Trump Overhauls H-1B Visa Program, Imposes $100,000 Fee and Million-Dollar Residency Option

The Trump administration on Friday unveiled sweeping changes to the H-1B visa program, transforming how it is funded and used by proposing a $100,000 annual fee per visa and a new residency option for those willing to pay $1 million. Officials framed the move as part of a broader effort to crack down on both illegal and legal immigration, while tying it to a push to shift high-skilled training to American workers. The announcement came on the same day as a separate proposal for a “gold card” program that would grant U.S. residency for a price that, in effect, places a premium on talent mobility.

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick framed the measure as a lever to pressure companies into training Americans for high-skilled roles that would otherwise be filled by foreign workers. “If you're going to train somebody, you're going to train one of the recent graduates from one of the great universities across our land. Train Americans. Stop bringing in people to take our jobs,” he said on Friday. The H-1B visa, a temporary, non-immigrant program that allows U.S. employers to hire foreign workers in specialty occupations such as technology and engineering, previously cost between $1,700 and $4,500. It is valid for three years initially and can be extended for as long as six years. The administration's plan would dramatically alter the cost structure and, supporters say, encourage domestic training over bringing in global talent.

Proponents of the crackdown say the program has diverted highly paid jobs from American workers and undermined domestic training efforts. Critics, however, warn that the changes could deal a blow to the tech industry as firms adapt to new price signals and potential delays in talent mobility. They also warn that the higher fees could deter foreign students and engineers from pursuing opportunities in the United States. Even some of the administration’s broader backers have questioned the approach, given the central role H-1B has played in building major U.S. tech and engineering ventures. Elon Musk, for example, has argued that the visa program has been essential to creating companies and jobs that underpin the American economy, highlighting the tension within the administration’s coalition.

The announcement triggered confusion for current H-1B visa holders. Reuters reported that several major employers issued immediate guidance to employees holding H-1B visas to understand how the new rules would affect their status and future plans. Lutnick said he had the support of American businesses for the move, asserting that tech companies were aligned with the goal of strengthening the U.S. workforce.

Legal experts quickly questioned the administration’s authority to impose such a steep fee. Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior legal fellow at the American Immigration Council, said on BlueSky that the administration has “literally zero legal authority to impose a $100,000 fee on visas. None. Zip. Zilch.” He added that the only authority Congress has granted the executive branch is to charge fees to recover the costs of processing applications, not to establish a new, punitive price tag. The status of H-1B processing fees as a cost-recovery measure would likely invite legal challenges if implemented.

On the international side, India remains the primary source of H-1B visa holders, accounting for close to three-quarters of approvals last year, according to Pew Research Center data. India’s Ministry of External Affairs responded to the news by cautioning about humanitarian consequences for families affected by disruption to the visa pipeline. It noted that skilled talent mobility and exchanges have contributed to technology development, innovation, economic growth, competitiveness and wealth creation in both the United States and India, and that policymakers would need to weigh mutual benefits and people-to-people ties in assessing any policy adjustments. China accounts for roughly 11% of H-1B visas, according to U.S. government data.

The proposed reforms reflect a broader, politically charged moment in U.S. immigration policy. While supporters argue the measures would safeguard American workers and incentivize domestic training, critics warn they risk slowing the technology ecosystem, deterring foreign talent and investment, and altering the long-standing flows that have helped maintain the United States’ competitiveness in science, engineering and innovation. The administration has signaled that the changes aim to press employers to invest in U.S.-based training programs, but the path forward will likely hinge on how Congress deliberates any legislative changes, potential legal challenges, and how industry players adapt to a new pricing landscape that could redefine the economics of hiring foreign-skilled workers.