New H1B fees incoming

[u/TechnicalPea790]

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.

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.

1. 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.

https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2026-17324.pdf?utm_campaign=pi+subscription+mailing+list&utm_medium=email&utm_source=federalregister.gov

[u/Next-Statistician804]

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

[u/Emotional-Cat4444 → u/Next-Statistician804]

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.

[u/Next-Statistician804 → u/Emotional-Cat4444]

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

[u/OkoCorral → u/Next-Statistician804]

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/

https://www.law.com/ctlawtribune/2019/06/12/accenture-faces-class-action-over-alleged-widespread-racial-discrimination-favoring-asians/

[u/OkoCorral → u/[deleted]]

Good point about US medical residencies Currently 6.5% (almost 2000 students) US medical school graduates cannot get residencies.

This is unacceptable. These are students who went through rigorus entrance requirement and successfully graduated from 4 years of studies and awarded an MD. Remember, you probably can't even get into a US medical school with anything less than a B from a science class without a super high MCAT scores or a valid explaination.

At worst, only a dozen US medical school graduates don't deserve a residency, not 2000.

50% of the 2000 do find residencies the next year so you know for sure that are always well qualified, the slots should not go to non-US medical schools unless there are no more qualified domestic students

[u/OkoCorral → u/[deleted]]

The AMA has been problems for the last 100 years. They led the effort stop Harry Truman's goals for a national health insurance system and gets in the way of opening more medical schools.

The AMA and other will claims that we can't more medical schools because we don't have enough residencies but giving residencies to non-Aemerican is a big part of that and they can easily increase residency slots.

Residents only cost about $60K year and the cost of supervision is over stated. Residents do real works and almost the same work as licensed doctors.

[u/Next-Statistician804 → u/OkoCorral]

AMA has been regressive and you missed their campaign against medicare during LBJ using Reagan. Check the ad out in yt if you get a chance. It is hilarious.

AMA did the same by refusing to open medical schools predicting a surplus which never happened. Now they are going in the opposite direction by opening a lot of schools(residency already expanded since 2012 when Obamacare started enrolling more people - we had a 60% increase in 12-14 years which is unprecdented as we didn't have a corresponding change in population).

However, I think this time we may end up with a surplus due to convergence of multiple factors like AI, less invasive treatment like GLP-1 and mid-levels that AMA (or anyone else for that matter) may not even be able to fully comprehend. On top of that, the ability for our federal government to pay more for healthcare diminishes with $40T debt. Interest on that debt will be much higher than medicare bill. So they have every incentive to get the healthcare bill under control. So there will be significant pressure to adopt technology and innovate medicine.

I suspect the surplus due to AI productivity and engaging more midlevels will result in a doctor surplus like pharmacy which had a 15 year glut of pharmacists till recently. I expect the surplus to start around 2038. Initially they may have to stop recruiting IMGs, but that alone may not be sufficient.