-
President Donald Trump renewed the $100,000 H-1B payment on Sept. 18 for 12 more months, through Sept. 21, 2027; the proclamation was printed in the Federal Register on Sept. 23.
- Employers still can't be charged: a federal judge in Massachusetts vacated the policy in June, and on July 24 a federal appeals court refused to revive it while the government appeals.
-
A companion executive order directs three Cabinet departments to weigh an employer's recent or planned layoffs of comparable U.S. workers before approving H-1B cases, a check that operates regardless of the court fight.
The White House has bought its $100,000 H-1B charge another year of life, even though no employer can currently be made to pay it. Proclamation 11069, signed Sept. 18 and published Wednesday, stretches the 2025 restriction by 12 months.
For engineers, coders and data specialists in Mexico, Brazil, Colombia and elsewhere who hope to be hired directly from home, the renewal keeps a six-figure price tag hanging over the one pathway the measure targets most: new visas processed at a U.S. consulate.
A Renewal on Paper, a Freeze at the Counter
Under the new text, the extension kicked in at 12:01 a.m. Eastern on Sept. 21, 2026, and lapses at midnight Eastern as Sept. 21, 2027, begins. It keeps the Homeland Security secretary's discretionary power to exempt a single worker, an entire company or a whole industry when the hiring is judged to serve the national interest.
Collection, however, remains off. Immigration firm DiRaimondo & Schroeder told clients that the renewal doesn't seem to displace the existing court order, and Fragomen reasoned that because the measure is framed as an extension, USCIS should stay barred from billing it too.
How the Courts Froze the Fee
Twenty states, with California and Massachusetts at the front, challenged the policy. On June 8, U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin ruled that the charge operated as a tax the president had no power to levy on his own, and that agencies skipped required procedures when rolling it out, according to an analysis by Ogletree Deakins.
The path since then has not been a straight line. Sorokin briefly paused his own ruling on June 12, which put the payment back in force for several weeks. Then, on July 24, the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Washington's bid for a stay, finding the government unlikely to win, and the vacatur took hold again.
Before the freeze, companies paid the $100,000 on more than 700 petitions, the proclamation itself acknowledges. Homeland Security has also indicated it still plans to collect if the order is lifted.
Who Would Pay if the Charge Returns
The payment was never universal. It targets new petitions for professionals who must enter the country to activate an approval, typically through a consulate. People already inside the U.S. whose change of status, amendment or extension is approved fall outside the requirement, as long as they don't leave before the decision.
That design is what makes the measure bite in Latin America. A developer recruited straight from Guadalajara, São Paulo or Medellín, with no U.S. degree or prior visa, matches precisely the profile the proclamation makes costlier.
Latin America's Small Slice of the Program
The region starts from a thin base. USCIS approved roughly 399,400 H-1B petitions in fiscal 2024, and 71% went to people born in India, with China a distant second near 12%. The rest of the top 10, eight nations in all, added up to roughly 7%.
The jump in cost is steep. Standard H-1B expenses typically run from $2,000 to $5,000, Reuters reported, so the new requirement would multiply the bill between 20 and 50 times. A global consulting giant can spread that across a large workforce; a midsize firm hunting for one engineer in Bogotá likely cannot.
Washington's Case, in Its Own Numbers
The administration argues the policy is working. The largest IT staffing and outsourcing firms slashed their combined lottery registrations from 24,946 to 2,055, a 92% plunge, and consular processing requests fell almost 97% between the fiscal 2025 and 2027 cap seasons, according to the proclamation. The government credits those shifts to the fee working together with the new wage-weighted lottery, not to the fee alone.
The White House also points to labor data: before the 2025 measure, joblessness among recent graduates hit 6.1% in computer science and 7.5% in computer engineering. These figures come from the administration and have not been independently audited.
The Layoff Screen the Courts Haven't Touched
The second document signed Sept. 18 may matter more in practice. The executive order on program integrity tells the secretaries of State, Labor and Homeland Security to take into account whether a sponsoring employer has recently cut, or plans to cut, U.S. staff in similar roles. It also has them draw wage and industry data from Commerce, Education and the Small Business Administration.
That review stands apart from the fee litigation and, per the Staffing Industry Analysts report, reaches petitions already on file. Even with the payment frozen, scrutiny of each sponsor could tighten.
Two More Cost Increases in the Pipeline
On wages, the Labor Department in late March proposed a new prevailing-wage formula for the H-1B, H-1B1, E-3 and PERM programs, aimed at bringing foreign workers' pay closer to that of comparable Americans. The department projects that over three-quarters of positions certified from fiscal 2020 to 2024 would land below the proposed floors. Public comments closed in May; the rule is not yet final.
Separately, DHS has proposed a $103,265 charge on every cap-subject petition, including filings that rely on the advanced-degree exemption. Unlike the proclamation, it would also cover change-of-status cases such as foreign students moving from F-1, though extensions and cap-exempt filings would be spared. The proposal was published Aug. 25, and its 30-day comment window closes Sept. 24.
What Comes Next
The 1st Circuit still has to rule on the merits. A parallel case, brought by the Association of American Universities alongside the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, went the other way: a Washington, D.C., trial court upheld the fee, and that decision is now before the D.C. Circuit. With lower courts pointing in opposite directions, the Supreme Court may ultimately settle the question.
Until then, Latin American professionals holding U.S. job offers face a year of uncertainty. Immigration attorneys advise sponsors to consult counsel before booking travel or filing for consular processing.
