Donald Trump’s administration has failed to suspend a ruling blocking the $100,000 fee on new H-1B visas, after the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals refused to place the lower court’s decision on hold.
The Boston-based appeals court found that the administration had not shown it was likely to succeed in establishing that it possessed the authority to impose the charge. The decision leaves in place a June 8 ruling that struck down the fee on the basis that it amounted to an unlawful tax that Congress had never authorised.
The underlying lawsuit was filed by 20 Democratic state attorneys general. The wider appeal remains pending, but the lower court’s order continues to prevent the administration from enforcing the disputed charge while the case proceeds.
Trump introduced the fee through a proclamation issued in September. The measure increased the cost of obtaining new H-1B visas, which technology companies rely on heavily when recruiting skilled foreign workers.
The H-1B programme provides 65,000 visas annually, with a further 20,000 available to workers holding advanced degrees. Approved visas cover periods of three to six years. Before the proclamation, employers generally paid between $2,000 and $5,000 in fees when applying to sponsor a foreign worker, depending on the circumstances.
The gap between those existing application costs and the disputed $100,000 charge leaves workforce budgets dependent on the outcome of the continuing appeal. Hiring plans involving overseas applicants may require a different cost assumption from recruitment involving foreign nationals already in the United States on student visas.
The fee does not apply to visas granted to foreign citizens already present in the country on student visas. Those applicants generally account for a large share of new H-1B recipients, creating different potential sponsorship costs depending on a candidate’s existing immigration status.
Trump has argued that the H-1B programme has been used to replace American workers with overseas employees who receive lower pay and have lower skill levels. The appeals panel’s decision does not determine the administration’s wider challenge, but it keeps the fee blocked under the current order.
Few employers have paid the charge since it was introduced. The limited number of payments does not remove the longer-term budgeting issue because the administration is continuing to contest the ruling.
Recruitment forecasts involving H-1B sponsorship will therefore need to preserve separate assumptions for the current position and for the possibility that the higher fee could return. The continuing appeal also makes the distinction between overseas applicants and candidates already in the United States on student visas material to workforce-cost planning.
