Proposed Adjustment of Naturalization Adjudication Fees by the Department of Homeland Security
美國國土安全部擬議調整入籍審理費用
Introduction
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has introduced a regulatory proposal to increase application fees for legal immigrants seeking naturalization and to eliminate most fee concessions.
美國公民及移民服務局 (USCIS) 提出了一項監管建議，旨在提高尋求入籍的合法移民之申請費用，並取消大部分的費用減免。
Main Body
The proposed fiscal restructuring involves a significant escalation in the costs associated with Form N-400 (Application for Naturalization) and Form N-336 (Request for Hearing on a Decision in Naturalization Proceedings). Specifically, paper filings for Form N-400 would increase from $760 to $1,330, while online submissions would rise from $710 to $1,280. Similarly, Form N-336 fees would ascend to $1,475 for paper and $1,425 for online filings. Concurrent with these increases, the administration intends to terminate fee waivers and the reduced-fee option previously available to applicants whose household income did not exceed 400% of the federal poverty line; however, statutory exemptions for military personnel shall be maintained.
擬議的財務重組涉及 N-400 表格（入籍申請書）與 N-336 表格（入籍程序決定聽證請求書）相關成本的大幅上升。具體而言，N-400 表格的紙本申請費將從 760 美元增加至 1,330 美元，而線上提交則將從 710 美元升至 1,280 美元。同樣地，N-336 表格的費用將升至紙本 1,475 美元，線上提交 1,425 美元。在增加費用的同時，行政部門打算取消先前提供給家庭收入不超過聯邦貧困線 400% 申請人的費用豁免與減費選項；然而，針對軍人的法定豁免將予以維持。
This policy shift represents a departure from the historical precedent of previous administrations, which maintained lower fees to facilitate integration and encourage naturalization. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) posits that the current fee structure necessitates a cross-subsidization model where other immigration benefits fund the naturalization process—a practice the agency now deems unsustainable. The administration asserts that the high value of U.S. citizenship justifies a 'full cost recovery' model. Furthermore, this financial adjustment coincides with an intensification of vetting protocols, including the resumption of 'neighborhood checks' and a more rigorous examination of the 'good moral character' requirement. These measures are aligned with a broader institutional effort to mitigate citizenship fraud and increase the frequency of denaturalization proceedings for those found to have obtained citizenship through fraudulent means.
這次政策轉向代表了與先前政府歷史慣例的背離，此前政府維持較低費用以促進融入並鼓勵入籍。國土安全部 (DHS) 認為目前的收費結構需要一種交叉補貼模式，即由其他移民福利資助入籍程序——而該機構現在認為此做法不可持續。行政部門主張，美國公民身份的高價值證明了「全額成本回收」模式的合理性。此外，此次財務調整與審查協定的強化同步進行，包括恢復「鄰里調查」以及對「良好道德品格」要求進行更嚴格的審核。這些措施與更廣泛的機構努力一致，旨在減少公民身份欺詐，並增加對被發現透過欺詐手段獲取公民身份者的取消國籍程序頻率。
Conclusion
The proposal is currently subject to a 60-day public comment period before it can be finalized and implemented within the federal rulemaking process.
在正式敲定並於聯邦立法程序中實施之前，該建議目前正處於 60 天的公眾評論期。
Vocabulary Learning
The Architecture of Institutional Euphemism and 'Nominalization' as a Power Tool
To move from B2 (competent) to C2 (mastery), one must cease treating vocabulary as mere 'word choice' and start treating it as strategic positioning. In this text, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) employs a linguistic strategy known as Bureaucratic Obfuscation through Nominalization.
⚡ The Linguistic Pivot: From Action to Entity
B2 learners often use verbs to describe change: "They are increasing the fees." C2 mastery recognizes the shift toward Nominalization—turning a process (verb) into a concept (noun) to remove agency and emotional weight.
Observe the transformation in the text:
- "increase application fees" "Proposed Adjustment"
- "making things more expensive" "Fiscal restructuring"
- "charging more" "Full cost recovery model"
By substituting a verb (increase) with a noun (adjustment), the writer strips the action of its aggression. An "adjustment" sounds technical and neutral; an "increase" sounds punitive.
🏛️ Lexical Precision: The 'Sustainably' Nuance
Note the phrase: "a practice the agency now deems unsustainable."
In a C2 context, "unsustainable" is not merely about ecology; it is used here as a fiscal justification. When a government entity labels a previous policy "unsustainable," they are creating a logical imperative for change that bypasses political debate. This is the essence of 'High-Register Administrative English': using a term of necessity to mask a choice of policy.
🧩 Synthesis: The 'Precedent' Framework
Look at the construction: "represents a departure from the historical precedent."
The C2 Formula: [Action] + [represents a departure from] + [established norm/precedent].
Instead of saying "This is different from what they did before," the author uses a formal structural anchor. This allows the writer to acknowledge a change in direction while maintaining an air of objective, historical observation rather than critical commentary.
C2 Mastery Key: To emulate this, stop describing what is happening and start describing the category of the phenomenon. Do not say "The company is changing its rules"; say "The organization is implementing a regulatory realignment."**