Big Tech Explores Loopholes Plans to Sidestep Trump’s $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee

Giant technology companies are reportedly looking at legal and structural workarounds to avoid the Trump administration’s controversial $100,000 fee on H-1B visa applications, even as smaller firms struggle with the steep new cost that could reshape U.S. hiring patterns. The debate reflects growing tension between immigration policy, global talent competition and corporate strategy in Silicon Valley.

Under an executive proclamation signed in September 2025, employers seeking to bring in highly skilled foreign workers on H-1B visas must pay a $100,000 fee per application, a dramatic increase from the previous $2,000–$5,000 range. The Biden-era program, which tech companies have relied on for decades, is central to staffing key engineering, AI, cloud, and cybersecurity roles.

In response, companies like Amazon, Microsoft, Google and others are said to be planning strategies to avoid paying the fee outright by leveraging existing immigration categories that aren’t subject to the new charge. Options include hiring individuals already holding valid H-1B status, recruiting international students on alternative visas before they require a fresh H-1B application, and making greater use of intra-company or executive transfer visas that sidestep the fee rule.

Such approaches can reduce immediate costs for well-resourced firms because they allow them to tap talent already in the United States or under different visa programs less affected by the fee. But these options are less accessible to smaller companies that lack large, existing cohorts of H-1B holders or the legal bandwidth to navigate complex immigration niches, industry sources say.

The high cost has already prompted some startups and midsize firms to pause H-1B sponsorships, rethink hiring strategies, or push roles offshore with some looking to expand remote workforces in countries like India or Europe where they can hire skilled talent without the U.S. fee burden. Firms are also exploring visa categories such as L-1 intracompany transfers and B-1 business visas to maintain cross-border talent mobility while minimizing costs.

Analysts say these shifting plans underscore how “Big Tech” companies’ financial flexibility gives them more options to adapt than smaller competitors, which could face strategic disadvantages if they cannot afford the new fees or lack the structures to deploy talent through alternative visas or offshore hubs. Critics argue that the policy will widen gaps between tech giants and smaller innovators, potentially redirecting jobs and investment to offshore sites.

Experts also warn the fee could accelerate broader offshoring of work and teams as companies respond to cost-prohibitive visa environments. With India, Eastern Europe and Latin America already hosting large tech development centres, some employers may expand those operations rather than shoulder high U.S. hiring costs.

Legal challenges to the fee including lawsuits from states and business groups arguing it exceeds presidential authority could alter the landscape again, though litigation is expected to take months. For now, companies are balancing compliance with strategic moves to protect access to global talent amid evolving immigration policy.