.png)
A Fresh Turn for the US H-1B Visa – What’s Changing, Who Gains & Who Loses
- Nishka.K
- 5 days ago
- 5 min read
If you have been keeping an eye on US immigration, you will know the H-1B visa has long been a go-to mechanism for hiring foreign professionals in specialty occupations (engineering, IT, healthcare). But as of September 2025, the US made some changes and that opened a lot of eyes.
What changed? the H-1B visa shake-up
On 19 September 2025, President Donald Trump signed a Presidential Proclamation, “Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers,” which came into effect on 21 September 2025 at 12:01 a.m. ET.
Here are the headline changes:
Feature | Old / Pre-change | New / Post-change (for new petitions) |
Fee for new H-1B petitions | USD 100,000 one-time supplemental fee required on new petitions filed on or after 21 September 2025. | |
Scope of application | All new petitions (various fees) | Only new petitions for workers outside the US (i.e. entry) need the additional $100,000. Extensions, amendments, change of employer within the U.S. are not subject to the new charge. |
Exemptions / grandfathering | — | Petitions filed before 21 September 2025, valid existing H-1B visa holders and certain change-of-status from other visa types are exempt. |
Duration of rule | N/A | The Proclamation is in effect for 12 months (i.e. until 20 or 21 September 2026) unless extended. |
Selection / priority basis | Lottery system (plus some category preferences) | Proposed shift toward favouring higher-paid, higher-skilled applicants. |
Who is affected — and how
1. New applicants outside the US
If you are overseas and you were planning to file a fresh H-1B petition, your employer must now include that hefty $100,000 supplemental fee. Without it, your petition will likely be denied or sidelined.
2. Existing H-1B holders already in the US
You are largely spared extensions, amendments, intra-US transfers or change of employer (so long as you stay in the US) are not subject to this new fee.
However, if you leave the US and try to re-enter on a new petition filed after 21 September 2025, you may be caught by the new rule unless your petition paid the supplement.
3. Employers / tech companies / startups
These entities will bear a major cost burden for every new H-1B hire from abroad. If you’re a small business or startup operating on tight margins, this could drastically change your hiring strategies.
Also, the shift toward favouring higher wages and skill levels means firms that previously used lower-cost H-1B entrants might need to rethink whether to sponsor at all.
4. Countries with high H-1B utilisation
Countries like India and China (which have historically sent many H-1B applicants) may see a sharper impact. For instance, ~71% of approved H-1B visas previously went to Indian nationals.
Indian industry associations have already flagged concerns about disruption to families and mobility.
5. Other visa-type planners
Some people might shift to other categories (L-1, O-1, E-2, etc.) or rely more on intra-company transfers to avoid the $100,000 hit.
What advantages (if any) come out of this?
It may feel like a raw deal on the surface but there are arguments made by proponents that see some upside. Let’s break down who might benefit.
Advantage: Filtering for higher-value talent
By imposing a high cost, the system effectively weeds out low-margin, low-wage H-1B sponsorships. The resulting pool may tilt toward more specialised, high-pay roles. The switch from pure lottery to weighted selection (favoring higher wages) also aligns with this.
This benefits:
US firms seeking top talent: When only serious, high-value candidates are in the mix, competition is narrower.
Highly skilled workers: If you already qualify for the upper wage tiers, your odds (relatively) improve compared to generalised lottery entrants.
Domestic US professionals: The intent (per the Proclamation) is to reduce displacement of local workers by cheap outsourcing.
Advantage: Pressure to upskill local workforce
With the cost of relying on foreign skilled labour rising dramatically, companies may invest more in training local talent. That could boost domestic capabilities and ledge to stronger innovation ecosystems internally.
Advantage: Broader visa reforms
The Proclamation also directs the Department of Labor to revisit prevailing wage definitions (i.e. raise minimums for qualified roles) and gives DHS more leeway to prioritise high-wage applicants.
In the long term, theoretically, this could lead to a more calibrated, merit-based system (if implemented sensibly).
Who gains the most (and least)?
Group | Likely Outcome / Gain | Risks or Losses |
Premium, high-skill professionals | Better odds in selection (less “noise”) | Still must compete with fewer slots; more rigid barrier to entry |
US employers in premium sectors | Access to a more curated talent pool | High upfront cost for new hires; smaller firms may pull back |
Domestic workforce | Less competition from lower-wage foreign hires (intended) | If true demand remains, could still leave gaps in niche areas |
Countries with small H-1B footprint | Minimal direct disruption | Indirectly affected if firms reduce total H-1B hiring |
India, China, other big sending countries | Major impact: fewer quotas filled, more barriers | Could push candidates to alternative destinations (Canada, Australia, EU) |
In sum: the “winners” are those already at the top of the skill/wage curve; the “losers” are those at the margins or relying on cheaper outsourcing.
A narrative angle: The price of entry has gone stratospheric
Imagine you’re an Indian software engineer. A US job offer arrives. Pre-change, your company might have spent a few thousand dollars to sponsor you and you’d stand in the lottery. Now, your employer must shell out a chunk equivalent to a luxury car payment (USD 100,000) just for your petition to be accepted. That changes the economics entirely.
If the employer doubts your marginal contribution justifies that cost, you may not be hired at all. Or they might offer you a different arrangement (remote work, contracting) so that the visa burden disappears.
From the US side, the pitch is: “We want only the top tier, not mass outsourcing.” That resonates politically, especially with voices calling for protection of local jobs. Whether it actually leads to a better system depends heavily on how the rule is interpreted, implemented and challenged in courts.
What to watch next
Legal challenges: Experts widely predict that the Proclamation may be contested for overstepping executive power (especially fees set by Congress).
Rule-making details: How “higher wage” definitions will be drawn, how national interest waivers will be applied, how consulates will interpret nuance.
Extension beyond 12 months: The current policy is time-bound for one year; it may be extended or modified.
Shift in global migration patterns — Many skilled professionals may now look at Canada, Australia, EU or new programs (e.g. “talent visas”) where H-1B-style restrictions do not apply.
Impact on innovation sectors — The net loss from fewer foreign tech workers might slow down projects in AI, research, startups, etc.
Final thoughts
This is one of the boldest overhauls of the H-1B visa in decades. It raises the stakes: new entrants must clear a much higher bar and employers must justify large upfront investment. For many, this may break the viability of US relocation offers (especially for early or mid-career professionals from high-volume sending countries).
That said, those who remain competitive in skill, salary, domain might benefit from reduced “noise” in the system. Whether this becomes a more efficient meritocracy or a gate that blocks many will depend on the legal battles and how finely the rule is executed in practice.
If you like, I can send you a more country-wise impact breakdown (India, China, EU, etc.) or even a comparison with visa regime changes in Canada/Australia to see alternatives.
Comments