY2027约$4,010万 = 两年合计约$7,800万（未折现）。

DHS估计新规将使覆盖的H-1B申请从约27%增加到约75%。这一变化可能促使这些公司：

• 重新评估在美国的劳动力结构；
• 加速雇用美国公民或绿卡持有人以降低H-1B/L-1比例至50%以下；
• 将部分职位转移至海外。

The rule's practical target is IT outsourcing firms whose U.S. workforce is overwhelmingly H-1B/L-1. The covered petition percentage jumps from 27% to 75%. Projected additional revenue: ~$37.9M in FY2026 + ~$40.1M in FY2027 = ~$78M over two years. These firms may restructure U.S. staffing, accelerate domestic hiring to drop below the 50% threshold, or offshore more positions.

6. 费用去向：9-11生物识别出入境系统是什么？ / Where Does the Money Go? What Is the 9-11 Biometric Entry-Exit System?

• 50%存入9-11生物识别账户（上限$10亿），由DHS/CBP用于部署生物识别出入境系统；
• 50%存入美国国库一般基金；
• 资金主要支持旅客验证服务（TVS）——CBP生物识别出入境计划的核心面部比对系统：验证旅客身份与旅行证件匹配、打击恐怖主义和身份欺诈、防止签证逾期滞留、促进无接触旅行；
• 截至2025年10月的成效：在美国机场拦截87名冒名顶替者；在陆地入境口岸拦截2,158名冒名顶替者；通过出境面部识别确认超过516,601名逾期滞留者。

50% goes to the 9-11 Biometric Account (capped at $1B) for CBP's biometric entry-exit system;50% to the general Treasury. Funds support the Traveler Verification Service (TVS)—CBP's core facial comparison matching system. As of October 2025: 87 imposters intercepted at airports, 2,158 at land pedestrian entry, and 516,601+ overstays confirmed via facial biometric matching at exit.

7. 实际收到的费用为什么远低于国会预期？ / Why Have Actual Collections Fallen Far Below Congressional Projections?

DHS认为收入大幅低于预期的主要原因不是COVID-19（虽然COVID确实导致FY2020-21下降），而是此前未对同雇主延期收费——大量H-1B/L-1延期申请被排除在收费范围之外。新规旨在纠正这一"错误解读"以满足国会的资金意图。

DHS attributes the massive shortfall primarily to the prior exclusion of same-employer extensions—not COVID-19 alone (though COVID contributed to FY2020-21 declines). The rule aims to correct this "misinterpretation" to meet congressional funding intent.

8. 后Chevron时代的法律解释先例转变意味着什么？ / What Does the Post-Chevron Interpretive Shift Mean?

这条规则值得注意的一个重要维度是：DHS引用Loper Bright案推翻了自己之前的法律解释。这在移民法领域具有重要的先例意义：

• 后Chevron时代：行政机构不再可以仅凭"法规模糊"就维持自己的"合理解读"——现在必须证明自己的解读是"最佳解读"（best reading）；
• DHS主动承认旧解读有误：本案中DHS不是被法院推翻，而是主动在Loper Bright框架下重新审视并改变了自己的解读——这表明行政机构正在内部化后Chevron的法律标准；
• 对未来移民法规的影响：这一逻辑可能被用于重新解释其他移民法规中的模糊条款——例如H-1B的"specialty occupation"定义、L-1B的"specialized knowledge"标准、或者影响NIW国家利益豁免和EB-1A杰出人才的相关法规解读。

DHS invoked Loper Bright to overturn its own prior interpretation—not because a court mandated it, but proactively. In the post-Chevron era, agencies must identify the "best reading" rather than merely a "reasonable" one. This interpretive framework may be applied to reinterpret other ambiguous immigration provisions—potentially affecting H-1B "specialty occupation" definitions, L-1B "specialized knowledge" standards, or regulations impacting NIW and EB-1A adjudications.

9. 这条规则不改变什么？ / What Does This Rule NOT Change?

