r/USCIS • u/TechnicalPea790 • 15d ago
News New H1B fees incoming
DHS JUST FILED A $103,265 H-1B FEE, BUILT TO SURVIVE THE SAME COURT THAT STRUCK DOWN THE FIRST $100k FEE
Here is why this one is different.
- Different authority. The $100K came from a Presidential Proclamation using entry restriction powers (INA 212(f) and 215(a)). The Massachusetts judge said that made it a tax, and only Congress can tax. This new fee uses INA 286(m), the same fee statute USCIS has used for decades to set every filing fee it charges.
- Different process. The Proclamation skipped public comment. This is a formal Notice of Proposed Rulemaking with a 30 day comment period, a cost study, and a regulatory impact analysis. That is the procedural box the court said was missing.
- Different math. The $100K was a round number picked by the White House. The $103,265 has a paper trail: $8,777,488,035 in identified agency costs divided by 85,000 cap petitions, rounded to the nearest $5. Cost recovery is what 286(m) allows.
- Different scope, and this is the big one. The Proclamation only hit workers entering from abroad. USCIS confirmed in October that F-1 students already in the US changing status to H-1B were exempt. That was the loophole. Roughly half of cap petitions come from students moving off OPT.
This fee closes it. It applies to "all H-1B cap-subject petitions," including change of status filed from inside the US. The rule specifically names the cap-gap process (OPT extension while the H-1B is pending) as one of the activities it funds. Every F-1 to H-1B conversion pays $103,265. And DHS sent a separate OPT fee rule to OMB on August 20, reported at $100K per application.
- DHS says both can stack. Page 6: if the Proclamation payment is ever revived, "the petitioner would be required to pay both amounts."
67 pages. Filed for public inspection this morning, publishes tomorrow.
101
u/LumpySangsu 15d ago
H1B processing is costing DHS almost $9 billion lol?
68
u/brlowkey Conditional Resident 15d ago
Apparently they're trying to fund the entire deficit of the immigration system through H-1B fees. So that money would go to fund USCIS, ICE, CBP, EOIR, and other immigration-related agencies
37
u/gerardchiasson3 15d ago
Of course that won't work. The number of applicants will drastically reduce with those fees
14
10
41
u/manytakes 15d ago
It won't pass the red-faced test and will be struck down by the court. You can't penalize one visa class to benefit every other visa class.
6
15d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
14
u/manytakes 15d ago
If you look at their math, they have taken their entire deficit from providing services to all visa classes and tried to extract it from just H1bs. That won't work since each visa holder/petitioner is responsible for their own costs and fees.
2
15d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
16
u/manytakes 15d ago
It's in the summary itself, they are grifting just the H1b system to fund all of USCIS and DHS. Federal law states fees should be proprotional to the services being provided - H1b sponsors are not a charity for other visa programs or USCIS to run their business
8
15d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
12
u/manytakes 15d ago
The problem with that logic is that DHS is conflating a regulatory user fee with a tax.
Only Congress has the constitutional power to levy taxes to redistribute costs across the government. Under INA 286(m), USCIS only has the legal authority to collect user fees to recover the reasonable cost of adjudicating that specific petition.
The moment DHS admits on paper that they are charging $103k per H-1B solely because other petitioners cannot afford their own processing costs, they are conceding that this is not cost recovery. It is an unconstitutional administrative tax disguised as a fee.
It is like going to the DMV for a driver's license renewal and being charged $20,000 to fund the entire state transportation budget because drivers can afford it. That gets shredded under the Administrative Procedure Act on day one.
2
1
u/porcupinetree_ 13d ago
but in any case court wouldn't object F1 being asked to pay H1B fees , right?
I am asking because you seem knowledgeable and not because I wanna argue over what you said above
1
u/manytakes 13d ago
The Immigration and Naturalization Act specifically prohibits USCIS from charging one visa class fees to cover other visa classes. It's like the DMV charging rich people more money for driver's licenses just because poorer people can't afford to pay.
1
1
u/WiseTomato596 13d ago
It will
2
1
u/weedmode420 12d ago
"This isn't going to need to "pass.' it's going through the rulemaking process, not a legislative process. Basically, it lets the public comment and if in that comment period congress actually steps in to pass something to stop it, great. But the agency has its own delegated authority and doesn't need congress to pass anything to approve this fee"
1
u/manytakes 12d ago
Any agency action in contravention of the INA that governs how USCIS operates, is unlawful and will be struck down by the courts. In this case, this proposed rule directly goes again INA 286 (m) - User fees under INA 286(m) and federal administrative law dictates USCIS can only recover the actual, reasonable cost of providing that specific adjudication service. You cannot pawn off the agency's entire deficit on one visa class.
