{"id":10914,"date":"2026-06-09T07:16:15","date_gmt":"2026-06-09T07:16:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/federal-court-vacates-100000-h-1b-fee-burr-forman\/"},"modified":"2026-06-09T07:16:15","modified_gmt":"2026-06-09T07:16:15","slug":"federal-court-vacates-100000-h-1b-fee-burr-forman","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/federal-court-vacates-100000-h-1b-fee-burr-forman\/","title":{"rendered":"Federal Court Vacates $100,000 H-1B Fee | Burr & Forman"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n

In a ruling issued June 8, 2026, a federal court in Massachusetts vacated the $100,000 supplemental payment requirement imposed on employers filing certain H-1B visa petitions. The decision delivers significant cost relief for employers seeking to sponsor foreign workers under the H-1B program. The court found the payment requirement\u2014imposed by Presidential Proclamation in September 2025\u2014was an unlawful tax that exceeded presidential authority and violated federal administrative law on multiple grounds. The ruling vacates the $100,000 fee and therefore applies universally\u2014not just to the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.<\/p>\n

Background: The $100,000 H-1B Payment Requirement<\/u><\/h6>\n

On September 19, 2025, President Trump signed Proclamation 10973, which imposed a $100,000 \u201csupplemental payment\u201d on employers submitting petitions for new H-1B visas. The Proclamation took effect just two days later, on September 21, 2025, and was set to remain in place for twelve months. The Department of Homeland Security later clarified the fee rule did not apply to H-1B change of status, extension of status, or change of employer requests.<\/p>\n

The Department of Homeland Security retained broad discretion to waive the payment for individuals, companies, or entire industries found to be in the national interest. As of the date of the court decision, however, it was unclear if any exemption requests had been approved. Twenty states filed suit, alleging the massive fee increase was devastating their ability to staff public universities, educational institutions, research programs, and healthcare systems.<\/p>\n

The Court\u2019s Decision<\/u><\/h6>\n

The court concluded the $100,000 payment functions as a tax under established legal standards. Unlike a fee\u2014which is designed to cover the cost of processing a petition or providing a service\u2014the $100,000 payment did not impose a fee to cover costs. Instead, the amount was designed to raise revenue and deter conduct. The court emphasized the Immigration and Nationality Act does not grant the President the power to levy taxes, and Congress alone holds the taxing power under the Constitution.<\/p>\n

Having found the policy unlawful on multiple independent grounds, the court vacated the $100,000 requirement in its entirety. Importantly, the vacatur applies universally\u2014to all employers nationwide, not just those in the twenty plaintiffs.<\/p>\n

What This Means for Employers<\/u><\/h6>\n

While the decision is likely to be appealed, it has significant potential implications for H-1B employers. Initially, employers filing new H-1B petitions should not be subject to the supplemental payment. Universities, nonprofit research organizations, and other H-1B cap-exempt employers such as many school districts\u2014who were among the most severely impacted\u2014may consider reassessing their H-1B sponsorship strategies in light of the decision.<\/p>\n

The court\u2019s ruling may not ultimately be the final word on the $100,000 fee rule. The government is likely to appeal this decision to the Court of Appeals, and could also seek a stay of the court\u2019s ruling pending appeal. The $100,000 fee in its current form is set to expire on September 20, 2026, but could be extended by the administration.<\/p>\n

[View source<\/a>.]<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In a ruling issued June 8, 2026, a federal court in Massachusetts vacated the $100,000 supplemental payment requirement imposed on employers filing certain H-1B visa petitions. The decision […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":10915,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[7724,143,554,717,7725,4442,1390],"class_list":["post-10914","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-lawyers","tag-burr","tag-court","tag-federal","tag-fee","tag-forman","tag-h1b","tag-vacates"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10914","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10914"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10914\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10915"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10914"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10914"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10914"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}