Lawsuit Contends State Department’s Expedited Passport Processing Fee Is ‘Unlawfully Excessive’
Bourque v. United States of America et al.
Filed: October 4, 2024 ◆§ 3:24-cv-06994
A proposed class action lawsuit claims the United States Department of State knowingly overcharges Americans for expedited passport processing.
California
A proposed class action lawsuit claims the United States Department of State knowingly overcharges Americans for expedited passport processing.
Want to stay in the loop on class actions that matter to you? Sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter.
The 14-page lawsuit calls the State Department’s $60 expedited passport processing fee “unlawfully excessive,” alleging that the fee does not align with the actual costs incurred by the federal government to deliver this service. The case notes that under the Independent Offices Appropriations Act, federal agencies are prohibited from imposing fees beyond what is reasonable to cover the costs associated with the service.
Indeed, the complaint contends that the government has repeatedly failed to provide justification for setting the fee at $60, which applicants can pay to have their passport issued or renewed faster than through routine processing.
The filing cites testimony from a former senior government official at the Bureau of Consular Affairs, which manages passport services. According to this confidential witness, a periodic review of the $60 fee in 2017 revealed that the cost to provide expedited passport processing, compared to normal processing, was closer to $30 or $35.
The lawsuit claims that around the time the 2017 review was conducted, the bureau expressed a desire to raise the fee despite being unable to justify the existing expedited processing charge of $60, let alone an additional increase. Per the filing, the State Department’s expedited passport processing fee was first set at $30 in 1994, then raised to $35 in 1997, and finally bumped to $60 in 2002.
“The State Department set the expedited passport processing fee, and twice increased the fee, without specifying how it determined the rate to be charged, including not specifying the costs included in the fee calculation nor how those costs were calculated,” the case argues.
The complaint further alleges that an independent audit conducted in 2017 on behalf of the State Department’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) found that the Bureau of Consular Affairs was not in compliance with statutes and guidance regulating fees imposed by federal agencies.
The OIG found that in 2014 and 2015, “the Bureau collected revenue from consular fees of $3.7 billion and $4.1 billion, though the costs of services both years were approximately $3.3 billion,” the suit relays.
“OIG wrote that at least some of this excess revenue was unlawful because it was the result of unacceptable fee-setting,” the case says.
The auditors also observed that the bureau failed to maintain sufficient records showing how it determined the cost of a given service in order to set its fees, the filing claims.
“Despite the lack of documentation supporting the State Department’s fee-setting, the State Department continues to propose increases to its consular fees,” the case says.
The State Department passport lawsuit looks to represent anyone who paid the expedited passport processing fee from October 4, 2018 to the present.
Check out ClassAction.org’s lawsuit list for the latest top class action lawsuits.
Hair Relaxer Lawsuits
Women who developed ovarian or uterine cancer after using hair relaxers such as Dark & Lovely and Motions may now have an opportunity to take legal action.
Read more here: Hair Relaxer Cancer Lawsuits
How Do I Join a Class Action Lawsuit?
Did you know there's usually nothing you need to do to join, sign up for, or add your name to new class action lawsuits when they're initially filed?
Read more here: How Do I Join a Class Action Lawsuit?
Stay Current
Sign Up For
Our Newsletter
New cases and investigations, settlement deadlines, and news straight to your inbox.
Before commenting, please review our comment policy.