Friday, September 25
Immigration / labor policyupdated today

Does the $100,000 H-1B visa fee ultimately take effect?

Will the $100,000 H-1B visa fee imposed by presidential proclamation ultimately survive legal challenges and be enforced against new H-1B petitions?

5% yes — The fee is reinstated

Flat — nothing moved in either the DHS rulemaking or the First Circuit appeal today

Skeptics of the fee surviving note the First Circuit found the government unlikely to succeed on the merits, the tax-vs-entry-restriction theory echoes the reasoning that sank the administration's IEEPA tariffs 6-3 at the Supreme Court, and renewing a stayed policy costs the administration nothing politically. The counter-case: choosing to formally extend the proclamation for a second year — rather than quietly letting it die and relying solely on the DHS rulemaking — is a real signal the White House intends to keep fighting for it, a separate D.C. district court already upheld an identical fee theory under Section 212(f) entry-restriction authority, and the pending $103,265 DHS rule gives the fee a second life even if the proclamation itself eventually loses on appeal.

No fixed date · Federal court litigation — First Circuit appeal pending, a Supreme Court review is plausible given the circuit split

A quiet day the day after the DHS comment window closed: no published count of comments, no DHS signal on finalizing, revising, delaying or withdrawing the separate $103,265 cap-subject rule, and no new filings in the First Circuit appeal (State of California v. Mullin), which stays on track toward its Oct 16 briefing close. Both fee tracks remain exactly where they were Wednesday — the $100,000 proclamation fee stayed and uncollectable pending appeal, and the $103,265 DHS rule not yet final and not yet owed on any petition.

The fee either survives judicial review and is enforced, or the courts' vacatur stands and it is permanently blocked — a discrete legal outcome with no fixed date since the appellate timeline is at the courts' discretion.

Researched Sep 25, 2026 · tracked since Aug 24, 2026 · 25 readings

100500Aug 24, 2026: 32%Aug 25, 2026: 28%Aug 26, 2026: 27%Aug 27, 2026: 26%Aug 28, 2026: 24%Aug 31, 2026: 23%Sep 1, 2026: 22%Sep 2, 2026: 21%Sep 3, 2026: 20%Sep 4, 2026: 18%Sep 7, 2026: 16%Sep 8, 2026: 15%Sep 9, 2026: 14%Sep 10, 2026: 12%Sep 11, 2026: 10%Sep 14, 2026: 8%Sep 15, 2026: 7%Sep 16, 2026: 6%Sep 17, 2026: 5%Sep 18, 2026: 4%Sep 21, 2026: 6%Sep 22, 2026: 5%Sep 23, 2026: 5%Sep 24, 2026: 5%Sep 25, 2026: 5%
32% Aug 24, 20265% Sep 25, 2026

Build a position

market 5%you 5%no edge

You agree with the market.

Nothing here has positive expected value — the price already reflects this view. Move the slider to where you think the odds actually are.

Take a side

The fee is reinstatedthis is “yes”

The circuit split ultimately breaks the government's way — whether at the First Circuit on the merits or on Supreme Court review of the D.C. precedent — and the $100,000 charge is enforced against new H-1B petitions going forward.

Short
INFY InfosysThe largest India-based IT services firm by US H-1B petition volume; 93% of its new hires would be hit by the fee per Bloomberg analysis.
Short
WIT WiproSecond-largest India-based IT services ADR with comparable H-1B dependency to Infosys.
Short
CTSH Cognizant Technology SolutionsUS-listed but heavily H-1B dependent — 89% of its 2020-2024 new hires required the visa category the fee targets.
Long
ASGN ASGN IncorporatedUS-based IT staffing firm with far lower H-1B dependency than the Indian majors — a relative winner if rivals face a permanent cost shock.
Long
RHI Robert HalfDocumented as not H-1B dependent (19 labor condition applications in 2025) — structurally insulated from the fee either way.
Long
MAN ManpowerGroupDiversified global staffing conglomerate with a small IT/foreign-talent mix relative to its total placement volume — a marginal relative beneficiary.

Worth knowing: The most recent appellate signal (the First Circuit's stay denial) went against the government, so this is currently the underdog case — a bet that a higher court, not the current appellate posture, ultimately prevails.

The fee stays blocked

The Massachusetts vacatur holds up on appeal, the tax/separation-of-powers theory that already sank the administration's IEEPA tariffs at the Supreme Court carries the day again, and the fee never takes effect.

Long
INFY InfosysThe largest India-based IT services firm by US H-1B petition volume; 93% of its new hires would be hit by the fee per Bloomberg analysis.
Long
WIT WiproSecond-largest India-based IT services ADR with comparable H-1B dependency to Infosys.
Long
CTSH Cognizant Technology SolutionsUS-listed but heavily H-1B dependent — 89% of its 2020-2024 new hires required the visa category the fee targets.
Short
ASGN ASGN IncorporatedUS-based IT staffing firm with far lower H-1B dependency than the Indian majors — a relative winner if rivals face a permanent cost shock.
Short
RHI Robert HalfDocumented as not H-1B dependent (19 labor condition applications in 2025) — structurally insulated from the fee either way.
Short
MAN ManpowerGroupDiversified global staffing conglomerate with a small IT/foreign-talent mix relative to its total placement volume — a marginal relative beneficiary.

Worth knowing: A district-court vacatur and a favorable stay denial are not a final ruling — the D.C. precedent upholding the fee is real, and if the Supreme Court takes the case on the entry-restriction theory rather than the tax theory, the calculus changes quickly.

23 sources, leaning both ways