Tag Archive for: $100

USCIS’s October 20 Clarification Will  Not Make the $100,000 H-1B Fee Disappear

By Cyrus D. Mehta and Kaitlyn Box*

In a prior blog, we detailed Presidential Proclamation implementing a new $100,000 fee that applies to certain H-1B workers. The initial Proclamation created concern and confusion for H-1B beneficiaries and U.S. employers alike, as it left unclear which types of H-1B petitions would be impacted. On October 20, 2025, USCIS issued guidance stating that “for H-1B petitions subject to the Proclamation, petitioners must submit a copy of the proof of the payment from pay.gov or evidence of an exception from the fee from the Secretary of Homeland Security at the time of filing the H-1B petition. Petitions subject to the $100,000 payment that are filed without evidence of payment or the grant of an exception will be denied.”

USCIS guidance also clarifies that the Proclamation does not apply to “any previously issued and currently valid H-1B visas”,  “any petitions submitted prior to 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on September 21, 2025”, and “does not prevent any holder of a current H-1B visa, or any alien beneficiary following petition approval, from traveling in and out of the United States.” Moreover, “[t]he Proclamation also does not apply to a petition filed at or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on September 21, 2025, that is requesting an amendment, change of status, or extension of stay for an alien inside the United States where the alien is granted such amendment, change, or extension, and a beneficiary of an approved petition “will not be considered to be subject to the payment if he or she subsequently departs the United States and applies for a visa based on the approved petition and/or seeks to reenter the United States on a current H-1B visa.”

Ambiguity remains, however, in which categories of H-1B beneficiaries will be subject to the new fee. For example, even the updated guidance does not address whether the fee would apply if an H-1B amendment or extension petition was filed on behalf of a noncitizen who was on a brief trip outside the U.S. To ensure that they are exempt from the Proclamation, however, beneficiaries caught in this situation who have valid visas could simply travel back to the United States before the H-1B petition is filed, a scenario in which the fee is clearly inapplicable. However, individuals who were counted against the H-1B cap because they were terminated by their H-1B employer or have reached the six year maximum in H-1B status and are awaiting I-140 approval may no longer have valid H-1B visas. If new H-1B petitions are filed on behalf of these individuals, it is unclear whether the employer would be required to pay the $100,000 fee. 

The updated guidance also clarifies that  if a petition filed at or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on September 21, 2025, requests a change of status or amendment or extension of stay and USCIS determines that the alien is ineligible for a change of status or an amendment or extension of stay (e.g., is not in a valid nonimmigrant visa status or if the alien departs the United States prior to adjudication of a change of status request), the Proclamation will apply and the payment must be paid according to the instructions provided by USCIS. This could impact one whose H-1B extension or amendment has been denied. If the employer files a new petition for consular processing so that the beneficiary could travel overseas and apply for an H-1B visa stamp at the US Consulate, this petition would unfortunately be subject to the $100,000 fee. On the other hand, if a motion to reopen or reconsideration is filed and the case gets successfully reopened, the employer can avoid the $100,000 fee. Of course, there is a lot of uncertainty with a motion to reopen and reconsider with respect to the time it will take and the outcome. If the motion to reopen or reconsider fails, the H-1B worker might also have accrued more than 6 months of unlawful presence and would face the 3 or 10 year bar to reentry. 

USCIS’ updated guidance also does not indicate whether the fee applies to H-1B1 visas for Chilean and Singaporean nationals, although the U.S. Embassy of Singapore stated in a Facebook post on October 29, 2025 that the Proclamation “does not apply to the H-1B1 visa for Singaporean citizens. There is no change to the H-1B1 process at this time.”

Even if the scope of the Proclamation has been clarified since its promulgation apply to a narrower set of H-1B beneficiaries than initially appeared to be impacted, the new fee will nonetheless have a devastating impact on U.S. companies who rely on H-1B workers. It is clear that the fee will apply to new H-1B petitions filed on behalf of candidates selected in next year’s H-1B cap. However, if such candidates are in the US in a status such as F-1, and get selected under the H-1B lottery, they should not be subject to the $100,000 fee.  On the other hand, if such prospective candidates enter the US in a nonimmigrant status to try their luck at changing status to H-1B in the next March 2026 lottery to avoid the $100,00 fee, the USCIS could potentially still use its discretion in denying the change of status. Worse still, the prospective candidate would be subject to expeditious removal at the port of entry. 