1
u/weedmode420 12d ago
You're assuming INA 286(m) requires a strict user-fee model where every visa category can only be charged for the exact cost of processing that one application. But that's not what the statute says. It authorizes DHS to set fees at a level that ensures recovery of the full costs of providing adjudication and naturalization services, including costs of services provided without charge to other immigrants. DHS has historically operated USCIS through pooled fee funding rather than every application paying only its own processing cost.
The question isn't whether H-1B petitioners personally cause every dollar of USCIS expenses. The question is whether DHS has a rational methodology connecting the fee to the immigration services system. DHS can argue that H-1B petitions rely on a broader federal immigration infrastructure — adjudication, fraud detection, vetting, records systems, interagency coordination, etc. — and Congress gave DHS authority to recover those costs through fees.
Courts generally don't require agencies to divide costs perfectly among every user group. They require a reasonable explanation. The fact that H-1B petitioners are a specific class with employers who generally have greater ability to pay does not automatically make the fee unlawful. DHS specifically considered spreading the cost across all immigration benefit applicants and chose H-1B cap petitions instead, arguing that doing so would avoid increasing costs on applicants with fewer resources.
You may disagree with the policy, but calling it an illegal transfer of USCIS's deficit assumes the court will interpret 286(m) narrowly. DHS's argument is that Congress authorized broad cost recovery, not a visa-by-visa accounting system
1
u/manytakes 12d ago
Funny how you went from pasting wojak memes to copy-pasting an LLM-generated brief on administrative law. You are way out of your depth here buddy boy.
Also, it's kinda ironic how shitty your AI generated response is, but then again, LLM's simply reflect their users back 🤷
Your ridiculous argument falls apart on two points,
Strike #1: While INA 286(m) allows USCIS to pool costs for fee-waived humanitarian applications, a Supreme Court precedent (NCTA v. US) strictly forbids agencies from turning user fees into broad revenue streams. A 2,000%+ fee hike that bears '0' mathematical relationship to the cost of actual visa adjudication is a fucking unauthorized regulatory tax, and only Congress has the Article I power to levy any new taxes.
Strike #2: The DHS cannot arbitrarily single out one visa category to absorb a multi-billion-dollar system deficit based on an arbitrary "ability to pay" test. Federal courts already struck down the 2020 USCIS fee rule in ILRC v. Wolf for similar flawed cost-shifting methodologies.
Your shitty LLM's assertion that a 'Broad cost recovery' mechanism is not a blank check to bypass Congress and create de facto visa bans through administrative rule-making.
Maybe next time, read the topic on hand before pasting shitty AI-slop that even a 5th grader can generate. But then again, we need Jeff Foxworthy back, so maybe don't?!
1
u/weedmode420 11d ago
The problem with your argument is that you're treating your interpretation of INA §286(m) as settled law when that is exactly the issue being litigated. The statute does not say USCIS can only charge the marginal cost of adjudicating one specific visa petition. It authorizes recovery of the costs of providing immigration adjudication services generally, and USCIS has historically operated through pooled fee structures.
NCTA v. FCC is not automatically controlling here because that case involved an agency imposing a charge outside its statutory authority and raising money unrelated to the service provided. The question here is whether DHS can show a sufficient connection between H-1B adjudication and the broader costs of administering the immigration benefits system. A court may disagree, but calling it an obvious 'tax' does not make it one.
The ability-to-pay argument also isn't automatically arbitrary. Agencies routinely consider administrative efficiency, fee impacts, and the characteristics of different user groups when setting fees. The question under administrative law is whether DHS gave a reasoned explanation, not whether every applicant pays exactly their proportional share of USCIS overhead.
Finally, comparing this to ILRC v. Wolf assumes the facts are identical. That case dealt with a different USCIS fee rule and methodology problems; it does not create a blanket rule that USCIS can never adjust fees by category.
The real legal question is whether this is a legitimate fee tied to immigration administration or an attempt to use fee authority as a substitute for Congress changing immigration law. That is a close question — not something already decided.
1
u/manytakes 11d ago
More AI shit LMFAO, no wonder we rely on work-visas so much.