10. H-1B/L-1持有人和雇主现在应该怎么做？ / What Should H-1B/L-1 Holders and Employers Do Now?

新未名律所建议以下行动：

• 第一步：确认你的雇主是否是covered employer。这是最重要的一步。如果不是，你可以安心——这条规则不影响你。确认方式：查看雇主的美国员工总数和H-1B/L-1比例（可从HR或immigration counsel处确认）；
• 第二步（如果是covered employer）：评估绿卡路径加速的紧迫性。如果你在EB-2/EB-3绿卡排期中，每次H-1B延期的额外$4,000成本会增加雇主的累计支出。虽然费用由雇主承担，但这是一个好时机与雇主讨论是否可以加速NIW国家利益豁免或EB-1A杰出人才的申请——这些类别不需要雇主担保和PERM劳工证，EB-1排期也更短。成功的I-140批准可以让你在H-1B第六年后继续延期（AC21），同时锁定优先日；
• 第三步：如果你计划在9月9日后延期H-1B/L-1，提前确认费用。在2026年9月9日之前提交的延期申请仍按旧规则——不需要缴纳这笔额外费用。但不要为了省这$4,000而提交不成熟的延期申请（在PA-2026-05新政策下，不完整的申请可能被直接拒绝）；
• 第四步：考虑双重意图（Dual Intent）路径优化。H-1B和L-1签证本身具有双重意图（Dual Intent）——允许同时追求绿卡。利用这一优势，同步推进PERM、NIW、EB-1A等移民类别，减少对非移民身份续签的长期依赖；
• 第五步：咨询靠谱华人移民律师。每位申请人的雇主类型、绿卡排期进度、职业背景不同，最优策略因人而异。

Step 1: Verify if your employer is a covered employer—if not, you are unaffected. Step 2 (if covered): Evaluate accelerating green card pathways—NIW or EB-1A (no employer sponsorship or PERM required, shorterEB-1 backlog). Step 3: If extending H-1B/L-1 after September 9, confirm fee requirements; extensions filed before that date are still under old rules. Step 4: Leverage H-1B/L-1 dual intent to simultaneously pursue PERM, NIW, or EB-1A, reducing long-term dependence on nonimmigrant renewals. Step 5: Consult a qualified immigration attorney—optimal strategy varies by employer type, green card backlog progress, and professional background.

无论你是H-1B、L-1、O-1签证持有人计划延期或换雇主，还是雇主需要评估covered employer身份和新费用影响，或者你正在考虑NIW国家利益豁免、EB-1A杰出人才、EB-2/3PERM职业移民、I-485调整身份、F-1身份维护或J-1豁免，欢迎联系新未名律所的靠谱华人移民律师团队。我们在美国首都华盛顿地区、大华府DMV地区、马里兰(Maryland)和弗吉尼亚(Virginia)拥有超过17年的H-1B/L-1延期、I-140/I-485、PERM、NIW、EB-1A全流程实务经验，帮你在复杂的移民法规变化中做出最优决策。

Whether you are an H-1B, L-1, or O-1 holder planning an extension or employer change, an employer needing to assess covered employer status and new fee impacts, or an individual considering NIW, EB-1A, EB-2/3 PERM, I-485, F-1, J-1 waiver, or other immigration pathways, contact New Weiming Law Group. With over 17 years of H-1B/L-1 extension, I-140/I-485, PERM, NIW, and EB-1A experience across Washington D.C., the DMV, Maryland, and Virginia, we help you make optimal decisions amid complex regulatory changes.

免责声明 / Disclaimer：本文基于DHS/CBP于2026年8月10日在Federal Register发布的最终规则（91 FR 51360，RIN 1651-AB48）撰写，仅提供美国移民法的一般性信息解读，不构成针对具体案件的法律意见，也不保证任何申请结果。具体费用适用情况取决于雇主是否满足covered employer的定义以及申请类型。请以USCIS/CBP最新官方指南为准，并咨询合格的美国移民律师进行个案分析。This article is based on the DHS/CBP Final Rule published in the Federal Register on August 10, 2026 (91 FR 51360, RIN 1651-AB48). It provides general U.S. immigration information only, not case-specific legal advice, and does not guarantee any outcome. Whether the fee applies depends on covered employer status and petition type. Consult the latest official USCIS/CBP guidance and a qualified immigration attorney for individual analysis.