 Given how unaffordable this fee will be for many, it is anticipated that a number of U.S. employers will be forced to stop filing new H-1B petitions altogether. Companies like Cognizant, Tata Consultancy Services, and Walmart, which traditionally employed large numbers of H-1B workers have already signaled that they will limit the number of H-1B petitions that they file going forward. Even cap exempt employers such as universities and non-profits affiliated to universities or non-profit research organizations will be subject to the $100,000 fee if the candidate cannot fall under any of the exceptions set forth in the October 2, 2025 clarification. 

After the October 20, 2025 clarification, many in the immigration community expressed relief that this guidance had blunted the impact of the Proclamation, but the clarification does not really address the fact that the Proclamation will continue to apply to many H-1B cases with a few exceptions. As we have stated in our prior blog, this Proclamation has been issued in violation of the INA, and there are two court challenges already to the Proclamation, and we hope that the courts will strike it down very soon. 

*Kaitlyn Box is a Partner at Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners PLLC.

 

Trump’s Reshaping of the H-1B Visa in the Manner He Chooses is Further Demonstration of Authoritarianism

By Cyrus D. Mehta and Kaitlyn Box*

On September 24, 2025, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) promulgated a new proposed rule to introduce a “weighted selection” system for H-1B cap-subject petitions. The new proposed system is aimed at favoring the “allocation of H-1B visas to higher skilled and higher paid aliens”.

Pursuant to the proposed rule, each H-1B lottery registration would be categorized based on the Department of Labor (DOL)’s Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) wage levels and entered into the lottery accordingly:

  • Wage Level IV entries would be added to the selection pool four times
  • Wage Level III, three times
  • Wage Level II, twice
  • Wage Level I, once

The proposed rule makes clear that “each unique beneficiary would only be counted once toward the numerical allocation projections, regardless of how many registrations were submitted for that beneficiary or how many times the beneficiary is entered in the selection pool.”

The system outlined in the proposed rule would have a devastating impact on U.S. employers and H-1B beneficiaries alike. Wage levels for some industries are much higher than others, so U.S. employers who are unable to pay a level IV wage for a Software Developer (SOC Code 15-1252), for example, which exceeds $100,000 in many geographic areas, will have a lower chance of candidates being selected in the H-1B lottery. Candidates in fields that tend to be lower-paying, such as Acupuncturists (29-1291.00) will have a greater chance of being selected, as employers may be better positioned to offer a Level IV wage if it is still relatively modest. This measure is also likely to deter U.S. employers from sponsoring new graduates for H-1B employment, as a level I wage is often the one that applies to an entry-level position.

This proposed rule is one of a number of measures aimed at eviscerating the H-1B visa program, together with the new $100,000 fee that applies to certain H-1B workers, detailed in our prior blog. This fee will have the effect of pushing many H-1B workers out of the U.S. labor market. Industries like information technology, which depend heavily on H-1B workers because there is not enough U.S. talent to fill open positions, will be impacted the most severely.

These measures are not only detrimental to the U.S. economy and H-1B workers alike, but are also a further example of the Trump administration’s disregard for  laws enacted by Congress, like his imposition of tariffs, firing of federal employees, including Immigration Judges whose decisions he does not like and taking revenge on former government officials he does not like, as with the indictment of James Comey. Trump has likely overstepped his authority as president by unilaterally imposing the new $100,000 fee, which is arbitrarily high and not authorized by the statute. Although Trump is proposing a rule to skew selections in favor of H-1B candidates who will be paid higher wages, there is nothing in the INA that authorizes weighting H-1B selections based on the amount of the offered wage.

CNN’s Fareed Zakaria  cited the proclamation implementing the $100,000 fee as evidence that the “America is moving down the path of illiberal democracy.” We agree.

*Kaitlyn Box is a Partner at Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners PLLC.

Poking Holes at the Poorly Drafted Proclamation Banning H-1B Workers through a $100,000 Fee

By Cyrus D. Mehta and Kaitlyn Box*

The Proclamation banning H-1B workers unless a $100,000 fee is paid is so blatantly unlawful that it rewrites parts of the INA. However, a successful challenge to the proclamation – after the Supreme Court upheld Trump’s travel ban for nationals of mainly Muslim countries under INA 221(f) in Trump v. Hawaii – is not a foregone conclusion. This Proclamation is also issued pursuant to INA 221(g).

