The USPTO is changing the filing processes, and filing fees associated therewith, for all trademark applications in 2025.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently announced their “highly-anticipated fee structure”, which will go into effect January 18, 2025. 

Bear with me on the level of detail I’m about to go into; the new fee structure is as nuanced as it is escalated, compared to previous fees (in my humble opinion). 

The new fee structure will require new levels of strategy, and will likely have a strong impact on small businesses’ ability to pursue trademark registrations. 

My unfiltered opinion: I believe that while this price increase will disproportionately affect the proverbial wallets of small businesses, it will (more importantly, and more disproportionately) dissuade small businesses from making this critically important investment into their own brand. This will devalue those businesses who chose not to trademark. Trademarks can raise the valuation of a brand anywhere from 20-30% on average when a company is sold (this summer, we had a client sell his IP portfolio separately from his business of 40+ years, for over 38% of the value of the company itself). 

Building an IP portfolio is the “not so secret” tactic that separates the millionaires from 6 figure business owners, at the least. This summer, I sat down with someone who has invented technology you use every day, and attributed the majority of his company’s success to his IP strategy.

My point being: it’s not about being a “6 figure v. a 7 figure” business owner”. There’s no barrier to entry on this conversation, and frankly, if you’re looking at it from that lens, you’re missing the point, and hoisted by your own batard. 

Intellectual property is the oil field beneath the surface rights of the property. You can have a beautiful company, and a “generational wealth’s” worth of value beneath your feet. It’s a matter of what you tap into. 

If you’ve built a company of any size, you have IP that you can leverage to raise the value of your company at any later date.  You may hear IP Lawyers laud this new change by the USPTO, and I respect that. But I also know that sometimes, as an entrepreneur, you have to be scrappy. As a lawyer, it’s never what I want you to do. 

But sometimes, needs must, and you file on your own.

With these changes, you’re going to be hit with additional fees that could range in the thousands, because these changes benefit the government, and IP strategists (lawyers*). I think these changes will require an even-more dynamic approach to filing trademarks, simply to avoid unnecessary fees.

*my only hope is that this is the death knoll of “big box” filing services who see businesses as a number 

The Brass Tax

The fire behind my explanation for these changes honestly has nothing to do with a price increase itself. 

It’s because fees are increasing, and if you want to be as strategic as possible, you’ll probably be banged for that charge as well.  

This change will only benefit those who can “fit in the middle” (and again, deter those who are fully actualizing potential licensing and acquisition opportunities). 

Fee amounts are increasing, in addition to new “surcharges”.

At a snapshot:

Fee Description	Current Fee	New Fee
Basic Application	*250	*350
*Insufficient information fee	New for 2025	$100
*Free-form text box	New for 2025	$200
*Descriptions over 1,00 characters	New for 2025	$200
Allegation of Use (1B to 1A)	$100	$150
Section 8 or 71 declaration	$225	$325
Section 8/71 and 15 filing	$425	$575
Section 8 & 9 renewal filling	$525	$650

Renewal Applications: 

This is the most straightforward of filing fee increases in 2025, but if you have a trademark that was filed 5-6 years ago, you’re essentially going to have to pay an additional $100 per class just to keep it. 

Surcharges:

This is the most significant new change. Particularly if you’re a current client of mine (as of Dec. 2024), frankly, you likely haven’t seen some of the minor filing fees I’ve swallowed on your behalf beforehand. 

Now, it’s impossible not to. 

List of Surcharges

Insufficient information fee ($100): This new line item creates an additional $100 fee per class for any application filed that has missing or incomplete information in any of 19 categories (e.g., applicant’s name and domicile address, legal entity and citizenship, a description of the mark).

You may not think this applies to you, but this will affect about 30% of our average filings. Especially if you have a nonprofit. 

Use of free-form text box for the identification of goods/services ($200): The Basic Application presumes that applicants will use the ID Manual to describe the applied for goods and services. However, if the ID Manual does not list an appropriate entry, then the applicant may instead use the free-form text box. However, for each class in the application that uses the free-form text box, the fee increases from $350 per class to $550 per class. It also appears that this is an “all or nothing” selection, meaning you cannot select the ID Manual for one class and free-form text box for another.

This is the hardest to explain, as a practitioner. But, this will disproportionately affect “true” entrepreneurs (the ID Manual is updated according to changing case law and requests. Ie, pioneers literally pave the way, and now pay for it). 

I can’t share non-public client info, but if you’ve worked with me, you’ve heard me mention “strategic ambiguity” as a strategy to employ, while at other times, employing the tactic of being strategically-specific at other times. The strategy lies in the ability to employ either tactic as the situation requires. For example, maybe, at times, we are trying to avoid a likelihood of confusion claim in one of the broadest classes in the system. In that case, we may be very specific in our description of other classes. In other instances, we be taking advantage of being able to literally “take up more space” in a given class, to preclude others from filing. It all depends on the level of strategy available, and ready to be utilized. It’s a-symmetrical tactics, v. other options. There are situations that require both, or neither, and you’re welcome to search my name as a trademark owner to study how I’ve employed this within my own brand portfolio.

My point being: we have to see the forest from the trees, and the simple fact of the matter is, at times, being specific in an application is an extremely potent strategy. These types of changes to the USPTO are tough for entrepreneurs, but will also cater to those who are looking at long-term strategy: if your trademark (or IP portfolio) were to be considered 30% of the worth of your company when you sell 3 years from now, would you regret investing in these newly-expensive application fees? Or would it be worth it in the long run?

This is where trademark strategists will come into play; those who are business strategists in addition even more so. You’re welcome to email hello@paigehulse.com at any time for a call.