Federal Court Vacates $100,000 H-1B Fee Requirement
A federal court has struck down the Trump Administration’s controversial $100,000 fee requirement for certain H-1B visa petitions, finding that the government lacked legal authority to impose the charge without congressional approval.
In a decision issued on June 8, 2026, the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts vacated the policy nationwide, concluding that the additional fee exceeded the executive branch’s authority under existing immigration laws.
Employer H-1B Visa Fee Cancelled
The H1B fee had been introduced through a September 2025 presidential proclamation and applied to certain H-1B petitions filed on behalf of foreign workers outside the United States. The measure required employers to pay an additional $100,000 on top of existing H-1B filing fees before a petition could proceed.
The administration argued that the fee formed part of a broader effort to protect US workers and address labor market concerns. However, the court found that the government had effectively created a new financial charge without clear authorization from Congress.
According to the ruling, the fee operated as a tax rather than a regulatory filing charge. The court held that the Constitution grants Congress, not the President, the power to impose taxes and that existing immigration statutes did not provide authority for the executive branch to create a fee of this nature.
The court also concluded that the administration exceeded its authority under sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act and found additional legal defects in the way the policy had been implemented.
As a result of the ruling, the $100,000 fee requirement has been vacated and is no longer enforceable. Employers filing H-1B petitions are not currently required to pay the additional charge.
The decision applies nationally and affects all petitions that would otherwise have been subject to the fee requirement.
Impact on Employers
Following the decision, employers considering H-1B sponsorship can proceed without factoring the additional $100,000 fee into workforce planning or immigration budgets.
The decision does not affect existing H-1B filing requirements, prevailing wage obligations, Labour Condition Application requirements or employer compliance responsibilities.
Standard government filing fees remain in place, and employers should continue to ensure that sponsorship decisions are supported by robust immigration compliance processes.
NNU Perspective
For organizations, the ruling provides a degree of financial certainty at a time when immigration policy has become increasingly difficult to predict, particularly for employers operating in sectors that make regular use of the H-1B program, including technology, engineering, life sciences, healthcare and advanced manufacturing. In some cases, the additional fee exceeded the annual salary of the position being sponsored.
Workforce planning often takes place months or even years in advance, and unexpected immigration costs introduced through executive action can disrupt budgets, delay hiring decisions and affect investment planning.
Beyond the financial impact, the decision may have wider implications for how future administrations approach employment-based immigration policy. The court’s reasoning suggests there are limits on the executive branch’s ability to impose significant new financial burdens on employers without clear authorization from Congress. While each future policy would be assessed on its own legal basis, the ruling reinforces the principle that major changes to immigration costs should have a clear statutory foundation.
At the same time, employers should avoid viewing the judgement as indicative of a more permissive immigration environment. The administration retains significant authority in the immigration arena and political pressure to reform employment-based immigration has not disappeared.
Employers should also be aware that the litigation may not be over. The administration is expected to appeal the decision, and future legislative proposals could seek to increase the cost of employment-based immigration through congressional action. As a result, while the immediate financial burden has been removed, organizations with significant H-1B populations should continue monitoring developments closely.
Need Assistance?
Employers concerned about how changing H-1B policies could affect recruitment plans, workforce mobility or immigration compliance should seek legal advice early, particularly where hiring decisions or sponsorship strategies may be affected by ongoing litigation or future policy changes. For specialist guidance tailored to your organization, speak to our attorneys.
