Executive Summary
- ICE updated its I-9 inspection fact sheet in April 2026, reclassifying several errors that have been treated as correctable since 1996 as substantive violations subject to immediate fines.
- Remote and hybrid workforces are particularly exposed. Specific remote verification procedural errors are now on the substantive list, and many HR teams do not know they have been making them.
- The right response is to run a focused review of your remote I-9 process now, before an audit surfaces the problem for you.
What changed
Since 1996, I-9 paperwork violations have been split into two categories:
- Substantive violations - errors serious enough to warrant immediate fines
- Technical or procedural violations - minor clerical mistakes that gave employers at least 10 business days to correct before any penalty
That 10-day correction window has been a meaningful protection for HR teams. If ICE identified a technical error during an audit, you had time to fix it. That protection no longer applies to a longer list of errors than it did a week ago.
ICE updated its Form I-9 inspection fact sheet in April 2026, reclassifying several errors that have historically been treated as correctable into the substantive category. For remote and hybrid teams, a specific set of those changes deserves immediate attention.
The remote verification errors that are now substantive
When the pandemic-era remote I-9 verification flexibility was made permanent in 2023, it came with specific procedural requirements. ICE has now made clear that failing to follow those requirements is a substantive violation, not a correctable one.
Here is what that means in practice:
Failing to check the alternative procedure box: When you complete a remote I-9 verification for an employee, Section 2 and Supplement B both include a checkbox indicating that an alternative remote procedure was used. If that box is not checked, it is now a substantive violation.
- This is a simple step that is easy to miss when HR is processing forms quickly during onboarding
- If you completed remote I-9s in 2023, 2024, or 2025 and did not consistently check this box, those forms have a substantive violation on them
Not being an active E-Verify participant at the time of remote verification: Remote I-9 verification is only available to employers who are enrolled in E-Verify and active at the time the verification is conducted. If your company used the remote procedure during a period when your E-Verify enrollment was lapsed or inactive, that is now a substantive violation.
- This catches companies that enrolled in E-Verify to access remote verification, but let their participation lapse
- It also affects companies that acquired another business, inherited remote I-9 practices, but did not verify E-Verify status
Electronic I-9 system failures: Many HR teams moved to electronic I-9 systems, assuming that would handle compliance. ICE's updated guidance makes clear that the system itself can create substantive violations if it falls short on:
- Audit trail documentation
- Electronic signature protocols
- Security documentation standards
If your electronic I-9 vendor's system does not meet ICE's specific standards for these features, the compliance gap belongs to you as the employer, not the vendor.
What the full list of reclassified errors looks like
Beyond remote verification, ICE also reclassified several other common errors as substantive. HR teams should know the full list:
- Missing date of birth in Section 1
- Missing date of hire in Section 2
- Incorrect use of the Spanish-language I-9 form outside of Puerto Rico
- Missing preparer or translator information in Supplement A (name, address, signature, and date must all be present)
- Missing title of the employer or authorized representative
- Failure to date Section 1 or Section 2
- Missing rehire date in Supplement B
Any of these errors on an existing I-9 form is now substantive if found during an audit.
What HR should do right now
You do not need to audit every I-9 in your system today. But you do need a focused review of the areas most likely to have gaps, starting with remote verification.
Step 1: Identify which I-9s were completed remotely
Pull a list of employees onboarded using the remote alternative procedure since it became available. If your system does not tag these separately, look for employees hired during remote or hybrid onboarding periods.
Step 2: Check the alternative procedure box on each one
For each remote I-9, confirm that the alternative procedure checkbox is marked in Section 2 or Supplement B. If it is missing, flag that form for review with your immigration advisor before deciding how to address it.
Step 3: Confirm your E-Verify enrollment history
Verify that your company was an active E-Verify participant for every period during which remote I-9 verification was used. If there were gaps, identify which employees were verified during those periods.
Step 4: Review your electronic I-9 system's compliance documentation
Contact your electronic I-9 vendor and ask for documentation confirming that their audit trails, electronic signature protocols, and security documentation meet current ICE standards. Get this in writing.
Step 5: Run a spot audit on the full reclassified error list
Pull a sample of recent I-9s and check each one against the full list of newly substantive errors. Focus on date fields, Section 1 and 2 dating, and Supplement A completeness. If errors surface in the sample, expand the review.
Common questions from HR teams
We used remote verification during the pandemic under temporary flexibility rules. Do the new substantive classifications apply to those older forms?
The short answer is: this depends on the specific form and the circumstances. What is clear is that ICE can review historical I-9s during an audit. If you have forms from the temporary flexibility period with procedural gaps, it is worth reviewing those with an immigration advisor to understand your exposure.
Our electronic I-9 vendor told us their system is compliant. Is that enough?
A vendor representing their system as compliant is not the same as documentation confirming it meets ICE's specific standards for audit trails, e-signatures, and security. Ask for the documentation in writing and have someone review it against ICE's current fact sheet. Do not take a verbal assurance at face value.
How do we fix a form that is missing the alternative procedure checkbox?
I-9 corrections require following specific procedures - you cannot simply add a checkmark after the fact without proper documentation. This is a situation where working with an immigration advisor to handle the correction correctly is important, because an improperly corrected form can create a separate issue.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult qualified immigration or labor law counsel before making decisions about your I-9 compliance program.
.svg)
