Administrative fees, reductions, waivers and costs if an application is rejected or withdrawn

We assess which statutory fees apply to your naturalisation application and whether a reduction or exemption is available. Nevertheless, two people may ultimately pay different amounts: a lower rate applies to certain children, some routes to citizenship are exempt from fees by law, and particular financial burdens may justify a reduction. Rejection or withdrawal of your own application can also give rise to a fee. The decisive questions are therefore which fee provision applies and whether a separate decision on financial relief is needed.

§ 38(2) StAG sets the standard naturalisation fee at 255 euros. This amount relates to the naturalisation of a particular person. Processing a family's applications together does not turn it into a single fee for the entire household. For two adults, 255 euros is generally payable twice, unless a statutory exemption or individual reduction applies.

This standard fee does not depend on income and does not automatically increase with the length of the procedure. A lengthy processing period does not raise the statutory fixed amount merely because months have passed. Conversely, speedy processing does not create a general entitlement to a discount. Any additional cost item must have its own basis.

The fee pays for the service provided by the authority. It does not automatically include privately commissioned translations, examination fees or legal support. Disbursements incurred by the authority may also be relevant separately. We distinguish fees from other expenses in the cost overview. The article on fees and other costs explains the wider context.

The statutory reduction for children has three requirements: the child must be a minor, must be naturalised alongside a parent, and must have no income of their own within the meaning of the Income Tax Act. If these requirements are met, the fee is 51 euros. This is a statutory concession, rather than a discretionary decision based on financial need.

If a child is naturalised independently rather than alongside a parent, the fee of 51 euros does not apply simply because of their age. Conversely, a separate form or an independent application from the age of 16 does not, in itself, rule out the reduction for children. Nor is it enough for parents and their child to submit documents on the same day. What matters is the legal classification as naturalisation alongside a parent, rather than the number of forms used. For separate processing, we assess the continuing connection and fee calculation.

Income of the child's own may be relevant, for example, where they receive pay during vocational training. The law refers here to a concept from tax law. The question is therefore not simply whether the child is financially independent or actually pays income tax. Income below the tax-free personal allowance may also matter for this assessment. We record and assess employment and other income sources specifically.

The age threshold of 16, by contrast, concerns the capacity to take procedural steps independently. It is not a general threshold for being a minor for fee purposes. For birthdays during proceedings, we reassess the expected reduction. The family-law and procedural classification is discussed in more detail in the article on children and naturalisation alongside a parent.

§ 38(3) StAG exempts certain procedures from fees from the outset. These include, in particular, naturalisation as a form of restitution under Article 116(2) of the Basic Law and § 15 StAG, as well as acquisition by declaration under § 5 StAG. Other expressly specified procedures, such as renunciation of citizenship, are also covered.

Anyone covered by such a statutory provision does not have to demonstrate financial hardship to receive the exemption it provides. The relevant factor is the route to citizenship or the particular administrative service. An application for a reduction due to limited financial means, by contrast, is only necessary where a fee is payable in principle and is to be reduced in the individual case.

Under § 38(4) StAG, the authority may set a lower fee or waive it entirely on equitable grounds or in the public interest. Equitable grounds concern, in particular, situations in which the full financial burden would be inappropriate in the individual case. The law does not provide a nationwide table automatically assigning a particular discount to each level of income.

The authority must take account of the relevant personal circumstances and exercise its discretion properly. Merely stating that naturalisation generally involves a fee does not adequately address a substantiated application for a reduction. Conversely, a low income does not automatically create an entitlement to complete exemption. Partial relief may be appropriate if the remaining burden is affordable in light of the overall situation.

Individual financial burdens may justify a fee reduction. Recognised refugee status must be taken into account in the person's favour when exercising discretion in the individual case; it does not, on its own, automatically establish an additional fixed discount. What matters is the person's individual situation within the equitable assessment under § 38(4) StAG.

We explain specifically why the fee places a particular burden on your household. Simply stating that the procedure is expensive does little to establish this. An up-to-date overview of income and necessary expenses, together with supporting evidence, is useful. For family applications, we also show the household's total fee burden.

The aim is not to submit as many unrelated documents as possible. What matters is that the authority can understand the financial situation. We explain a recent income reduction with its date. An older tax assessment may otherwise give a picture that no longer reflects current circumstances.

We state clearly in the request whether we seek full exemption or, alternatively, a reduction for you. An additional request for more flexible payment arrangements may be useful, but does not replace the decision on the amount of the fee. A clear written response is advisable, showing what relief has been granted or the reasons for refusing it.

