I-9 Fines in 2026: Penalty Ranges and How a Self Audit Reduces Exposure

I-9 paperwork violations currently carry civil fines of $288 to $2,861 per form, and knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers runs from $716 to $28,619 per worker. Why the 2025 amounts still apply in 2026, how ICE sets a fine, and how to run a self audit without making things worse.

Worksite Compliance7 min read read
Maeve Healy, Esq.
Lead Supervisory Associate Attorney: Complex Federal & State Litigation
All Insights by Maeve Healy
Accurate as of

I-9 paperwork violations currently carry civil fines of $288 to $2,861 per form, and knowingly hiring or continuing to employ an unauthorized worker carries $716 to $5,724 per worker for a first offense, rising to $8,586 to $28,619 for a third or later offense. These are the 2025 inflation adjusted amounts, which remain in effect in 2026 because the federal government made no 2026 adjustment, and ICE sets the actual fine within each range using the error rate and five statutory factors.

Related FAQ: What are the penalties for I-9 violations?

What are the current I-9 penalty ranges?

The Department of Homeland Security last adjusted these amounts in its January 2, 2025 rule (90 FR 1), which amended 8 CFR 274a.10 and 8 CFR 280.53. The rule applies to penalties assessed after January 2, 2025 for violations occurring after November 2, 2015. The same figures appear in the Justice Department's table at 28 CFR 85.5, which governs penalties an Administrative Law Judge orders at OCAHO.

Violation (8 U.S.C. 1324a)MinimumMaximum
Paperwork violation, per form$288$2,861
Knowing hire or continuing to employ, first offense, per worker$716$5,724
Knowing hire or continuing to employ, second offense, per worker$5,724$14,308
Knowing hire or continuing to employ, third or later offense, per worker$8,586$28,619
Requiring an indemnity bond from a worker, per violation (fixed amount)$2,861$2,861

Paperwork penalties are counted per form, so they multiply quickly. A workforce of 200 with a 40 percent error rate has 80 potentially fineable forms before any factor is applied.

Criminal exposure is separate. An employer engaged in a pattern or practice of knowing hire violations faces criminal fines and imprisonment under 8 U.S.C. 1324a(f).

Why are the 2025 amounts still in effect in 2026?

The inflation adjustment statute normally requires a new adjustment each January. On April 17, 2026, the Office of Management and Budget issued Memorandum M-26-11 directing agencies not to make 2026 adjustments and to "continue using the 2025 civil monetary penalty levels," because October 2025 CPI data was not produced during the government shutdown. The Justice Department confirmed on July 15, 2026 (91 FR 43405) that it will continue using its 2025 levels. We have found no 2026 DHS adjustment in the Federal Register, and under the OMB memorandum none is expected. The next change, if any, would come with a 2027 adjustment.

What are the document abuse penalties?

The Justice Department's Immigrant and Employee Rights Section (IER) enforces the anti-discrimination provision, 8 U.S.C. 1324b. Asking a worker for more or different documents than the rules require, or rejecting valid documents, because of citizenship, immigration status, or national origin is "document abuse." Under 28 CFR 68.52(d)(1)(xii) and the current amounts at 28 CFR 85.5 (90 FR 29445, July 3, 2025, still in effect for 2026):

Violation (8 U.S.C. 1324b)MinimumMaximum
Unfair documentary practices (document abuse), per individual$236$2,364
Citizenship or national origin discrimination, first order, per individual$590$4,730
Second order, per individual$4,730$11,823
Subsequent order, per individual$7,093$23,647

This matters for self audits: an audit that targets certain employees, or demands new documents from them, can create IER exposure while trying to fix ICE exposure.

How does ICE decide the fine?

ICE's inspection overview describes a two step method.

  1. Base fine from the error rate. ICE divides the number of forms with substantive or uncorrected technical violations by the number of forms the employer was required to have. The resulting percentage, together with whether this is a first, second, or later offense, sets the base fine within the statutory range.
  2. Five statutory factors. Under 8 U.S.C. 1324a(e)(5), ICE then weighs: the size of the business, the good faith of the employer, the seriousness of the violations, whether unauthorized workers were involved, and the history of previous violations. ICE states each factor can move the base fine up 5 percent, down 5 percent, or leave it unchanged, with a cumulative adjustment capped at 25 percent either way.

Two points follow. First, the error rate drives the base fine, so reducing errors before an inspection lowers the starting number. Second, good faith is one of only five factors, and it is the one an employer controls.

Since March 16, 2026, ICE treats roughly fifteen categories of errors that used to be technical, and curable, as substantive violations. Our analysis of that reclassification lists them. For those errors, the ten business day correction window after an inspection no longer helps; only fixing them beforehand does.

How does a self audit reduce exposure?

A self audit does not immunize an employer. The joint ICE and Justice Department guidance says plainly that "penalties for violations... may be imposed even if an internal audit has been performed." What it does is lower the error rate ICE finds, remove curable problems before the clock starts, and create a record of good faith.

Follow the agencies' rules for corrections:

  1. Choose forms neutrally. Review all forms, or a sample "selected based on neutral and non-discriminatory criteria." Never select by citizenship, national origin, or appearance.
  2. Correct transparently. For errors in Section 1, the employee should "draw a line through the incorrect information; enter the correct or omitted information; and initial and date the correction." The employer does the same for Section 2. Use the current date.
  3. Never backdate. The guidance states an employer "should not backdate the Form I-9." A missing form is completed now, on the current edition, dated now, with the actual hire date entered.
  4. Do not conceal. USCIS tells employers not to "conceal any changes made on the form." If correction fluid was used in the past, attach a signed and dated note explaining what happened.
  5. Attach an explanation. For each corrected or newly completed form, attach "a signed and dated explanation of the corrective action taken."
  6. Do not ask for specific documents. If reverification or a new form is needed, the employee chooses which acceptable documents to present.

A self audit run through counsel can also be structured to protect privileged analysis, which matters if the results later become relevant in an inspection.

Status, stated precisely

  1. DHS penalty amounts: 2025 adjustment, 90 FR 1 (Jan. 2, 2025), 8 CFR 274a.10. In effect; no 2026 DHS adjustment published.
  2. DOJ amounts (OCAHO and IER): 28 CFR 85.5 as adjusted by 90 FR 29445 (July 3, 2025). In effect; DOJ notice of no 2026 adjustment, 91 FR 43405 (July 15, 2026).
  3. OMB Memorandum M-26-11 (Apr. 17, 2026): agencies to keep 2025 levels for 2026.
  4. ICE reclassification of technical errors: effective March 16, 2026, per ICE's inspection guidance (see our September 11 analysis).

What to do

  1. Run a full or neutrally sampled internal audit now, using the March 2026 classifications.
  2. Correct errors transparently: line through, correct, initial, current date, attached explanation. Never backdate.
  3. Complete any missing forms on the current edition, dated today.
  4. Train anyone who completes Section 2 not to request specific documents.
  5. Keep the audit file (scope, method, corrections, explanations) as evidence of good faith.
  6. If a Notice of Inspection arrives, follow a strict three day process; see our Notice of Inspection checklist.

Related reading

Sources

Accurate as of September 25, 2026.

Related questions

Maeve Healy, Esq.
Written by
Maeve Healy, Esq.
Lead Supervisory Associate Attorney: Complex Federal & State Litigation

A former prosecutor and formidable trial attorney, Maeve commands complex federal and state litigation with an insider's mastery of courtroom and prosecutorial strategy.

This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice, nor does it create an attorney-client relationship. Immigration law and agency policy change frequently; the analysis above reflects our understanding as of the date noted. Readers should consult counsel regarding their specific circumstances.