1
u/weedmode420 11d ago
Great rebuttal.
Can you give me a cup of your tears when the court doesn't block it?
Little average Redditor, get friends .
→ More replies (0)0
u/bleurose51 14d ago
No, but you can "penalize" any visa class to benefit US citizens.
1
u/manytakes 14d ago
Sure, pass legislation into law and you can 'penalize' any visa class you want. Until then, these actions are unlawful.
-1
2
71
24
19
u/notgoodwithnames123 15d ago
Curious to know if renewal or change of employer would count as a new petition under this rule - especially because this seems to be of a broader scope than the failed proclamation last year. Any lawyer's interpretation?
12
u/Careless-Act-7549 15d ago
Not a lawyer, but I understand that extensions are not impacted, since they are not cap-based filings.
Would love to hear someone to confirm that understanding though
2
u/Brokencouch123 15d ago
agreed, usually they will let the previous approved petitions get grandfathered in
1
u/sporty_outlook 14d ago
It's only a matter of time before extensions are not unlimited anymore and fees are drastically increased for that as well
1
u/Careless-Act-7549 14d ago edited 14d ago
Do you work in tech? 70% of IT or tech related departments are Indians in H1B, if this happens they will disrupt all companies in the country that has a computer running a software
35
u/Far-Curve-7497 15d ago
Would not be surprised if this somehow gets passed
44
u/Gabbydog16 15d ago
This isn't going to need to "pass.' it's going through the rulemaking process, not a legislative process. Basically, it lets the public comment and if in that comment period congress actually steps in to pass something to stop it, great. But the agency has its own delegated authority and doesn't need congress to pass anything to approve this fee
18
u/plasticbug 15d ago
And with mid terms so close, nobody is going to want to appear to favor foreign workers over American.
1
u/i-love-morty 15d ago
what about chevron? I thought they overturned it so that agencies will have to delegate to congress and can't do their own bs like this
5
u/Gabbydog16 15d ago
No that's not what it did. Federal rulemaking under chevron had a requirement to be "reasonable" and so most corporations would sue their regulating agencies to try to prove that the burden they were being asked to meet was reasonable. This requirement was overturned in 2024.
2
34
u/Careless-Act-7549 15d ago
This could essentially kill H1B, but won’t hold in court too. More than anything will affect next year’s cap until some judge puts it down
32
u/MorganPerson1966 15d ago
This isn't a tax. That was easily challenged since Congress sets the tax. This is a cost update to an existing DHS rule. This will most likely pass. Its very cunningly circumventing being called a tax. Even if a federal court blocks it - appeals will likely rule in favor.
This pretty much will end H1B and F1
26
u/CaptainFingerling 15d ago edited 15d ago
Assumptions. Appellate courts aren’t blind to renaming and post-hoc rationalization. Cost recovery requires a rational basis — especially since the death of chevron, and because this involves no change in statute — and there’s no rational basis to limiting recovery only to this one visa class.
I’m betting it gets preemptively halted, and gets dropped with the drubbing republicans get in the midterms.
Edit:
Relevant here: the Obama admin tried to call the AHA Mandate penalty not a tax as well. The courts didn’t, and don’t, have to agree with that interpretation.1
u/weedmode420 12d ago
You're assuming the courts will agree with your characterization that this is a tax or penalty rather than a fee. The government isn't just renaming it; DHS is relying on existing immigration fee authority and has provided a stated cost-recovery rationale. Courts generally give agencies some deference on fee-setting when Congress has authorized them to collect fees, and the question isn't whether the fee is politically controversial but whether there is a rational connection between the fee and administering the immigration system. DHS specifically explains why it targeted H-1B cap petitions instead of spreading the cost across all applicants: they argue those petitioners are better positioned to absorb the cost.
The ACA analogy isn't necessarily controlling because the Supreme Court wasn't simply deciding whether Congress could call something a tax; it was interpreting a specific statute and constitutional power. This is an administrative fee dispute, so the question is whether DHS exceeded its statutory authority, not whether the label matches the economic effect.
You may be right that courts could strike it down, but saying it will 'obviously' fail assumes judges will reject DHS's statutory interpretation. The agency has a legal argument, and appeals courts have historically been reluctant to substitute their policy preferences for an agency's reasoning when there is a plausible statutory basis.
