When you send a client to Kinzy Law, the relationship you have built with that client is respected. The engagement is scoped to the referred matter, the client is returned to you for everything else, and you are kept informed to the extent the client authorizes. Conflicts are checked before any substantive conversation takes place.

Where the rules permit and the client consents in writing, fee divisions are available under Texas Disciplinary Rule 1.04(f) and Illinois Rule of Professional Conduct 1.5(e), and co-counsel arrangements are welcome where your continued involvement adds value. Attorney Kinzy is licensed in Texas (since 1997) and Illinois (since 1996), and immigration matters can be handled nationwide because immigration is federal law.

Finally, a word about scope. A general practice earns a colleague’s trust by knowing its limits. When a matter falls outside the firm’s lanes, it is referred out rather than dabbled in, and the firm is glad to reciprocate referrals to specialists whose work it respects. Call or text 512.761.8479 to discuss a potential referral in confidence.

Hello everyone, this is Kyle Kinzy of Kinzy Law.. As an attorney dedicated to guiding clients through employment-based green card processes, I’ve been closely tracking the evolving landscape for Form I-140 (Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers). Recent USCIS actions and proposed changes indicate a return to heightened scrutiny in adjudications, particularly emphasizing employer accountability, evidentiary standards, and ability-to-pay requirements. These developments echo patterns seen during the first Trump administration (2017–2021) and contrast sharply with the more predictable, talent-friendly approach in the pre-2017 and Biden-era periods (2021–2024). Below, I outline the key differences, supported by data and legal references, and offer practical guidance for employers and petitioners.

I-140 Processing Before the Trump Administration: Predictable and Accessible

Prior to 2017 (and during much of the Biden era), I-140 adjudications were generally efficient and supportive of attracting skilled talent. Approval rates for employment-based petitions typically ranged from 84–89% in FY 2016 and FY 2017, with RFEs focused on targeted issues like basic qualifications or documentation gaps. Processing times averaged 4–6 months without premium processing, and ability-to-pay evidence (required under 8 CFR § 204.5(g)(2)) was often satisfied by straightforward financial records, such as tax returns or payroll showing wages at or above the proffered level. Revocation rates remained low (around 5–10%), limited to clear fraud or material changes (INA § 205, 8 U.S.C. § 1155; 8 CFR § 205.2). Site visits were infrequent, and standards for EB-1 extraordinary ability or EB-2 National Interest Waivers (NIW) allowed broader interpretations, leading to higher success without excessive demands.

This environment prioritized global talent recruitment, with policies like AC21 portability (INA § 204(j)) facilitating job changes after 180 days of I-485 pendency.

I-140 Processing During the Trump Administration: Stricter Enforcement and Lower Approvals

The first Trump term introduced a significant shift toward rigorous review under “Buy American, Hire American” priorities. Approval rates dropped notably—e.g., to 75.3% in FY 2018 and 53.5% in FY 2019 for certain categories like EB-1A—reflecting a nearly 40% decline from pre-2017 levels in some subcategories. RFEs increased sharply, often requiring extensive additional evidence (e.g., independent expert letters or quantifiable impacts for NIWs). Revocations became more frequent for perceived inconsistencies, and ability-to-pay scrutiny intensified, demanding ongoing proof under a stricter “totality of the circumstances” test (Matter of Great Wall, 16 I&N Dec. 142 (1977); 8 CFR § 204.5(g)(2)). Processing slowed, with more denials tied to conservative interpretations of criteria.

In the current term (2025–present), similar trends are reemerging. While comprehensive 2025–2026 approval data is still emerging, recent reports indicate renewed emphasis on enforcement, with RFEs climbing in related areas and overall scrutiny increasing.

Key Recent and Proposed Changes Impacting I-140s

1. Premium Processing Fee Increases On January 9, 2026, DHS published a final rule (effective March 1, 2026) adjusting premium processing fees for inflation from June 2023–June 2025 (INA § 286(u)(3)(C), 8 U.S.C. § 1356(u)(3)(C); 8 CFR § 106.4). The I-140 fee rises from $2,805 to $2,965. Requests postmarked on or after March 1, 2026, must include the new amount—failure results in rejection.
2. Processing Holds for High-Risk Countries USCIS memoranda (PM-602-0192, Dec. 2025; PM-602-0194, Jan. 2026) direct holds on pending benefit requests (including I-140-related adjudications) for nationals from expanded “high-risk” countries (now 39+ under Presidential Proclamations 10949 and 10998). This applies regardless of entry date and may delay final decisions pending enhanced vetting, contrasting with pre-2017’s lack of such categorical pauses.
3. Ability-to-Pay and Verification Emphasis USCIS continues applying a totality test for ongoing payment from priority date (8 CFR § 204.5(g)(2)), often requiring detailed financials (tax returns, audited statements). Proposed reforms (RIN 1615-AC85 discussions) could formalize site visits to verify job bona fides and employer legitimacy (8 CFR § 103.2), increasing denial risks for discrepancies—far more proactive than pre-Trump practices.

These changes extend processing beyond historical norms and raise revocation potential.

Practical Advice for Employers and Petitioners

• Build Robust Documentation: Submit comprehensive financials (tax returns, payroll) proving ability to pay from priority date. For EB-1/EB-2 NIW, include strong expert letters and metrics.
• Anticipate RFEs: Prepare for thorough requests; respond promptly with evidence.
• Monitor Country-Specific Holds: If from a listed country, consider alternatives or waivers.
• Seek Early Consultation: Review petitions pre-filing to mitigate risks.

These measures aim to enhance vetting but may challenge talent attraction. I’ll continue monitoring and updating as developments unfold. For personalized guidance on your I-140 or related matters, contact my office.