Trump Thinks a $100,000 Visa Fee Would Make Companies Hire More Americans. It Could Do the Opposite.
Countries like Canada and Germany are lining up to welcome companies and workers priced out by the H1-B price hike.
In December 2024, a battle erupted between the tech right and the nativist right over the H-1B visa program, which allows American employers to hire foreign workers in specialty fields. When President-elect Donald Trump weighed in, he threw his support behind H-1B defenders Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy. "I've always liked the visas, I have always been in favor of the visas. That's why we have them," he told the New York Post. "I've been a believer in H-1B. I have used it many times."
Fast forward to September 2025, when Trump announced that new H-1B visa applications would be subject to a $100,000 fee (though he reiterated his support for the program just two months later). Touted in a White House press release as a way to address the "systematic abuse of the program" that has "undermined both our economic and national security," the fee will ultimately harm American companies and communities.
American tech companies rely heavily on the H-1B visa and were immediately some of the most vocal opponents of the fee. Amazon, Microsoft, Meta, and Apple were four of the top five H-1B beneficiaries in FY 2025, reports The Wall Street Journal. Large tech companies may be willing to take on the fee to an extent, but as a CNBC headline warned, "Startups and founders could be hardest hit by $100,000 H-1B visas." (As it stands, U.S. companies are already paying H-1B holders hefty salaries, with the median wage totaling $108,000 in 2021.)
The fee will affect workers in fields far beyond tech. Health care providers, religious groups, and educators are among those suing the Trump administration over the fee, "saying it would harm hospitals, churches, schools and industries that rely on the visa," reports the Associated Press. The fee could exacerbate teacher and physician shortages, especially in rural areas that struggle to attract American workers. "About a third of H-1B workers are nurses, teachers, physicians, scholars, priests and pastors, according to the lawsuit," according to the Associated Press.
Though the Trump administration argues that its visa fee will address the "large-scale replacement of American workers," it might not lead to companies hiring American workers instead of foreign workers after all. "Firms respond to restrictions on H-1B immigration by increasing foreign affiliate employment," found a 2020 National Bureau of Economic Research working paper. "For every visa rejection," the average multinational corporation hires 0.4 employees overseas, while the most globalized firms "hire 0.9 employees abroad for every visa rejection." Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond economist Nicolas Morales observed that "tighter immigration rules don't just limit U.S. hiring, but they can also accelerate relocating jobs to other countries."
Other countries are trying to attract foreign talent that might be deterred by U.S. visa policies, Roll Call reported in October. Germany's ambassador to India and Bhutan compared the country's immigration policy to a German car: "It's reliable, it's modern and it is predictable….We do not change our rules fundamentally overnight." Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney argued that "not as many people are going to get visas to the United States," which represents "an opportunity for Canada."
The H-1B program is imperfect. Many supporters of high-skilled immigration suggest fundamentally changing the visa or scrapping it altogether, arguing that it limits foreign workers' mobility and long-term prospects and doesn't prioritize the highest-skilled workers for the U.S. economy. But a $100,000 fee won't fix those issues.
This article originally appeared in print under the headline "What Would a $100,000 H-1B Fee Do?."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
This is just another importing tariff-tax by another name, and AmeriKKKunts, the fools, will pay the prices, while they think and stink that they are "sticking it to the Man".
Only in America could a conman slap 15- 100% taxes (tariffs) on life-saving medicines, groceries, and other essential products sending prices soaring while his supporters cheer like he’s sticking it to ‘the elites’ and not their own wallets. The sheer passivity with which Americans swallow this economic suicide is staggering. Trump could tax oxygen next, and half the country would wheeze, ‘Thanks, Daddy, can we pay more?’ while their children skip meals to afford insulin. This isn’t just gullibility. It's a despicable, brain-dead tribal cult, where loyalty to a billionaire who despises you matters more than putting food on your own table. The Founding Fathers feared tyranny of the majority, but never imagined a people so eager to be tyrannized by a clown.
All Heil Dear Orange Caligula!!!
F-, Melvin. Do better.
The headline is a lie that the story doesn't even try to back up. The closest it comes is justifying a different headline: "Trump Thinks a $100,000 Visa Fee Would Make Companies Hire More Americans. It Could Convince Them To Hire Non-Americans Outside Instead Of Inside America."
Also, many defenders of the program say it is for highly skilled immigrants. Since when do clergy ("priests and pastors") count as highly skilled (rather than say, highly indoctrinated)?
Dear Orange Caligula ALSO thought (until very recently) that high taxes on bananas, coffee, and chocolate would magically change USA soil and climate, and bring the “good jerbs” of producing these things back to the USA!
Ass to Priests, Beasts, and other “Creatures of the Cloth”, foreign such beasts are every bit ass capable of seducing our young boys (with smooth, oily words about God) ass our domestic ones, and at a lower price, if we don’t tax the shit out of them! I imagine that foreign beasts could also price-wise beat the domestic beasts at the POTUS and SCROTUS orifices, being eminently skilled at seducing the voters with smooth, oily words about Government Almighty! Sad to say, in the special case of the Grand Orifice now held by Dear Orange Caligula (ass ASSisted by Queen Spermy Daniels), the USA Cunts-Tits-Tuition keeps those non-native-born rascals OUT of this orifice!!! If we want Government Almighty DicKKKtators crawling up our arses, they had better SNOT be illegal sub-humans, By Government Almighty!!!
