Trump Admin Imposes $5,000 Apprehension Fee on Migrants Aged 14+

(UNITED STATES) The Trump administration has begun charging a mandatory $5,000 apprehension fee to most migrants aged 14 and over who are arrested after entering the United States without authorization, a sweeping new cost created under President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act and now being applied nationwide.

The fee, grounded in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, known as OBBBA and designated as H.R. 1, is being imposed under a new provision in immigration law, 8 U.S.C. § 1815, which requires people who entered “without inspection” to pay $5,000 “upon apprehension.” The measure applies across the country, not only at the border, and is already in effect, with multiple outlets reporting that it “has started” or “has begun” being collected by U.S. immigration authorities.

U.S. Border Patrol Chief Michael W. Banks publicly announced the policy on December 4, 2025, in a statement on X, underlining how broad the new rule is.

“Under 8 USC §1815, all illegal aliens age 14 or older who entered the United States without inspection will be assessed a $5,000 apprehension fee,” he wrote.

He added:

“This message applies to all illegal aliens — regardless of where they entered, how long they’ve been in the US, their current location, or any ongoing immigration proceedings.”

Under the statute, the trigger for the apprehension fee is being arrested or otherwise apprehended and then determined to have entered the U.S. without authorization and to be inadmissible under immigration law. The fee is assessed at the moment of arrest or apprehension, not after an immigration court ruling. Reporting based on Department of Homeland Security (DHS) explanations describes the charge as mandatory for those who meet the criteria, with no general waiver mechanism mentioned so far.

The law does not limit the fee to recent border crossers. It applies to anyone 14 years or older, regardless of where they crossed, how long they have lived in the country, or whether they already have an ongoing immigration case. That reach means both people arrested soon after crossing the Mexican border and long‑term residents picked up in interior raids could face the same $5,000 bill at the point of arrest.

DHS sources cited in media reports say that if a migrant does not pay the apprehension fee when assessed, the amount becomes “a debt owed to the US government” and that debt may bar the person from legally entering the country or obtaining immigration benefits in the future. DHS has indicated that the penalty will remain on record unless settled, raising the possibility that unpaid fees today could derail visa or immigration applications years later. The department has not publicly detailed how it will track or collect the debts, but has stressed that they will not be wiped away automatically.

The apprehension fee is one part of a much larger set of immigration-related costs and penalties built into OBBBA, which Congress passed and Trump signed into law on July 4, 2025. The administration has framed the law as a tool to both “strengthen the border and discourage illegal entry” and to make the U.S. border “the most secure border in history,” according to Republican officials cited in a Moneycontrol report. Officials describe the apprehension fee as a central piece of that enforcement‑driven funding model.

Alongside the $5,000 charge, OBBBA created a $100 asylum application fee with no fee waiver, the first time the United States has ever charged asylum seekers to file for protection. It also added a recurring $100 “annual asylum fee” for each year an asylum case is pending, and a $250 Special Immigrant Juvenile (SIJ) fee for children seeking protection due to abuse, neglect or abandonment. These new charges have already drawn court challenges. The National Immigration Project’s fee chart notes that OBBBA’s asylum‑related fees are subject to litigation and that the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland issued a preliminary injunction on October 30, 2025, partially pausing the annual asylum fee while the case proceeds.

Separate from OBBBA’s statutory framework but part of the same enforcement push, DHS has rolled out additional charges and penalties. The department previously announced a $1,000 fee on migrants paroled into the U.S. to “institute accountability and prevent rampant fraud of the parole system,” according to DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin in comments to Fox News Digital. DHS has also put in place civil fines of $998 per day, up to $1,800,000 per person, for some people who remain in the U.S. illegally. A lawsuit has been filed on behalf of 21,500 immigrants challenging those penalties, with their lawyers arguing that the affected migrants are attempting to comply with federal law.

At the same time, DHS has experimented with incentives to encourage voluntary departure. One program, advertised by the administration as a “holiday deal of a lifetime,” offers a free flight home and a $1,000 bonus for people who self‑deport, as well as possible forgiveness of civil fines in order to preserve the option of legal return later. Together with the apprehension fee and the parole and overstay fines, the mix of penalties and incentives marks a major shift in how the federal government uses money as a tool of immigration enforcement.

The administration argues that these measures are working. DHS data cited by Moneycontrol state that

“more than 600,000 deportations have taken place since Trump returned to office and nearly 2 million people have left the US voluntarily or through enforcement.”