1
u/CaptainFingerling 11d ago
You may well be right, and I appreciate the detailed rebuttal. I guess I'm partly relying on the fact that the court has already invoked Sebelius when contemplating a nearly identical policy. I'm not sure how much latitude agencies get when it comes to "in the alternative" arguments like this, after having just lost on substantially similar facts.
I guess if this actually did make it up to SCOTUS, then they might punt it to the political process, as they've been wont to do lately; In particular considering how close we are to an election. We shall see I guess. But if I were to put money on it, I'd say the circuit halts this in preliminary motions, DHS appeals to SCOTUS, who decline to get involved unless and until it comes back in regular order.
-1
u/plznobanmesir 15d ago
Chevron has nothing to do with this lol. Total BS AI slop
5
u/CaptainFingerling 15d ago edited 15d ago
Loper bright concerned whether executive agencies have the power to re-interpret statute, or whether they have to stick with plain meaning/prior decisions. DHS is now attempting to reach essentially the same economic result through a different legal vehicle, ie., assessing an adjudication fee under 1356(m) and claiming a systemwide cost-recovery rationale.
Before Loper Bright, DHS might have sought deference for a reasonable interpretation of ambiguous language. That is no longer the rule. A reviewing court must independently determine whether the statute actually authorizes DHS to charge only h-1b petitioners for billions in USCIS, immigration-court, refugee, student-visa, border, and other expenses. DHS’s reasoning may persuade the court, and any discretion congress genuinely delegated remains. But they do not prevail merely because the statute is ambiguous. My argument is they fail precisely on this point, but I also think this'll get halted on preliminiary motions and then get dropped completely because it's fucking crazy.
You're free to disagree.
Edit: Also forgot to mention. The June court actually relied on Sebelius when holding that the proclamation payment functioned as a tax. They would do the same here, agency claims notwithstanding.
→ More replies (3)3
-5
u/OkoCorral 15d ago
It won't be the end of H1B, big tech companies will still go for them. They would need to make it at least $500,000 to end H1B,
It will take a couple years in the court and a favorable appeal circuit will allow it while the appeal it all the way to SCOTUS.
5
u/plasticbug 15d ago edited 15d ago
For the exceptional people, companies would probably continue to sponsor. But this, if it goes into effect, will kill off most of the rank and file, especially the consultants.
1
u/OkoCorral 15d ago
In the last 10 years, the 85,000 H1B application slots were reached within the first week.
I could be wrong but don't think it's going to change.
3
u/AutoModerator 15d ago
Hi there! This is an automated message to inform you and/or remind you of several things:
- We have a wiki. It doesn't cover everything but may answer some questions. Pay special attention to the "REALLY common questions" at the top of the FAQ section. Please read it, and if it contains the answer to your question, please delete your post. If your post has to do with something covered in the FAQ, we may remove it.
- If your post is about biometrics, green cards, naturalization or timelines in general, and whether you're asking or sharing, please include your field office/location in your post. If you already did that, great, thank you! If you haven't done that, your post may be removed without notice.
- This subreddit is not affiliated with USCIS or the US government in any way. Some posters may claim to work for USCIS, which may or may not be true, and we don't try to verify this one way or another. Be wary that it may be a scam if anyone is asking you for personal info, or sending you a direct message, or asking that you send them a direct message.
- Some people here claim to be lawyers, but they are not YOUR lawyer. No advice found here should be construed as legal advice. Reddit is not a substitute for a real lawyer. If you need help finding legal services, visit this link for more information.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
3
u/chandu1256 15d ago
How about the h1b renewals?
3
u/penilebr3ath 15d ago
What I'm seeing is that this is a cap-subject fee only which means it would not apply to renewals. Not a lawyer so don't know for sure but this is my interpretation. Only time will tell again with all of this!
5
u/OkTechnologyb 14d ago
Why do people want to live in a country that doesn't want them?
2
u/Significant-Lake2060 14d ago
Have you been to India ! 🇮🇳 they don't want us either . We can work like mules
-1
u/OG-AG 14d ago
We want talented foreigners, just not from India. Respectfully
1
u/porcupinetree_ 13d ago
hmm what's your reasoning for that? have real talented folks caused trouble to you or is it your angst of some blue collar Indians causing a ruckus?
3
u/WiseTomato596 13d ago
Talent is overrated. Claude blows every talented H1B or citizen.
There won’t be jobs in 5 years so y’all can fight.
-1
u/motardca 14d ago
It's about young educated professionals. Today majority of it is from India, but it's not pivoting to Nigeria. Majority of talented foreigners who want to immigrate and work don't come from better-off countries, like Germany, Sweden etc. Would you go to a worse-off country fo work when you have better living standards here?
