The Tax Times: Federal Court Strikes Down Trump’s $100,000 H‑1B Fee: What Employers Need to Know Now

On June 8, 2026, a federal judge in Massachusetts vacated President Trump’s controversial $100,000 “fee” on certain H‑1B petitions, calling it an unauthorized tax on U.S. employers and setting it aside under the Administrative Procedure Act. The decision in State of California et al. v. Markwayne Mullin et al., Civil No. 25‑13829‑LTS, is a major win for employers that rely on high‑skilled foreign talent.

What was the $100,000 H‑1B fee?

In 2025, the administration issued a proclamation titled “Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers,” supported by DHS and USCIS guidance, that effectively imposed a $100,000 charge on certain H‑1B petitions. The payment applied to petitions filed on or after September 21, 2025 for H‑1B workers abroad without a valid H‑1B visa, including many cases forced into consular processing after USCIS denied a change of status, extension, or amendment.

Although labeled as a “monetary penalty,” the measure operated as a six‑figure, per‑petition cost on employers seeking to fill key roles with foreign professionals.

Why did the court strike it down?

Judge Leo Sorokin held that the $100,000 assessment is, in substance, a tax on U.S. employers rather than a regulatory fee or penalty. Under the Constitution, Congress—not the President—holds the taxing power, and the government could not point to any statute in the immigration laws that clearly delegates authority to impose this kind of tax.

Because the proclamation and implementing policy exceeded that authority, the court found them unlawful and set them aside under the APA. In short, the administration cannot use immigration powers to create a new revenue‑raising tax on H‑1B employers.

What does this mean for your H‑1B strategy?

For now, USCIS may not collect or enforce the $100,000 fee in any case covered by the decision, and the vacatur applies nationwide. Employers planning H‑1B hiring for the upcoming fiscal year, or managing consular‑processing cases for workers abroad, can move forward without budgeting for an extra $100,000 per petition under this policy.

The administration is expected to appeal, but there is no indication of any stay currently in place. That makes this a critical moment to reassess stalled hiring plans, dust off postponed petitions, and confirm that your immigration counsel is leveraging the ruling to eliminate unnecessary costs and delays.

Our take

This decision is a reminder that even in the immigration arena, there are constitutional limits on how far the executive branch can go in shifting tax burdens onto employers. If your company paused H‑1B filings because of the $100,000 assessment—or if you have questions about pending cases that were caught up in the proclamation—now is the time to revisit those decisions with experienced counsel.

Need Tax Advice ?