In a major win for U.S. employers, the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts has vacated the $100,000 “supplemental payment” that President Trump imposed on new H-1B petitions via Proclamation 10973. Judge Leo T. Sorokin ruled on 8 June that the levy functions as a tax that only Congress can create, and that CBP, the State Department and USCIS violated the Administrative Procedure Act by enforcing the fee without notice-and-comment rulemaking. The decision took effect nationwide and was widely circulated in legal alerts on 12 June.
![Court Strikes Down $100,000 Supplemental Fee on New H-1B Petitions]()
Employers scrambling to adapt to these rapid policy shifts can lean on VisaHQ’s corporate immigration services for end-to-end support—from document assembly and status tracking to deadline reminders—through its dedicated U.S. portal at https://www.visahq.com/united-states/ The platform’s real-time updates and expert guidance help HR and global mobility teams stay compliant and responsive as H-1B rules continue to evolve.
The Department of Justice is expected to appeal and may request a stay, but for now USCIS should not collect the payment. Since September 2025, the fee had dramatically raised the cost of sponsoring specialty-occupation workers, hitting tech firms, healthcare systems and universities alike. Analysts estimate that companies collectively paid or set aside more than $4 billion in the eight months the rule was active. For global mobility and talent-acquisition teams, the judgment provides immediate budget relief and may revive shelved hiring plans. Employers with petitions already filed but not yet approved should monitor USCIS refunds, while those who delayed filings can proceed without the six-figure surcharge—though they should prepare contingency funds in case an appellate court reinstates the fee. Strategically, the ruling illustrates that aggressive use of presidential authority under INA § 212(f) is vulnerable when it crosses into revenue generation. It may also influence forthcoming rulemakings on H-1B program fees and prevailing-wage reforms, reinforcing the importance of stakeholder comment and litigation preparedness. Finally, the split among district courts—another case in D.C. had upheld the fee—sets the stage for appellate resolution, leaving some uncertainty. Companies should stay in close contact with counsel, track government appeals and retain documentation of any payments made under the now-vacated rule.
Employers scrambling to adapt to these rapid policy shifts can lean on VisaHQ’s corporate immigration services for end-to-end support—from document assembly and status tracking to deadline reminders—through its dedicated U.S. portal at https://www.visahq.com/united-states/ The platform’s real-time updates and expert guidance help HR and global mobility teams stay compliant and responsive as H-1B rules continue to evolve.
The Department of Justice is expected to appeal and may request a stay, but for now USCIS should not collect the payment. Since September 2025, the fee had dramatically raised the cost of sponsoring specialty-occupation workers, hitting tech firms, healthcare systems and universities alike. Analysts estimate that companies collectively paid or set aside more than $4 billion in the eight months the rule was active. For global mobility and talent-acquisition teams, the judgment provides immediate budget relief and may revive shelved hiring plans. Employers with petitions already filed but not yet approved should monitor USCIS refunds, while those who delayed filings can proceed without the six-figure surcharge—though they should prepare contingency funds in case an appellate court reinstates the fee. Strategically, the ruling illustrates that aggressive use of presidential authority under INA § 212(f) is vulnerable when it crosses into revenue generation. It may also influence forthcoming rulemakings on H-1B program fees and prevailing-wage reforms, reinforcing the importance of stakeholder comment and litigation preparedness. Finally, the split among district courts—another case in D.C. had upheld the fee—sets the stage for appellate resolution, leaving some uncertainty. Companies should stay in close contact with counsel, track government appeals and retain documentation of any payments made under the now-vacated rule.
