Labor: How to conquer your fear of the new I-9 form
After a flurry of revisions over the past several years, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) settled in March on the latest edition of Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification.
May 20, 2013 at 06:27 AM
9 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
After a flurry of revisions over the past several years, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) settled in March on the latest edition of Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification. This ubiquitous one-page form, familiar to every human resource professional and in-house counsel, has now grown to two pages, not including the six pages of instructions.
Employers must use the latest version of the form bearing an edition date of March 8, 2013, and those who fail to do so may be subject to penalties enforced by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Birth of the form
Form I-9 was created as a result of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA). Congress intended to stem the flow of illegal immigration into the U.S. and began requiring employers to fill out the I-9 form for all new hires. IRCA sought to diminish the lure of American jobs for foreign workers by penalizing employers who knowingly hire workers who are unauthorized aliens—that is, nonU.S. citizens who are not authorized to accept employment in this country. It is unlawful for employers to hire any individual without complying with the IRCA verification of work status and record-keeping requirements.
What are the requirements?
Under IRCA's I9 employment eligibility verification requirements, an employer must 1) not knowingly hire, or continue to employ, any person not authorized to work in the United States; and must 2) verify the identity and employment eligibility of every new employee, whether the person is a U.S. citizen or foreign national, hired on or after Nov. 6, 1986. On the I9 form, the employer must verify the employee's identity and authorization to work.
Both the revised form and the “Handbook for Employers, Guidance for Completing Form I-9” (M-274) are available online. USCIS also has a schedule of useful free webinars about Form I-9 for employers.
Filling out the form: employee responsibilities
The employee must fill out the first page of the form no later than the first day of employment and with the revised form, now has the option of providing an email address and telephone number. Apparently, this may assist the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in contacting an employee regarding his or her employment verification. If an employee chooses not to complete these optional fields, he or she should write “N/A”.
Also, the U.S. Social Security Number is optional unless the employer is signed up for E-Verify, in which case the number must be provided. There is also a new field requesting passport information for employees who are authorized to work in the U.S. only temporarily.
Filling out the form: rules for employers
The employer must complete page 2 of the I9 form within three business days of the employee's first day of employment. In addition, the employer must attest, under penalty of perjury, that the employer has examined original documentation presented by the employee, that such documentation “appears on its face to be genuine” and relates to the named individual, and that to the best of the employer's knowledge the employee is authorized to work in the U.S. In addition, this page now contains a box in which to enter the employee's last name, first name and middle initial. I recommend that you print the new I-9 form front and back so as to minimize the possibility of the two pages of the form becoming separated.
How long do I keep the form?
The new form has improved instructions with more definitions, and there are also a few changes on the list of acceptable documents under List A and List C. Employers must have I-9 forms on file for all current employees. Form I-9 must be maintained in the employer's files for three years after the date you hire an employee or until one year after the date employment terminates, whichever is longer.
To copy or not to copy?
The law allows, but does not require, employers to make copies of the employee's verification documents to attach to the I9 form. However, if you choose to photocopy documents, you must do so for ALL employees, regardless of actual or perceived national origin, immigration or citizenship status, or you may be in violation of anti-discrimination laws. Therefore, an employer should give careful thought in deciding on its I9 verification policy based on individual needs and circumstances.
What's next?
What remains to be seen is how ICE will address violations relating to improper completion of the form in light of the new instructions. With immigration reform looming and the prospect of E-Verify becoming mandatory for all U.S. employers, I suspect that Form I-9 and the accompanying employer handbook will continue to be updated. Stay tuned!
After a flurry of revisions over the past several years, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) settled in March on the latest edition of Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification. This ubiquitous one-page form, familiar to every human resource professional and in-house counsel, has now grown to two pages, not including the six pages of instructions.
Employers must use the latest version of the form bearing an edition date of March 8, 2013, and those who fail to do so may be subject to penalties enforced by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Birth of the form
Form I-9 was created as a result of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA). Congress intended to stem the flow of illegal immigration into the U.S. and began requiring employers to fill out the I-9 form for all new hires. IRCA sought to diminish the lure of American jobs for foreign workers by penalizing employers who knowingly hire workers who are unauthorized aliens—that is, nonU.S. citizens who are not authorized to accept employment in this country. It is unlawful for employers to hire any individual without complying with the IRCA verification of work status and record-keeping requirements.
What are the requirements?
Under IRCA's I9 employment eligibility verification requirements, an employer must 1) not knowingly hire, or continue to employ, any person not authorized to work in the United States; and must 2) verify the identity and employment eligibility of every new employee, whether the person is a U.S. citizen or foreign national, hired on or after Nov. 6, 1986. On the I9 form, the employer must verify the employee's identity and authorization to work.
Both the revised form and the “Handbook for Employers, Guidance for Completing Form I-9” (M-274) are available online. USCIS also has a schedule of useful free webinars about Form I-9 for employers.
Filling out the form: employee responsibilities
The employee must fill out the first page of the form no later than the first day of employment and with the revised form, now has the option of providing an email address and telephone number. Apparently, this may assist the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in contacting an employee regarding his or her employment verification. If an employee chooses not to complete these optional fields, he or she should write “N/A”.
Also, the U.S. Social Security Number is optional unless the employer is signed up for E-Verify, in which case the number must be provided. There is also a new field requesting passport information for employees who are authorized to work in the U.S. only temporarily.
Filling out the form: rules for employers
The employer must complete page 2 of the I9 form within three business days of the employee's first day of employment. In addition, the employer must attest, under penalty of perjury, that the employer has examined original documentation presented by the employee, that such documentation “appears on its face to be genuine” and relates to the named individual, and that to the best of the employer's knowledge the employee is authorized to work in the U.S. In addition, this page now contains a box in which to enter the employee's last name, first name and middle initial. I recommend that you print the new I-9 form front and back so as to minimize the possibility of the two pages of the form becoming separated.
How long do I keep the form?
The new form has improved instructions with more definitions, and there are also a few changes on the list of acceptable documents under List A and List C. Employers must have I-9 forms on file for all current employees. Form I-9 must be maintained in the employer's files for three years after the date you hire an employee or until one year after the date employment terminates, whichever is longer.
To copy or not to copy?
The law allows, but does not require, employers to make copies of the employee's verification documents to attach to the I9 form. However, if you choose to photocopy documents, you must do so for ALL employees, regardless of actual or perceived national origin, immigration or citizenship status, or you may be in violation of anti-discrimination laws. Therefore, an employer should give careful thought in deciding on its I9 verification policy based on individual needs and circumstances.
What's next?
What remains to be seen is how ICE will address violations relating to improper completion of the form in light of the new instructions. With immigration reform looming and the prospect of E-Verify becoming mandatory for all U.S. employers, I suspect that Form I-9 and the accompanying employer handbook will continue to be updated. Stay tuned!
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllExits Leave American Airlines, SiriusXM, Spotify Searching for New Legal Chiefs
2 minute read'A Warning Shot to Board Rooms': DOJ Decision to Fight $14B Tech Merger May Be Bad Omen for Industry
'Incredibly Complicated'? Antitrust Litigators Identify Pros and Cons of Proposed One Agency Act
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250