I threw a party for me and my homies the other day, and “Sting” sang for us. You know twat he sang, that relates to all of the above?
https://www.bing.com/search?q=sting+lyrics+Poets%2C+priests%2C+and+politicians%2C&pc=GD03&form=GDAVG1&ptag=9228
Poets, priests and politicians
Have words to thank for their positions
Words that scream for your submission
And no one's jamming their transmission
'Cause when their eloquence escapes you
Their logic ties you up and rapes you
Remember to use the spam flag, folks.
I’ve had him muted for years now,
Execute the SQRL.
Worst copypasta ever, Melvin. Get some new material.
We need immigrant do do things like pick fruit. We also need immigrants for high skill jobs, oh and we deed immigrants for blue collar jobs. Americans are incapable of working
Be fair. Democrats have told Americans over and over that they don't have to work.
If they are in high demand, their sponsors will indeed pay the fine.
To answer your question: they could only count as high skilled if, and only if, those religious teachers have utterly failed to educate their replacements.
And education is done expressly for that purpose, so this is an admission of failure.
Only a Marxist atheist could write such nonsense.
Walz -2
Are you as retarded as Tim Walz or something?
That comment was only two points off the Walz Retardation Median. However, several of his comments have been over five points above said median.
" Since when do clergy ("priests and pastors") count as highly skilled (rather than say, highly indoctrinated)?"
Since when have Americans lost the ability to educate and train local clergy, for God's sake?
When Americans became less religious.
Walz +1
When a retard replies to another retard in the Reason comments.
Guys in silicon value refer to the $100,000 fee as a “rounding error”
Trump should increase it then. Would a million work better?
Could, might maybe. And when it doesnt happen, never follow up. KMWs established editorial way at reason.
We don't NEED no stinkin' coverage on shit that doesn't happen!!! Der Dear JesseBahnFarter-Fuhrer gives us all WAAAAAY more than enough of THAT shit!!! (Such ass Government Almighty LOVING us all VERY Dearly, butt ONLY when Government Almighty is Dear Orange Caligula and His Queen Spermy Daniels!)
And it would interfere with the plan to drive down American wages.
Yes, some people are more hard-working and smarter than many Americans. Sad to say, discriminating against them because they are SNOT Americans, does SNOT work in the long run! They will work (ass this article clearly explains) harder and faster, smarter, longer, later, and (sometimes) cheaper in Canada, Germany, their homelands, etc., if we tax the shit out of their employers and them, here! The "fix" is to STOP scapegoating, and start working harder and faster, smarter, longer, later, and (sometimes) cheaper, here in the USA, and compete on a level playing (working) field! Ya want a higher standard of living? EARN it (by working), don't try to discriminate your way to it! (Working less hard is OK, too, just don't bitch too much about your resulting lower pay. Get out of the rat race is fine by me, though. If you do... Don't worry about keeping up with the Joneses, and be happy!)
No, some people are work cheaper than Americans. That does not mean they are smarter or work harder. It often means that you get what you pay for.
When you see an Indian in tech the only question you ask are
1. What's the name of the white guy who's work you stile
2. What's the name of the white guy that fixes your mistakes
More likely, who is the entitled lazy white guy who partied all through high school and college who can't hold down a tech job and joined MAGA out of resentment that the world actually doesn't owe him anything.
Walz +3
You never worked in tech I see
Kill yourself.
Did you know that the Chinese are pulling ahead in quantum computers and some other high-tech fields? I don't like it, either, but smart and hard-working and personable people (brilliant but arrogant people usually don't get very far) are an UTTERLY precious resource, and they ARE "doled out" by nature and the environment, on a skimpy basis, at the VERY top! Nations with HUGE populations (like China) have a numerical advantage against smaller-population nations like the USA, for THIS particular scarce asset! The BEST that we can do, is to accept from them (attract) their best and brightest! We are cutting our own throats, here!
The point of MAGA is to make sure that mediocre incompetence is rewarded.
No, that’s what unions are for
Unions, yes, and unions of angry (mostly white) Entitled Americans thinking that they DESERVE more than that them thar ferriners, who we must PUNISH with tariff-taxes against ourselves, and with deportation of most of the truly hard-working ones!
Walz +5
Kill yourself.
'Trump Thinks a $100,000 Visa Fee Would Make Companies Hire More Americans. It Could Do the Opposite.'
Too bad Trump can't really put Americans first, and give $100,000 to every student loan deadbeat. Right, Fiona?
At he university of Arizona Fiona only twice confused her glue stick for chapstick
But taxes on the rich capitalists fat cats will solve all the country's problems, progressives tell me so.
As long as we only tax Americans, taking other countries dumping crap products into the US is wrong
Steel and aluminum are crap???
The US lacks bauxite resources and tariffs won't change that. Iron ore is in a bit better shape but the resources are a small fraction of world's. We now are also in the same situation with crude oil.
