U.S. Adds 12 Countries to Visa Bond Program, Putting B-1/B-2 Travelers at Bond-Breach Risk

(UNITED STATES) — The U.S. government expanded its visa bond program to 12 more countries, widening a B-1/B-2 visitor visa pilot that can require some travelers to post a refundable bond before they receive a visa.

As of March 18, 2026, the State Department’s “Countries Subject to Visa Bonds” page lists 50 countries whose nationals may be required to post a bond as a condition of receiving a B-1/B-2 business or tourist visa. The 12 countries newly listed with an implementation date of April 2, 2026 are Cambodia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Grenada, Lesotho, Mauritius, Mongolia, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Papua New Guinea, Seychelles, and Tunisia.

The move expands an existing pilot rather than creating a new policy. It widens a 12-month program created by the State Department’s August 5, 2025 temporary final rule under INA section 221(g)(3).

That pilot allows consular officers to require bonds from certain B-1/B-2 applicants from countries identified for high overstay rates, deficient screening and vetting information, or citizenship-by-investment concerns. In practice, the expansion reaches beyond visa pricing and into travel rules, post-entry compliance and future immigration planning.

The measure applies to B-1/B-2 business and tourist visas, not to all nonimmigrant categories. That distinction matters because the underlying statute can also reach F student visas, but the current pilot does not.

The Federal Register notice says the government did not include F-1 applicants in this pilot because student stays usually last too long to complete the bond cycle during the program window. For that reason, the program operates as a visitor-visa enforcement tool rather than a direct new filing requirement for students or workers.

Applicants from listed countries do not automatically owe a bond. A consular officer decides whether a bond is required and which of the three available tiers applies based on the applicant’s individual circumstances.

That discretion means two applicants from the same country may not receive the same decision. It also means a bond request is not the same as visa approval.

Posting a bond does not guarantee that a visa will be issued. The State Department also warns applicants not to pay unless a consular officer tells them to do so, and says money paid outside the official process will not be protected.

The bond mechanism becomes a travel issue as soon as a visa holder makes plans to enter and leave the United States. Under current State Department guidance, bond holders must use commercial air ports of entry, including CBP preclearance locations, for both entry and departure.

That bars charter air, general aviation, land crossings and sea ports under the bonded travel structure. A traveler who expected to drive in from Canada or Mexico, or to leave on a cruise, would have to change those plans.

The airport-only rule can shape itinerary design for business trips, family visits and regional travel. It also affects how travelers protect their refund, because proper departure recording sits at the center of how the bond is canceled and returned.

The State Department says the money is automatically returned when DHS records a timely departure, when the visa expires unused, or when the traveler is denied admission at the port of entry. Those are the main paths to getting the funds back without further dispute.

A bond-breach risk emerges when post-entry conduct falls outside those conditions. The government says a bond-breach review may be triggered by departing after the authorized stay, remaining in the United States beyond the authorized period, or applying to adjust out of nonimmigrant status, including claiming asylum.

That makes the visa bond program more than a deposit against overstaying. It ties the bond to compliance after arrival, including how the government views later immigration steps taken from inside the United States.

For travelers, that distinction can carry financial consequences long after the visa interview. A bonded B-1/B-2 visa holder who later changes plans could face a separate review over the bond even where another immigration benefit might otherwise be available.

The requirement also follows passport nationality rather than residence. The State Department says it applies to “any citizen or national traveling on a passport issued by one of these countries” and that it applies “regardless of place of application.”

That means residence abroad does not remove the possibility of being subject to the pilot. A national of a listed country can still face a bond requirement while applying outside the home country if that person uses a passport from one of the listed states.

The reach matters for globally mobile families and professionals. Students’ parents, business travelers and relatives planning graduation visits may face the same bond analysis whether they apply in their home country or in cities such as London, Dubai, Toronto or New Delhi.

The expansion also carries wider immigration implications even though it is limited to visitor visas. The official rule says the statute can reach F classifications, while the government excluded F-1 visas from this pilot for administrative reasons tied to the duration of student stays.

That leaves student visas outside the current rollout, but it also shows that the government has built an operating system for visa bonds. The use of Pay.gov and Form I-352 shows the payment and processing mechanics are already in place.

For B-1/B-2 travelers, the bond-breach language may matter later if they pursue another path after entry. Visitor visa holders sometimes marry, change plans or seek another immigration benefit, and the current framework attaches added risk to that shift when the original trip involved a bond.

The government’s own rationale for choosing countries is narrower than a blanket worldwide visitor rule. The 2025 temporary final rule says the pilot uses countries identified for high B-1/B-2 overstay rates, deficient screening and vetting information, or certain citizenship-by-investment situations.

That rationale draws on DHS overstay reporting. The rule says country overstay rates for the pilot are based on the DHS FY 2023 Overstay Report, and the State Department says current overstay rates are based on DHS B-1/B-2 overstay data.

Officials are framing the policy as data-driven and country-specific, not as a universal requirement for all B-1/B-2 applicants. Still, the expansion to 50 countries broadens the group of travelers who may now have to account for the possibility of a bond before they book a trip.

For prospective applicants, the financial question is immediate. A traveler from one of the listed countries may need to budget for a substantial refundable bond if a consular officer directs payment as part of the visa process.

Yet the practical effects do not end there. Travelers also have to plan around airport-only entry and exit rules, preserve evidence of timely departure through the required channels, and think carefully about how later changes in immigration plans could affect the bond.

That makes the program relevant not only to people who expect to overstay, but also to people who intend short lawful visits and assume their travel patterns can remain flexible. Under the bonded structure, routine choices such as crossing a land border or taking a cruise can carry compliance consequences.

The policy also changes how consular discretion operates for nationals of listed countries. Because officers decide case by case whether to require a bond and which tier applies, the pilot introduces another screening layer before a visa is issued.

Applicants therefore face two separate hurdles rather than one. They must satisfy the officer on eligibility for the B-1/B-2 visa itself, and they may also have to satisfy any bond condition that officer imposes.

For families and business travelers, that can shape whether a trip goes forward at all. The bond may be refundable, but it still has to be posted up front if ordered, and the visa can still be refused afterward.

The same framework may also affect how applicants weigh different visa categories. The current pilot does not include F-1 student visas, but a bonded B-1/B-2 visitor visa should not be treated as a neutral bridge for study, work or long-term immigration plans.

That is where the bond-breach risk becomes central. Conduct after entry, rather than only the visa interview, can determine whether the money is returned automatically or moves into review.

By adding 12 countries and bringing the list to 50, the United States has widened a consular risk-control tool that reaches from the visa window to the airport gate and beyond. The expansion changes who may apply, how bonded visitors must travel, and how later immigration choices may be judged once the trip has already begun.