Remember that the purpose of the Berlin wall was not to keep the West out but to keep the East in. You're at the stage where 'in' and 'out' are being defined and if you have the choice I'd go for 'out' even if that means a temporary - large - setback.
Non cancerous link to the source.
Quote: Section 1. Restriction on Entry. (a) Pursuant to sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a), the entry into the United States of aliens as nonimmigrants to perform services in a specialty occupation under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), is restricted, except for those aliens whose petitions are accompanied or supplemented by a payment of $100,000 — subject to the exceptions set forth in subsection (c) of this section."the entry into the United States of aliens as nonimmigrants to perform services in a specialty occupation under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), is restricted, except for those aliens whose petitions are accompanied or supplemented by a payment of $100,000 — subject to the exceptions set forth in subsection (c) of this section. This restriction shall expire, absent extension, 12 months after the effective date of this proclamation, which shall be 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on September 21, 2025."
So it applies to all H1Bs. Subsection c is limited (but will be interesting to see how it plays out) so I don't bother sharing.
Actual proclamation here: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/09/rest...
Much easier for the companies to recommend/insist on folks fly back before the deadline to avoid issues.
※ - https://www.reddit.com/r/immigration/comments/1nlo8jd/h1b_pr...
We are on our way there.
The voters apparently wanted more of this per the Nov 2024 elections, when we still had a credible election process.
This is another Bernie Sanders policy. Bernie is also a populist.
The differences between them are mostly "two-sides of the same coin"
https://www.sanders.senate.gov/op-eds/h1-b-visas-hurt-one-ty...
I didn't see that on Bernie's website.
Lots of bad decisions were made over the last few decades, now we are living in the result.
How did we get to a point where people casually call H1B tech workers often earning $120K or more “slave labor”?
Change "Some" to "All major employers". I worked at a fortune 500 company in IT and all they hired were H1B employees over the past 15/20 years. The last raise we got that was above inflation and health insurance increases was before 2000. I left 2 years ago and after I left they fired almost everyone in the IT Dept I was in and replaced them with H1B.
So I hope this sticks. Plus remember, H1B people should make a fair wage too, all too often their salary is set by their contracting firm and is far far lower then what we got.
There are so many active H-1B visa holders, now everyone is just anxious. The rules can start for new visa applications. For existing holders, there should be a time period where people can figure out if the employer is even able to pay.
If this stays in effect for existing visa holders and the employers cannot pay in time or wants to change the contract, the individuals and their families are stuck. Plus, employees probably lose their job if employer cannot pay the fees.
POSIWID
This is what the system wants
Having to say to 'UPR' and other anti-atlantist militants 'you were absolutely right' was difficult I will admit.
Even if you like this policy as an end goal, the implementation is pants on head stupid.
This is a large net negative for 3 sectors that I can currently think of:
- American (software) tech workers - Healthcare - Research / Postgrad
Medicine and Research are fairly self explanatory, however, why the American software tech worker?
Let's say you're Microsoft, you have large offices all over the world - instead of hiring in the US and making those departments in US offices bigger, you're going to instead hire in probably the following places:
- UK - Australia - South Asia
It means less focus in the US which eventually will just become sales and marketing only with perhaps some smaller department sized tech jobs.
Another great Trump strategy that appears to be helping the poor whites but actually shafts them.
Microsoft has urged its employees on H-1B and H-4 visas to return to the US immediately before the Trump administration’s September 21 deadline, after which companies will be required to pay $100,000 per year for each H-1B worker visa.
pavlov•1h ago
They come up with these rules on a Saturday morning. If you’re a visa holder outside the country and you don’t return to the US by Sunday, you’ll be asked to pay a $100k ransom to re-enter the country where your life and work and children are.
Amazing level of contempt for ordinary foreigners who came into the country legally.
ericmay•51m ago
phyzix5761•46m ago
lmz•30m ago
Muromec•29m ago
This of course creates another problem -- highly paid foreigners price locals out of the housing market, but hej, we can always blame that on refugees, right.
risyachka•29m ago
Though it is reasonable to ask whatever you want you must understand there are always someone more desperate (and often with higher skills) that will take that job.
So the fact that 10yoe can’t find a job doesn’t mean anything. Usually this is either too many demands from seeker or skill issue.
Or they don’t eant to take lower salary.
If a company was willing to pay 70k for a developer you must be delusional to think they will suddenly decide to pay 100k+ for local talent.
They will just get a remote contractor
tayo42•20m ago
pavlov•43m ago
It’s going to take a long time while Microsoft figures out if they will actually pay these fees and which budget it should come out of.
Meanwhile, if you didn’t return by Sunday, you’re locked out of the country and unable to show up for work which will result in your termination fairly soon.
trollbridge•36m ago
FAANG are by far the largest users of H1-B. They also have billions of dollars and access to excellent lawyers. They can pay up for this; an excellent employee is certainly worth more than $100k per year to them. Think of this more as a tax levied on some of America’s wealthiest businesses.
Workaccount2•14m ago
more_corn•3m ago
teeray•35m ago
Remember too that this coincides with an RTO order for Puget Sound that kicks in roughly the same time.
ericmay•34m ago
I’m actually curious, have you worked at a large corporation before?
It would be atypical for the scenario you are describing to occur given that there has been a US government policy change that’s of no fault of the employee who is still eligible to work in the United States.
Folks aren’t going to be sitting around on Monday morning saying jeez Billy on the H1B visa didn’t show up to work today and we have no clue why, guess he is fired!
Within business units at this scale there are small, dedicated teams that manage contractors, vendor contracts and licenses, keep track of employees on visas, report that information for compliance purposes, etc, and they are almost certainly communicating with their employees who are currently out of the country to provide arrangements and additional details as things progress.
Muromec•27m ago
I deeply suspect it will go both ways -- one Billy would be paid for, while the other will be fired for not being able to show up. Not every Billy is on the same good standing with the corp.
ericmay•26m ago
Muromec•23m ago
JBorrow•39m ago
trollbridge•36m ago
JBorrow•33m ago
usernamed7•29m ago
JBorrow•27m ago
taminka•20m ago
[1]https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/reports/o...
JBorrow•6m ago
duped•32m ago
cjbgkagh•24m ago
That said I wonder if it’s more of a power grab with the discretion to grant exemptions being used to strong arm corporations to clamping down on criticism of Israel.
baobabKoodaa•13m ago
MS with N fewer workers is not going to bring in N*$440K less net income. The incremental income added by an average employee is much less than $440K.
cjbgkagh•10m ago
Ar-Curunir•11m ago
Igrom•24m ago
And is it respectable and okay to switch up the law over the weekend if, and just because, the ones who are affected are large companies? Realistically, what's the rush to have the "law" (Congress?) come into effect two days after its announcement, beside making it a shakedown? Remember that policymakers anticipate, or should anticipate, second-order effects. Either Microsoft forks out $100k per employee, or the cost of coping with the new policy is pushed onto the regular Joe. In any case, this produces a sense of crisis and urgency that you'd criticize if it happened at a measly, inexperienced startup you happened to work at.
The law changes three months ahead? Looks like I'll have to cancel my December plans. But when I'm on a holiday? Sure, let me pack my bags, get back to the nearest airport and take the first transcontinental flight. Or maybe Microsoft is flexible enough to have me shoulder the $100K to stay until the end of my holiday?
I'm not sure how openly the measure was discussed beforehand (and on that point: the employees already have visas; why must they return, unless their visa is about to expire?), but it was promulgated _yesterday_.
ericmay•9m ago
pclmulqdq•41m ago