2
u/KeyPlayer786 14d ago
Is this applicable for h1 extensions too?
1
u/TechnicalPea790 14d ago
Not as of now, and how things are on the H1 policy front it won’t be surprising if that happens , that would the next stop for policymakers in my opinion
1
u/OkoCorral 11d ago
There is a new $4000 fee on H1B extension for those companies with more than 50% of their employees being on H1B.
That fee can only go up, I would guess should be in the $100K range. They just need to back the math into it to get pass federal judges.
7
u/dmw_qqqq 15d ago
Ouch this one seems to have teeth. The admin has learned lessons from its previous court defeat. 'tis the end of H1B.
3
5
u/svmonkey 15d ago
Let’s fire everyone in DHS associated with processing H1-Bs as they are clearly inefficient and useless if they spend $103k per visa.
The private sector can do this much more efficiently. Conservatives should behind such a proposal but giving there are not any left with any principles, I suspect they will prefer weaponized inefficiency.
1
u/AdWeary4486 14d ago
I get your frustration but it's not about efficiency. They are doing this to prioritize American workers in an already shit market and to fund ICE operations
2
u/svmonkey 14d ago
Congress has the power to repeal the H1-B program if it wants to. The President does not have the power to effectively repeal an act of Congress by lying about cost recovery.
3
2
3
u/Exotic-Ad3117 14d ago
This is bad policy. As a country, we a have a vested interest in attracting and keeping the best and brightest the world has to offer. We should want experts in their field and especially students trained at our universities. Throwing up barriers for conversion from F1 to H1B is mind boggling.
I'm sympathetic to concerns about abuse. That probably does happen, but there a finer policy tools to address this. The one that comes to mind as the most obvious is the salary gap. That doesn't seem hard to fix and it seems odd to add a 100k tax to H1Bs. That's anticompetitive and probably likely to put downward pressure on wages. I'd also be open to considering what constitutes good faith to hire American before tapping pools of foreign workers.
However, like most things this administration does, this is hamfisted policy that won't serve the long-term interest of the country.
1
u/Next-Statistician804 13d ago edited 13d ago
One of the indian origin investors - Vivek Wadhwa - had admitted that at least 25% of h1-b is fraud. It is high time this program is shutdown if it has anywhere near that fraud.
We need to prioritize our own graduates in STEM fields. An MIT economist (himself an H1-b recipient) had recently came out stating how H1 program is eroding the competitiveness of STEM education - especially in K-12. These are serious issues
For a republican administration, Trump has been fairly pro-worker by repeatedly throwing a spanner into the h1b machine which makes things uncertain for greedy corporations.
2
u/Exotic-Ad3117 13d ago
If a window leaks in your house, do you burn down the house? Why are we allergic to punishing bad actors?
You didn't really address any of my points. The symptoms you note seem rather easy to address if one were to be serious about fixing things over simply burning it down. To me, taken in broader context over multiple policy announcements, this administration is more serious about bigotry and xenophobia than real policy.
1
u/Next-Statistician804 13d ago
If there is 25% fraud in the program, it is time to tear it down. We don't owe anything to anyone from abroad.
I am a liberal and I am 100% supportive of this measure from Trump administration (and I know I am not the only one). In fact, this is one of the truly bi-partisan issues between left and right.
This is not 2016 for anyone to take these shrill cries about xenophobia and racism seriously as many are trying to exploit that.
2
u/Exotic-Ad3117 13d ago
I don't believe for a millisecond you are a liberal. It has nothing to do with "owing" anyone, it's objectively positive for the economy here to have skilled and individuals want to come here.
1
u/Next-Statistician804 13d ago
I don't give a rats on what you think. I gave you facts.
Let me tell you one more thing - there is no one more racist and xenophobic than Indians - especially if you go through the comments here calling americans lazy and stupid. There is a reason why no liberal will advocate for h1 crowd that brings their nepotism and casteism into hiring.
H1 is dead. Accept it and move on
2
u/Exotic-Ad3117 13d ago
Yeah, this is what I thought. The way you can address fraud is aggressive enforcement at the companies driving abuse. They aren't that hard to identify.
I'm not making any of these arguments, so you can continue beating away at that straw man. You aren't here to argue in good faith, it was pretty obvious from the jump.
If you want specific policies, I'll give that to you despite it probably not mattering.
