For decades, the U.S. has relied on the H-1B visa program to fill labor market gaps. The program is designed to bring in skilled workers in technology, healthcare, and higher education. It has always been a topic of controversy, with critics concerned about wage suppression and supporters highlighting innovation and labor shortages. Now, a new policy risks shutting down this pathway entirely.
What Happened
On September 19, President Trump signed a proclamation titled Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers. Starting September 21, 2025:
Employers must pay $100,000 per petition for H-1B workers outside the U.S.
Without payment, those workers will not be allowed to enter.
The rule lasts 12 months, unless extended.
Exceptions exist for cases deemed in the “national interest,” but there’s no guidance yet on how that will be applied.
H-1B holders already inside the U.S. are not directly impacted—unless they leave and try to re-enter. This has forced companies to ask their employees to return to the U.S in less than 24 hours.
Who’s Not Covered
In-country cases: If you’re already in the U.S. and shifting from another visa (like F-1 student to H-1B), this proclamation does not apply. Adjustment of status applicants file through USCIS domestically and aren’t subject to the $100,000 requirement.
Existing H-1B holders in the U.S.: As long as you don’t leave, you can stay.
Other visa categories: The rule applies specifically to H-1B petitions, not other work visas.
The biggest risk: anyone outside the U.S. (or who leaves after Sept 21) will be caught by the payment requirement at the border or consulate.
Why It Matters
The fee is so large that it functions as an outright ban. Few companies outside the very largest tech firms can afford to pay $100,000 per worker. The consequences are far-reaching:
Healthcare: Many doctors serving rural or underserved communities are here on H-1B visas.
Universities: Professors and researchers depend on the program.
Small businesses, already facing high legal and filing fees, will be priced out completely.
Beyond individual cases, this raises big economic questions:
Can the President impose new visa fees without Congress?
Will industries critical to the economy, like tech and medicine, qualify for “national interest” exceptions?
How will this affect America’s competitiveness in attracting global talent?
Killing the Legal Path
For decades, the H-1B has been more than a work permit. It has been one of the few structured pathways from temporary work to permanent residency. Many immigrants who came to the United States on H-1B visas later transitioned to permanent residency and citizenship, going on to become entrepreneurs, professors, and community leaders.
By making entry financially impossible, it chokes off a legal route to immigration. At a time when illegal immigration dominates political debate, the U.S. is actively undermining the system designed to attract and retain skilled workers through legal means.
The Bottom Line
This policy represents a drastic reform and will likely result in a near shutdown of the H-1B system. By setting an impossibly high price tag, it risks cutting off industries that rely on global talent at the very moment when the U.S. is competing for leadership in AI, STEM, and healthcare innovation. Expect legal challenges, as well as real disruption in the short term.
Reader Question- Should U.S. policy focus on protecting jobs for domestic workers, or on keeping the door open to global talent? Share your thoughts.
Just finished my lectures on Comparative Advantage and Trade, which are always my favorite topic, and now are so depressing, because of the extent to which both tribes reject the obvious benefits of trade. I mentioned, as usual, North Korea and its national ideology of "juche" or "self-reliance", and the problematic consequences, and Mahatma Gandhi, and his abjuration to his followers to twist their own thread, and weave their own cloth, and how we would all starve to death if we did that, and how ONE THIRD of all global economic growth between 1947, when the GATT was formed, and 2010, when China joined the WTO, came SOLELY from Comparative Advantage and Trade. And I also pointed out that labor migration for work has EXACTLY the same enormous benefits as trade in promoting economic growth. And I told my students to pay attention, and carry the banner of FREE TRADE to the world...
I would not be surprised if in a few weeks the administration grant specific companies a waiver for the fees stating that they are critical to infrastructure or something like that. I doubt Google or Apple would ever pay this.