Tricia McLaughlin told Fox News Digital in October that the administration was

“on pace to shatter historic records” by tallying 600,000 deportations by the end of Trump’s first year back in office.

She also said that “more than two million” people in the U.S. illegally have left the country this year, including 1.6 million who have self-deported, 515,000 deportations, and another 485,000 who were arrested.

Border enforcement numbers along the Mexican frontier are also shifting. NDTV, citing DHS data, reports that Border Patrol made about 7,300 arrests along the Mexican border in November, the lowest monthly figure since the 1960s. Agents have expanded interior enforcement in cities like Los Angeles and Chicago, with operations at car washes, Home Depot parking lots, store lots, and public spaces targeting people believed to be in the country without authorization. Those interior arrests are now squarely within the reach of the $5,000 apprehension fee, which applies nationwide.

For families and individuals with little money, the new charge could have an immediate and lasting impact. Legal experts quoted in the Moneycontrol segment say the apprehension fee could face court challenges, particularly regarding its impact on children and people fleeing danger. They point to scenarios where teenagers picked up during workplace raids or asylum seekers arrested soon after crossing may be presented with a $5,000 bill they cannot pay, with the threat that the unpaid amount will follow them for life as a barrier to any future legal status.

Children’s advocates are especially alarmed by how OBBBA’s fee regime intersects with minors. The group Kids in Need of Defense (KIND), which works with unaccompanied and separated migrant children, is quoted in the Moneycontrol explainer as saying

“places unprecedented and crushing fee on children fleeing abuse and violence”

and warning that many young migrants “simply won’t be able to afford protection under the new rules.” The combination of the $250 SIJ fee and possible exposure to the apprehension fee if they are arrested has fueled fears that some children will give up on formal protection pathways altogether.

Democratic lawmakers have responded by introducing a bill to exempt minors from these fees, arguing that the charges put vulnerable children at greater risk of exploitation and trafficking. While details of that proposal are still emerging, supporters say that children who arrive alone or with smugglers are often already in debt to criminal networks, and adding thousands of dollars in government fees risks pushing them deeper into dangerous arrangements to repay what they owe.

Advocacy and legal groups more broadly argue that OBBBA’s web of charges – from the asylum filing and annual fees to the SIJ fee and now the apprehension fee – imposes what they call “unprecedented and crushing” financial burdens on people who often have nothing when they arrive. They warn that pushing costs higher will not only strain families but may also deter people with valid asylum claims or strong humanitarian cases from coming forward, undermining long‑standing U.S. commitments under refugee and human rights law.

Supporters of the law and of the new apprehension fee counter that tough measures are needed after years of record border crossings. Republican officials cited in the Moneycontrol report say that OBBBA is designed to “strengthen the border and discourage illegal entry” and to help fund a broader crackdown that they argue is finally bringing numbers under control. In their view, the apprehension fee and related penalties are part of a clear message that crossing without authorization will carry steep costs, and that those costs will not vanish even if a person later leaves and seeks to return legally.

Michael Banks has stressed the universal nature of that message. By posting that “this message applies to all illegal aliens — regardless of where they entered, how long they’ve been in the US, their current location, or any ongoing immigration proceedings,” he signaled that no category of migrant – whether a recent border crosser, a long‑term resident picked up years later, or someone with a pending asylum or family petition – is automatically shielded from the apprehension fee. Immigration lawyers say that breadth is likely to feature in any lawsuits aimed directly at 8 U.S.C. § 1815.

The legal landscape is still taking shape. Existing litigation has already forced a partial pause on at least one OBBBA‑created charge, the annual asylum fee, through the October 30, 2025 preliminary injunction in Maryland. Experts expect that challengers to the apprehension fee will argue that imposing a $5,000 charge at the moment of apprehension, with no general waiver system and with lasting consequences for future immigration options, may violate due process or conflict with protections for asylum seekers and children in U.S. and international law.

For now, however, the apprehension fee remains on the books and in force. As interior operations expand in cities like Los Angeles and Chicago and as Border Patrol continues arrests along the Mexican border, more people aged 14 and over who entered without inspection are likely to encounter not only the prospect of detention and removal but also a steep bill that the government says will follow them even if they leave. With Congress, the courts, and the administration all pulling on different parts of the system, the $5,000 apprehension fee created by OBBBA under H.R. 1 has rapidly become a central test of how far the United States will go in using money to shape who can come, who can stay, and who will be locked out in the years ahead.

Information about current immigration enforcement and policy is available from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which oversees Border Patrol, deportations, and many of the programs affected by OBBBA.