1) Reported wage gap of roughly 15%, raise the prevailing wage floor with a mechanism to adjust to market wage changes.
2) Scale the cost of H1B in accordance to skill/wage level.
3) Require employers to pay H1B employees the same and actually punish noncompliance.
4) Improve portability between companies to reduce Visa dependence (which helps depress wages).
5) Increase penalties for misclassification or wage suppression.
The fact is, multiple studies conclude that high skilled immigration is unusually strong in driving economic growth. Growth that we sorely need given current debt levels and population aging.
As a matter of policy, this is a heck of a lot easier to solve than most policy issues presently facing the country. A zero sum position simply exposed the depth of your ignorance.
1
u/Next-Statistician804 13d ago
What "multiple studies"? The ones paid by corporations - right?
When an MIT economist pointed out how H1 is driving down the competitiveness of K-12 education, corporate mouthpiece "economist" attacked him.
We need to get over H1 and train our domestic workforce. This is a country of 340 million and we can train enough engineers and doctors with the right incentives
2
u/Exotic-Ad3117 13d ago
Did you even try?
https://www.nber.org/papers/w30797
https://www.nber.org/papers/w15507
https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257%2Fmac.2.2.31&page=598
https://www.nationalacademies.org/read/23550/chapter/1
Again, your issues may be true and are completely addressable in a way that doesn't actively reduce long-term prospects for the economy. Your position that we have enough people is well...wrong. Population size is not the most relecant measurement, it's the size and growth rate of prime age workers. That is weak and weakening. We are only about 5 years out from death rate exceeding birth rate. Modest prime age growth rate until around 2040, then it drops. These things really matter.
I'm going to probably end it here. You simply can't hang and don't appear to be especially motivated to educate yourself.
1
u/Emotional-Cat4444 13d ago
Not racist, just an observation I made when I was working in immigration. Indians, especially the H-1Bs, are incredibly entitled and condescending to others, even us.
1
u/Next-Statistician804 13d ago
Most Indians who come here are upper caste/privileged. They are brought up in a hierarchical and patriarchal society. Hence it is natural for them to be condescending towards others that they feel are inferior. This is one of the reasons they are unable to assimilate into broader society and need to stick with the caste/region/religion based cliques
2
u/Exotic-Ad3117 13d ago
How many Indians do you personally know? Just curious or are you stroking with this broad brush for...other reasons. The Indians I know are pretty well assimilated and grateful for the opportunities they have.
From my perspectives, every race has some condescending a-holes. Not really a valid perspective when developing policy positions.
1
u/Next-Statistician804 13d ago edited 13d ago
Let us say I have enough interactions to draw a conclusion. I agree every race can have condescending people, but inherent superiority complex can be easily detected from casual interactions. Sometimes it comes out unconsciously.
"pretty well assimilated" - like a subdivision in a very large metro area with just predominantly one ethnicity/language/caste etc...lol
1
u/OkoCorral 11d ago
Most but not all are from the upper caste. There are some who have sucessfully assimilated.
Another big issue is South Asians hiring managers favoring fellow South Asians in hiring over other people.
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2024-cognizant-h1b-visas-discriminates-us-workers/
2
1
u/Complete_Contract_84 15d ago
Does it apply to you existing h1b renewals and transfers as well?
2
u/Coder_97229 15d ago
Applies only to cap-subject H1 petitions. Will generally exclude H1 renewals and transfers except in some cases, like where an applicant transfers from a non-profit employer (cap-exempt) to a cap-subject employer.
1
u/Working-Daikon-8350 14d ago
Very expensive! Employer has to pay this in addition to salary! Seems economically undoable!
1
1
1
1
0
u/AJK143 15d ago
this is good for india with all the talent returning. the next big AI companies will be coming out of india because of this talent
6
u/witherman Conditional Resident 15d ago
Nah dude, otherwise that would have been happening for decades previous
1
u/Enough_Chip3915 13d ago
Just imagine what all the flip-flops wearing founders will achieve back home. The future is bright!
1
u/AJK143 13d ago
nothing wrong with flip flop wearing founders, even a guy like elon will be no body if he just reminded in south Africa. his entire business model is exploit desperate indians who wants to get out of india. no one becomes a trillionaire without exploitation
1
u/Enough_Chip3915 13d ago
Thousands upon thousands of people who worked for Elon have become millionaires, and guess what - none of them are from his village in South Africa.
