Overview:
The policy, administered by the U.S. Department of State in coordination with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), takes effect on January 21, 2026, for most of the newly listed countries, including Uganda. It applies to B-1 (business) and B-2 (tourist) visa categories. It is intended to curb visa overstays.
Public backlash is mounting in Uganda following the United States’ decision to include the country in an expanded visa bond pilot program that could require applicants to deposit up to USD 15,000 before receiving short-term business or tourist visas.
The policy, which takes effect on January 21, 2026, applies to B-1 (business) and B-2 (tourist) visa categories and gives U.S. consular officers discretion to impose refundable bonds of USD 5,000, USD 10,000, or USD 15,000 based on individual risk assessments during visa interviews.
In Uganda, where average annual income is estimated at about USD 800, critics say the policy is economically prohibitive and effectively shuts out ordinary citizens from travelling to the United States. A USD 15,000 bond would equal several years’ income for most Ugandans, prompting accusations that the measure amounts to a “soft travel ban.”
On social media, anger and frustration have intensified, with many users describing the policy as discriminatory. The hashtag #USVisaBond has been widely shared, with one post calling the measure “a compliance tool designed for the rich.” Others questioned how students, small business owners, or family visitors could realistically afford the bond, even on a refundable basis.
David Kasule wrote on X: “Why doesn’t Uganda do what Mali did and place the same requirement on USA travelers coming to Uganda? Last year, the USA did this to Mali and when Mali reciprocated, the USA dropped this requirement in less than 3 weeks.”
The visa bond requirement is administered by the U.S. Department of State in coordination with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and is authorised under Section 221(g)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. U.S. officials say the one-year pilot is intended to reduce visa overstays and will be evaluated for effectiveness before any permanent adoption.
According to DHS data, Uganda was selected after recording non-immigrant visa overstay rates above 10 per cent, a threshold used in the agency’s annual Entry/Exit Overstay Report. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said the expansion of the program was based on objective metrics rather than political considerations.
“This pilot program evaluates whether visa bonds can serve as an effective compliance tool, based on overstay data,” Bruce said, adding that applicants who comply with visa conditions will receive full refunds once they depart the United States on time.
However, travel analysts and civil society organisations argue that the policy risks deepening global mobility inequalities. Human Rights Watch and other advocacy groups say visa bonds disproportionately affect citizens of low-income countries while leaving wealthier travellers largely unaffected.
Public confusion has also followed mixed diplomatic messaging. Uganda’s Ambassador to the United Nations, Adonia Ayebare, initially suggested that Uganda might be exempt after diplomatic engagement, claims later contradicted by official U.S. documentation listing Uganda among affected countries.
The backlash extends beyond Uganda. Similar criticism has emerged in Nigeria, Tanzania, Mali, and Mauritania. Mali previously responded to inclusion in the program by introducing a reciprocal USD 10,000 bond requirement for U.S. citizens in October 2025.
Economists warn the policy could have unintended consequences for tourism, business travel, and diaspora engagement. Uganda received an estimated USD 1.4 billion in remittances in 2024, flows that analysts say could decline if travel barriers increase.
Although the visa bond program is formally temporary, immigration experts remain sceptical about its longevity. “These types of measures often outlast the administrations that introduce them,” said Jill Welch of NAFSA, an association of international educators. “Once systems are in place, they are rarely rolled back completely.”
As the January implementation date approaches, pressure is mounting on Ugandan authorities to seek clarification or mitigation measures, while many prospective travellers remain uncertain whether they will be able to meet the new financial requirements.
For now, the policy has reignited broader debates over fairness in global mobility and whether visa enforcement tools address the causes of overstays or simply restrict access for those least able to pay.