President Trump’s plan to impose a $100,000 fee on new H-1B visa applicants and to offer a $1 million “gold card” American citizenship visa, is both telling and sadly predictable. Enacted by presidential proclamation, both visa proposals triggered immediate backlash from legal experts, technology executives, immigrant advocacy groups, and foreign governments, all of whom question their legality and warn of far-reaching consequences for the American tech workforce and broader economy. It’s a virtual certainty that the announced visa policy will be challenged in the courts.
by Kevin Seraaj, OrlandoAdvocate.com
The fee for H-1B visas rises from $215 to $100,000 for new applicants, and will not apply to current H-1B holders. It is supposed to be a one-time fee, instead of an annual payment as some outlets initially reported, so if there is anything good about this news, that piece of information would be it.
Technology and financial companies to pay?
Amazon is probably the largest recipient of H-1B visas, with more than 14,000 visa holders employed. Microsoft, Meta, Apple, and Google each reported over 4,000. Companies like these rely on H-1B visas to fill roles requiring specialized knowledge. Elon Musk, you may recall, said that American engineers are not qualified to handle those specialized tasks. Both he and Vic Ramaswamy said the U.S. needs workers from India and China– people most MAGA members would call “DEI hires”– to do this work.
Trump administration adviser Elon Musk angered MAGA supporters with his approval of a social media post sarcastically explaining that immigrants are needed for tech jobs because U.S. workers aren’t qualified enough. Trump backed him up.
Using the X social media platform owned by Musk, an account called Autism Capital summed up the debate over H-1B visas allowing U.S. employers to hire foreign workers in specialized fields, saying traditional American conservatives want tech jobs but complain they aren’t getting adequate training to do them. So who is expected to train them? People of color, it seems.
If a $100,000 H-1B visa fee seems counterintuitive, it is. I would fully expect to see a reduction in the number of applications. But it’s pretty much what we should expect from the gaggle of unqualified people the president has surrounded himself with. His “policies” will only be as good as his advisors– and they seem too afraid to tell him the truth.
In a parallel move, Trump also announced a new “gold card” visa, offering investors “a path to US citizenship” for $1 million. For corporate sponsorships, the cost rises to $2 million per worker, begging the question why a corporation would not simply provide an “investor” the $1 million to enter. Perhaps even more outrageous is the “Trump Platinum Card” priced at $5 million, which would allow recipients to stay in the US for up to 270 days per year without being taxed on non-U.S. income.
Critics contend that the president is overstepping Congress in unilaterally revamping visa policies. These new visa categories should properly require congressional approval for full implementation, but with the Congress’ abdication of its constitutional responsibilities, and the Supreme Court’s penchant for acting as The Trump Court, don’t hold your breath waiting for things to change.
Doug Rand, a former senior official at US Citizenship and Immigration Services, told The Associated Press that the measures were “ludicrously lawless,” arguing that they amount to little more than headline-grabbing fan service for immigration opponents. Labor organizations, such as the AFL-CIO, argue that the current lottery system should be replaced with awarding visas to the highest-paying employers – a policy Trump previously proposed during his first term, but will not entertain today.
Immigtration law expert Aaron Reichlin-Melnick doubled down on the question of Trump’s authority to make these changes.
“We haven’t seen the text of this yet,” he posted on X, “but to be clear, the president has literally zero legal authority to impose a $100,000 fee on visas. The only authority Congress has ever given the executive branch here is to charge fees to recover the cost of processing the applications.”
Then again, maybe Congressional abdication– the norm with this body of lawmakers– is enough.
- Kevin Seraaj
- Kevin Seraaj
- Kevin Seraaj
- Kevin Seraaj
