WASHINGTON - The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has proposed a $103,265 fee for cap-subject H-1B skilled worker visas, mounting a formal regulatory effort to restrict foreign hiring following a major judicial defeat.
Published in the Federal Register on Aug. 25, federal officials framed the six-figure charge as an administrative cost-recovery mechanism. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security estimates the fee could raise approximately $8.8 billion annually to fund federal immigration enforcement, immigration court systems, and border security operations.
The proposed rule follows a June ruling by the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, which struck down a September 2025 executive proclamation establishing a $100,000 fee. Federal Judge Leo Sorokin ruled that the executive surcharge constituted an unconstitutional tax levied without congressional authorization, prompting the administration to pursue the fee through formal agency rulemaking instead.
If finalized, the $103,265 fee will disproportionately impact technology talent across the Asia-Pacific region, where the vast majority of H-1B visa holders originate. Indian nationals receive over 70 percent of approved cap-subject petitions annually, while Chinese nationals account for roughly 12 percent.
Unlike the invalidated executive order, the proposed regulation applies to both overseas candidates and foreign graduates already residing in the United States under Optional Practical Training.
Industry analysts warn that adding a six-figure surcharge to standard filing expenses will force employers to scale back junior technical sponsorships and accelerate offshoring toward domestic capability centers in India, Southeast Asia, and Canada.
The proposal opened a 30-day public comment period ending in late September before final implementation, with business coalitions preparing immediate judicial challenges.
Defending the rationale in the filing, DHS officials wrote that "given that demand for H-1B workers greatly exceeds the statutory cap, this fee could also have the indirect benefit of better protecting the wages and job opportunities of U.S. workers."