Walz +2
I think high taxes damage the country. I especially hate sin taxes - moralizing douchebags laying the path to their "utopian" ideal country are some of the worst.
Now how do we charge tarrifs on development hours done overseas?
Do the words "Trump" and "thinks" really belong together?
I'm getting to the point where I'd be OK with just ending the H-1B program entirely. $100k fee is a step in that direction. Maybe $200k is better.
I agree. Ditch the H1B program. And get rid of the quotas for skilled workers. There are millions of tech and medical workers who would move to the US immediately of they could get permanent resident visas.
The problem is that the lazy over entitled Trump voting base who aren't capable of doing those jobs will get upset that people who are qualified are getting them.
Walz +4
Incapable of countering with facts and logic.
You aren’t worth the effort
I’m rating your comments on the Tim Walz Retardation Scale. Walz 0 is on par with Tampon Tim’s average level of retardation. Each comment will be rated -10 to +10. Anecdotally you appear to be more retarded than Walz.
We will see if this trend continues.
100k is steep but ensures it's not just importing cheap labor across the board but really value, 200k just limits it to pretty much executives and directors.
Those people aren't going to Canada and Germany now.
Not only that, but people pass through those countries while trying to get to the US.
And if someone isn't making 100k worth of value for a company - then why are they displacing us? I thought this was about hiring the best of the best, not someone who is going to make a 50k salary?
*As it stands, U.S. companies are already paying H-1B holders hefty salaries, with the median wage totaling $108,000 in 2021.*
*"Firms respond to restrictions on H-1B immigration by increasing foreign affiliate employment," found a 2020 National Bureau of Economic Research working paper.*
So is this article 4-5 years old, or are you intentionally using data that was gathered during peak Covid to try to prove your case? I'm leaning towards the latter, although this is Reason, so anything is possible.
(As it stands, U.S. companies are already paying H-1B holders hefty salaries, with the median wage totaling $108,000 in 2021.)
That's not a hefty salary in blue state, tech-heavy cities. Minimum wage in Seattle is over $44,000 a year and in San Francisco it's nearly $40,000 a year. So if I roll my mind back to my youth when the minimum wage was ~$7,000 a year, double or even 2.5x that would not have been considered a 'hefty' salary.
I'm not saying it's a poor salary and that a single person can't live on that even in Seattle or San Francisco in 2025, but when the average rent in say, Seattle is ~$2,100 and the average sized apartment is 700sq feet for that average price, you begin to see how these 'hefty' salaries might not seem as hefty on second glance. They may be reasonable, they may be 'good', but I'd hardly consider them hefty.
It's also hard to believe there aren't enough Americans that could add 108k of value to a company's bottom line.
When you have people making millions - those are worth importing. Some dude that is basically making the same as any other lone coder? Nah.
This is one rare area where I'm not against making wonky policy proposals to try to solve this dilemma, making bowf sidez happy.
For instance, allow the H1B visa program, but make university funding contingent on degrees that are being demanded by the h1b visa system. If you're a university, your federal funding is directly tied to how many high skilled degrees you're able to graduate which either exactly match or closely match the h1b milieu.
Or, even play a card from the left's deck... place diversity and inclusion requirements on tech companies where they have to have a proportional mix of domestic and H1B visa workers. The latter is less realistic of course, but it makes me smile.
The last thing you could do is create some sort of limitation or 'parity' between H1B visa caps and the degree/graduation-rate makeup. If universities don't produce enough degrees from domestic students that closely match what H1B beneficiaries are demanding, then cap the H1B availability. This will create a system where if the Universities aren't producing the graduates that the tech companies need, then the tech companies will find the # of h1bs they can hire constrained, this in turn forces the tech companies to put more pressure on the universities to turn out more graduates in areas they need. This third option produces the least amount of government interference. The colleges can turn out whatever degrees they want, the tech companies can continue choose between domestic and h1b visa holders, but if they increasingly choose visa holders, then the government simply pulls those numbers back, forcing companies to dig into the domestic labor pool-- and pressure the universities to produce graduates they need, possibly by giving the universities endowments or grants tied to the skillset they need. Win-win...win-win.
"but make university funding contingent on degrees that are being demanded by the h1b visa system."
Is it too much to ask those who are demanding and benefiting from the university degrees to fund them as well? Wouldn't that be preferable to having the tax payer subsidize?
Absolutely. I believe that if these companies complain that they can't find anyone in America skilled enough for the positions they need, then they need to aggressively be funding university programs here. I am 100% on board with that.
Apprenticeships and in house training are other alternatives. It would leave more money for the government to fund unpopular and useless degrees - medieval French poetry, and the like.
You find that it's ok for liberal arts to be taxpayer funded but STEM needs to find itself?
"You find that it's ok for liberal arts to be taxpayer "
Not only OK but necessary. STEM is in demand. Let the market rule. Liberal Arts are not in demand. If an obscure branch of the humanities, Sumerian Cuneiform texts, for example, are to survive as disciplines, tax payer funding may be the only practical solution.
Buh bye.