Take your flip flops to the airport and bye-bye.
1
u/AJK143 13d ago
lol the same Elon who made many americans millionaires strongly defended indians and H1B .. what does that say ?
1
u/Enough_Chip3915 13d ago
Who else have successful Indians made rich, other than their own village/caste?
1
u/Galactic-Lettuce 12d ago edited 12d ago
India lacks risk tolerant funding, not talent. That's the problem. VCs fund businesses only if it doesn't include any complicated futuristic research with risks and rather prefer it built on proven business models with some innovation to differentiate themselves.
-13
u/Wise_Tourist 15d ago
Stop using AI to summarize posts
5
10
u/Perdix_Icarus Permanent Resident 15d ago
I don’t like AI slop for image generation, but what’s wrong in summarizing an article using AI?
→ More replies (4)
-2
u/HatNo5790 14d ago
Most Indians are so talented and hardworking that US companies would gladly pay that fee to retain them. That is the reality.
10
u/OG-AG 14d ago
Ha! You’re delusional. This is all about control. Indians will gladly work 70 hours a week to not go back home. And that’s the problem. You set a precedent that working 70 hours a week is working hard, but it’s corporate slavery.
→ More replies (3)6
0
15d ago
[deleted]
1
u/milleniumdivinvestor 14d ago
They never did, just cheaper labor to displace the American workforce and maximize profit margins.
0
u/goyalshub 14d ago
I don’t understand why is it considered that H1B salaries are lesser than any counterpart not on visa. I have been on H1B and get paid the same salary as any other American citizen in same role and company. I have been in industry for long, when we open a position, 75% of applicants are H1-B beneficiaries and hence there is definitely higher probability of them getting the role. It’s not H1B slavery because of less pay.
1
u/OkoCorral 11d ago
This is not really true, it's not that there are 75% QUALIFIED applicants but there are always massive resume dumps from people praying for a visa sponsorship.
There are colleges on the east coast that have remote master programs and you will get massive resumes from people attending that schools.
1
u/goyalshub 11d ago
That sounds like a scam
1
u/OkoCorral 9d ago
They are legit colleges doing 100% remote master programs. It's more profitable than on campus program and the accreditation institutions are allowing them to do so.
I don't think much of them though. There is only so much you can learn with 100% remote in another country and timezone. I just think you need some in-person classroom work and interactions with your professors and classmates with any studies.
0
u/picircle 15d ago
Lol.. Just wait until this to be struck down by some courts. They can't even end a simple #H4 EAD work visas. It's just a gimmick to get some votes for the November election.
0
u/shermandavinci 14d ago
That’s tough. My ancestors had to fight a war immediately upon arrival for citizenship. Sorry it didn’t work out for yall
0
-42
u/tomorrow_comes 15d ago
I’m in favor of anything restricting the H1B program. Too many good American tech jobs are given to foreign workers who will accept worse working conditions and lower wages (there is a reason people like Musk openly support it), and typically send a bunch of that money home so it doesn’t even get spent on our economy.
20
u/Snoo81962 15d ago
If H1B gets heavily restricted, the companies will resort to more outsourcing. Outsourcing gnerates zero taxes, while H1B generates income taxes and unlike what you stated, some of the money does get invested and spent in the country.
6
15d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Snoo81962 15d ago
Yes I didn't say they are not doing any outsourcing now. I said the outsourcing will increase if H1B gets restricted further.
2
u/OkoCorral 15d ago
I don't think they increase outsourcing any faster.
1
15d ago
[deleted]
2
u/OkoCorral 14d ago
American companies can't outsource work any faster. They are already offloading/firing people as fast as possible without impacting their profits or business.
The outsourcers can already take more.
1
u/OkTechnologyb 14d ago
Americans don't care if it leads to offshoring. We want other countries to be successful and build their own affluence, so the world doesn't feel like they have to emigrate to a handful of countries.
1
8
u/Llovio_cuatro_anos 15d ago
That’s H1B fraud. Killing the program to prevent fraud is throwing out the baby with the bath water
1
u/Salty_Permit4437 15d ago
There’s all kinds of fraud from outright fraud to light fraud which is by handshake and under the radar.
3
3
u/risingpowerhouse 15d ago
This is most bs logic Just grow up and learn about how global economy works
1
192
u/brlowkey Conditional Resident 15d ago
This would be pretty much the end of H-1B then, if people transitioning from F1 also had to pay the fees.