Trump’s $100,000 H-1B fee records limited uptake as few US businesses pay

Only about 70 employers have paid the $100,000 fee for hiring H-1B workers from outside the United States since the charge was introduced through a White House proclamation in September, a US government lawyer told a court on Thursday, according to a Bloomberg Law report. The statement was made during a hearing in Oakland as federal judges examine multiple legal challenges to the policy.

The fee is part of the Trump administration’s broader restrictions on skilled foreign workers. According to the Bloomberg Law report, Plaintiffs argue that the charge has made the H-1B programme difficult to use, especially for small employers. The government says the low number of payments shows the measure is not introduced to raise revenue.

Also read: H-1B wage rules may change as proposal clears federal review

Government says $100,000 fee is not a tax

At the hearing in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, Department of Justice attorney Tiberius Davis said the low number of payments shows the fee is not designed to raise revenue. He argued that this weakens claims that the charge requires explicit approval from Congress, similar to tariffs that were recently struck down by the US Supreme Court.

“The small number of fee payers goes to show it’s not a tax because it’s not raising revenue,” Davis said in court, as quoted by Bloomberg Law.

The government maintains that it has authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act to restrict entry of certain categories of foreign nationals.

Plaintiffs challenge authority

Plaintiffs, including a nurse recruiting firm, argue that Congress only allowed immigration fees to cover administrative costs. They say the $100,000 charge goes beyond that limit and has disrupted the specialty occupation visa system for many employers.

Also read: H-1B FY27 visa registration begins March 4 with new rules, $100,000 fee for select employers

Esther Sung, legal director at Justice Action Center and counsel for the plaintiffs, said the Supreme Court has made clear that Congress must clearly delegate authority when allowing the executive branch to impose monetary charges.

“The Supreme Court has reiterated that when Congress is going to delegate discretionary authority to the executive to impose monetary assessments of any kind, regardless of whether they are characterized as fees or taxes, it has to do so clearly,” she said, as per Bloomberg Law report. “That delegation has to be expressed.”

Plaintiffs also argue that the fee is arbitrary and should have followed notice-and-comment procedures under federal administrative law. The government says the proclamation is not subject to such review.

Also read: Trump administration weighs plan to make banks collect customers’ citizenship details

Court proceedings continue

The case is one of several legal challenges to the fee. A federal judge in Washington, DC, previously denied a request for an injunction in a related lawsuit filed by the US Chamber of Commerce, and that case is under appeal. Another lawsuit has been filed by California and other states in Massachusetts.

Judge Haywood S. Gilliam Jr. did not rule on the motions for a preliminary injunction or class certification in the Oakland case. He denied a government request to pause proceedings and asked both sides to submit additional arguments on the impact of the recent Supreme Court decision on tariffs.

The court will continue to review the legal challenges as proceedings move forward.