The Proclamation rehashes much of the objections to the H-1B visa program that have become outdated and seem to cast Indian heritage IT firms in an unfavorable light. H-1B workers are no longer cheap labor and provide great value to US companies, which in turn create more jobs for US workers. H-1B workers are mostly paid six figure salaries. The rules also ensure that H-1B workers are paid the higher of the prevailing or actual wage. A court may not challenge the President’s rationale behind the proclamation, but a court could still evaluate whether the imposition of the $100,000 fee rewrites H-1B law or only supplants it. It  is a complete rewrite of the law, and so a court should be able to distinguish this proclamation from Trump vs Hawaii. The president cannot wholesale re-write laws enacted by Congress, and decide the sort of immigrant he prefers over another based on personal whim and prejudice. Trump is not a King, and if he likes to be King, he should not be given unbridled power to rewrite provisions of the INA that Congress has enacted. 

Otherwise, it makes a mockery of the separation of powers doctrine, which is a defining feature of democracy because it distributes governmental authority among three distinct branches – legislative, executive and judicial.

Previously too when Trump imposed a similar ban, on October 1, 2020, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey S. White issued a preliminary injunction against the Trump administration’s June 2020 proclamation that suspended the entry of foreign nationals on H-1B, L-1, H-2B and most J-1 temporary visas. Judge White ruled the president does not possess a monarch’s power to cast aside immigration laws passed by Congress. The order in NAM v. DHS prevented the State Department and Department of Homeland Security from “engaging in any action that results in the non-processing or non-issuance of applications or petitions for visas in the H, J, and L categories which, but for Proclamation 10052, would be eligible for processing and issuance.” See our prior blogs on challenging Trump’s bans under INA 221(f) here and here, and discussing NAM v. DHS here

 USCIS Director Edlow’s memo thankfully tamps down the widespread panic that the initial Proclamation caused and the $100,000 supplemental fee applies to H-1B petitions filed after 12.01 AM ET on September 21, 2025. The threat of litigation and the opposition from corporate America and universities forced the Trump administration to back off a bit.

However, the Proclamation was poorly drafted and did not state that it would apply to petitions filed on or after September 21, 2025 and lawyers had to do their job to advise clients consistent with the language of the Proclamation. The guidance clearly stated that the fee would apply to H-1B workers outside the US after September 21, 2025. Therefore, it was disingenuous of the White House to falsely accuse “corporate lawyers and others with agendas” for “creating a lot of FAKE NEWS around President Trump’s H-1B Proclamation”

Edlow’s memo does not make things clear at all. We do not know whether the Proclamation would apply to H-1B extensions filed after September 21, 2025 for workers who are outside the US and will apply for H-1B visa stamps assuming they were the subject of approved H-1B petitions filed before September 21, 2025 whether by the same or a different employer.

The Edlow memo also does nothing for the future of the H-1B program. Cap exempt employers who are universities and nonprofits affiliated with universities or research institutions will be hit with the $100,000 fee when they file a new petition. After next year’s H-1B lottery selections in 2026, employers will have to also pay the $100,000 fee for any new petition. It will be  impossible  for employers to hire talented students from US universities. 

The White House subsequently issued an H-1B FAQ , but it again creates more confusion. It states that the Proclamation “requires a $100,000 payment to accompany any new H-1B visa petitions submitted after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on September 21, 2025. This includes the 2026 lottery, and any other H-1B petitions submitted after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on September 21, 2025.”  The Proclamation, because it is based on INA 212(f) which addresses the “entry of any aliens” or of “any class of aliens”, should not apply to someone inside the US who is seeking an extension of stay, and it should also not apply to a change of status to H-1B in the US, even if the most recent White House guidance, which again is as poorly drafted as the prior clarifications and the Proclamation itself, does not state it. For example, if one is currently in F-1 status, the employer applies for this person in the 2026 H-1B lottery,  the case gets selected and the new petition is filed as a change of status from F-1 to H-1B while the person has  always been in the US, the $100,000 fee under the Proclamation should arguably not apply.  The same would hold true if a non-profit cap exempt employer files a new H-1B petition after September 21, 2025 and requests the change of status for a beneficiary from F-1 to H-1B status. 

 The imposition of this fee will in effect kill the H-1B visa program and will no longer attract foreign talent to the shores of the US. US companies instead will also flee the US so that they can hire this talent overseas. Trump is in effect has killed the goose that laid the golden eggs by imposing this atrocious fee.

*Kaitlyn Box is a Partner at Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners PLLC.