A benefit award notice may demonstrate financial need. It does not, however, automatically establish whether the substantive requirements for naturalisation are met. For naturalisation by entitlement, § 10(1), sentence 1, no. 3 StAG refers to benefits under SGB II and SGB XII and provides for certain exceptions. Special routes to citizenship or the limited transitional rules may also be relevant.

Since 1 July 2026, the name used in § 19 SGB II has been Grundsicherungsgeld. Under § 65a(4) SGB II, the competent authorities may continue to use the term Bürgergeld until 31 December 2026. A notice bearing that name is therefore not outdated simply because of its title. The amendment and its commencement are set out in the official SGB II compilation published by the Federal Employment Agency, including the amendment notes for § 19.

The actual financial situation matters for the fee decision. For naturalisation, it also matters how the receipt of benefits is assessed under the applicable citizenship rules. A fee waiver does not create an entitlement to naturalisation; conversely, a statutory exception concerning subsistence does not automatically create an exemption from fees. We clearly distinguish these two assessments in our reasoning.

Payment by instalments spreads the amount owed over several payment dates. Deferral postpones payment. Both measures can bridge a temporary shortage of available funds, but generally leave the debt intact. Exemption from a fee, by contrast, removes the relevant fee burden; a reduction lowers it.

§ 38 StAG does not provide a general entitlement to a particular number of monthly instalments. The payment arrangements available must be clarified with the responsible office. The exact amount, due date and effects on the further course of the procedure are important. Making a partial payment of your own choosing without an agreement is not the same as having an approved payment plan.

If your resources are insufficient in the long term, we assess equitable fee relief rather than automatically limiting the request to instalments. We describe a merely temporary shortage as such. The appropriate solution depends on whether the problem is the amount of the burden or only its timing.

A negative decision may also involve a fee. For the cases it covers, § 38(2), sentence 3 StAG provides for a range from 25 euros up to the fee for the service requested once substantive processing has begun. For an ordinary naturalisation, the rejection fee can therefore be as much as 255 euros. However, if the application to naturalise a child alongside a parent would attract only the statutory fee of 51 euros, the corresponding upper limit is also 51 euros. The range must therefore not be determined without reference to the correct underlying fee category. An equitable reduction under subsection 4 must additionally be considered separately.

There is no federal statutory rule under which rejection always costs exactly half or three quarters of the standard fee. Statements of that kind may refer to local practices or particular circumstances. The actual fee assessment within the statutory range remains decisive. If amounts have already been paid in advance, the final calculation must take them into account.

Whether the rejection is lawful and whether its cost consequences are lawful are separate questions. A person may accept the substantive decision while disputing the fee amount. Equally, a legal remedy against rejection may be necessary even where there is nothing wrong with the fee calculation. If you wish to challenge both points, we define the remedy's scope clearly.

Voluntary withdrawal ends the application procedure, but does not retrospectively undo the authority's work to date. Once substantive processing has begun, withdrawal can also give rise to a fee within the statutory range. Withdrawal before that point is not covered by this provision on withdrawal fees. Whether processing has already begun cannot reliably be inferred solely from the time elapsed since the application was made.

Before you withdraw for cost reasons, we clarify the expected fees and assess the consequences of that step with you. It should also be examined whether submitting additional documents, making representations or taking another permissible procedural step could resolve the underlying problem. Withdrawal followed by a fresh application may create additional costs overall without improving the legal position.

Nor is withdrawal a means of erasing false information provided in the past. It does not automatically resolve a possible bar to naturalisation or criminal liability. These have their own requirements, explained in the article on incorrect or incomplete information.

We check the fee decision for the service charged, the amount assessed and credit for payments already made. If a reduction was requested, it is also necessary to check whether that request has actually been decided. A mere demand for payment may be a reason to ask for a clear breakdown and the corresponding decision.

For public charges and costs, a legal remedy generally has no suspensive effect. Raising an objection therefore does not, in itself, entitle you to suspend payment until the dispute has been resolved. § 80 VwGO governs the separate possibilities for obtaining a suspension of enforcement. In the case of demands for costs, an application to the court generally requires the authority to have refused, in whole or in part, an earlier application for suspension. Subsection 6 provides exceptions where the authority fails to decide within a reasonable time without sufficient reason, or where enforcement is imminent. A request for payment by instalments is not automatically an application of this kind for suspension of enforcement.

We examine the appeal instructions and distinguish an informal enquiry from a remedy that preserves the deadline. Depending on the law of the federal state, an administrative objection or a direct court action may be required. An admissible administrative objection may itself give rise to fees if it is rejected or withdrawn after substantive processing. We assess the costs, prospects and legal objective together.