The H-1B visa program has long stood as one of the most controversial pillars of U.S. immigration policy for skilled labor, consistently producing both beneficiaries and casualties. Every spring, the federal government administers a high-stakes lottery to allocate 110,000 new visas. This process, designed to meet employer demand for specialized talent, attracts staggering participation: in the most recent fiscal year alone, nearly half a million hopeful applicants entered their names, underscoring the intense global competition for these limited spots.
In the fall, the Trump administration introduced a sweeping set of regulatory changes that immigration attorneys say will substantially alter the landscape. According to legal experts, these new measures could advantage certain groups of foreign professionals while narrowing or even eliminating opportunities for others. Central to these reforms is a proposed $100,000 fee imposed on new petitions for foreign workers residing abroad. Simultaneously, the administration unveiled a plan to recalibrate the lottery system, granting preferential selection odds to the highest-paid applicants. Under this proposed structure, candidates commanding top-tier salaries would enjoy four entries in the drawing, dramatically improving their prospects, while lower-wage applicants would retain just a single chance.
Such a change inherently reshapes the calculus of the system. For example, a machine-learning researcher offered compensation on par with a professional athlete would now stand as a near-certain victor in the selection process. In contrast, a junior developer at a modestly sized technology firm would find their chances dwindling. The official public comment period regarding this wage-based proposal concluded in late October, and the Department of Homeland Security is currently evaluating feedback while drafting the final rule’s wording for eventual release.
The administration has justified these initiatives by arguing that employers have long exploited the H-1B visa as a cost-saving mechanism to bring in foreign IT workers at wages below prevailing market rates, thereby disadvantaging American employees. A September executive order accompanying the new fee described the program as having been “deliberately exploited” to replace domestic labor. Yet these policy moves have drawn legal scrutiny, with multiple lawsuits challenging their legitimacy now active in various federal courts.
Matthew J. Tragesser, speaking on behalf of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), told Business Insider that his agency is closely coordinating with both the Department of Labor and the State Department to enact reforms aimed at eliminating fraudulent practices. According to Tragesser, these proposed adjustments are designed to safeguard American workers, incentivize employers to offer truly competitive compensation packages, and ensure that H-1B slots go to “top-tier talent” performing advanced functions essential to the national economy — precisely what the statute originally envisioned.
Meanwhile, the State Department is simultaneously tightening its examination procedures for H-1B applicants and their dependent family members on H-4 visas. Consular officials have been directed to incorporate reviews of each applicant’s social media presence and other publicly available online information into standard vetting protocols. This policy shift toward more comprehensive scrutiny has already led some consulates to postpone or reschedule visa interviews as they adapt logistical workflows. A spokesperson framed this intensified screening as part of a broader effort prioritizing careful evaluation and national security safeguards over expedited processing, while reiterating that applicants may still seek expedited appointments when justified by urgent circumstances.
Among the clearest beneficiaries of these proposed modifications, immigration attorneys suggest, are the nation’s largest technology corporations — the so-called Big Tech giants. These companies are well equipped, financially and administratively, to navigate and absorb the new costs and procedural obstacles. Jason Finkelman, an Austin-based immigration attorney, notes that most employees hired by major firms like Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, and Google are either already working in the United States on existing visas or recently graduated from American universities. Since the new $100,000 charge applies only to petitions for foreign workers living abroad, the majority of Big Tech’s hiring pipeline would remain unaffected.
Data from the National Foundation for American Policy reinforces this dominance: in fiscal year 2025, Amazon topped all U.S. employers with 4,644 approved new H-1B petitions, followed closely by Meta, Microsoft, and Google — marking the first time these four corporations simultaneously held the leading positions. Edward Raleigh, a partner at the global immigration law firm Fragomen, observes that such organizations will likely treat the additional cost as merely another strategic investment, a necessary expenditure to secure the most capable specialists available.
Justin Parsons, a partner at BAL, another major work-immigration firm, is advising his Big Tech clients that the hefty fee might actually strengthen their advantage. Deep-pocketed corporations can easily manage costs that smaller firms — particularly startups and IT staffing agencies operating on thin margins — find prohibitive. As those high-volume but cost-sensitive applicants withdraw, the overall odds in the lottery improve for the companies continuing to participate, effectively amplifying Big Tech’s access to elite foreign talent. Should the wage-based rule also be implemented, that advantage would compound, since the lottery would further reward employers offering premium salaries.
The story is starkly different for early-stage startups, which stand to lose significant ground under this new hierarchy. Smaller firms, often rich in innovation and equity but short on cash, simply cannot match the salary levels that large, publicly traded companies can afford. Bay Area immigration attorney Sophie Alcorn explains that many startup founders consciously accept below-market pay to sustain their ventures and channel resources toward growth and product development. For these entrepreneurs, the proposed wage-based selection system could effectively exclude them from competing for top international talent. As Alcorn puts it, “the startups most dedicated to their missions may become those least able to secure the skilled workers they desperately need.” One partial exception exists among well-funded artificial intelligence startups, where leading researchers and engineers already command exceptional base salaries, positioning them more favorably under the new wage-weighted model.
Another group facing potential setbacks comprises international students studying in the United States. Under current conditions, most new graduates begin their professional lives in lower salary brackets, placing them in the least advantageous position if the lottery becomes linked to pay level. Compounding this challenge, many startups and midsize companies are withdrawing from sponsoring H-1B applications altogether, wary of regulatory uncertainty and publicized policy shifts. Alcorn reports that some job offers extended to international candidates have recently been rescinded because employers fear the evolving visa rules. Technically, most foreign students already on F-1 visas would not be directly subject to the $100,000 petition fee when transitioning to an H-1B, since that constitutes a change of status, not a new overseas application. Still, the chilling effect on employer willingness remains significant.
For American software developers, however, the outcomes are less clear. The administration has publicly portrayed its initiatives as a victory for domestic workers, asserting that reducing foreign competition will help rebalance the labor market. This policy shift coincides with massive layoffs across the technology sector — tens of thousands of engineers dismissed by firms such as Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and Meta amid restructurings and automation-driven pivots. Startups, meanwhile, increasingly rely on artificial intelligence systems capable of performing much of the coding formerly handled by human programmers. Some immigration lawyers predict that, given the heightened costs and complexity of sponsoring foreign hires, many employers will instead turn their attention to American-born candidates or permanent residents. In this new cost-benefit landscape, a domestic engineer may appear a safer and more affordable option than a noncitizen worker burdened with visa surcharges and administrative uncertainty.
Ted Chiappari, who leads the immigration practice at Duane Morris, encapsulates the prevailing mood succinctly: “One of the main attributes of this administration is that it keeps people guessing. Just because things are one way on Monday doesn’t mean they will be the same on Tuesday — and they might change back again on Wednesday.” His remark reflects the atmosphere of unpredictability now shaping corporate hiring strategies, worker expectations, and the very structure of skilled immigration in America.
Sourse: https://www.businessinsider.com/h1b-visa-lottery-new-rules-salary-big-tech-students-2025-12
