On September 18, 2026, President Trump issued two significant presidential actions affecting the H-1B program: a new Executive Order directing federal agencies to increase scrutiny of H-1B employers, particularly employers that have recently laid off U.S. workers, and a Presidential Proclamation extending the controversial $100,000 H-1B payment requirement for another year.

Although the two actions are related, they do very different things. The Proclamation attempts to continue the $100,000 restriction first announced in September 2025. The Executive Order focuses on enforcement, information sharing, employer layoffs, and increased scrutiny of H-1B filings.

For H-1B workers and companies that employ them, the most important point is that neither action should be viewed in isolation. Together, they signal a continued effort by the Administration to reshape how employers use the H-1B program.

The $100,000 H-1B Proclamation Is Extended Through September 2027

In September 2025, President Trump issued Presidential Proclamation 10973, which attempted to impose a $100,000 payment requirement on certain H-1B petitions involving workers outside the United States who would need to enter the country to take advantage of the petition approval.

The Administration relied primarily on the President’s authority under sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to restrict entry when the President determines that the entry of certain noncitizens would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.

The September 18, 2026 Proclamation extends that policy for another 12 months, with the White House stating that the restriction will continue through September 21, 2027. The Proclamation continues to target H-1B workers who must seek admission to the United States to effectuate approval of an H-1B petition, including cases involving consular notification or subsequent admission at a port of entry.

The Proclamation also retains the possibility of national-interest exceptions.

The $100,000 Requirement Is Still Tied Up in Court

The extension does not mean employers should assume that the $100,000 payment is immediately enforceable.

The 2025 policy has been the subject of significant litigation, and courts have reached different conclusions about its legality.

In December 2025, a federal district court in Washington, D.C. upheld the policy in litigation brought by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Association of American Universities. That case is now pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

A different federal court reached the opposite conclusion in litigation brought by a group of states. On June 8, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts vacated the federal agencies’ implementation of the $100,000 requirement. The court concluded that the agency actions violated the Administrative Procedure Act and exceeded lawful authority.

The government appealed and asked the First Circuit to allow the policy to remain in effect during the appeal. On July 24, 2026, the First Circuit denied that request.

As a result, the new Proclamation preserves the Administration’s policy for another year, but it does not by itself eliminate the existing litigation or resolve whether the government may lawfully collect the $100,000 payment.

Why Extend a Policy That Is Being Blocked in Court?

The original Proclamation was scheduled to expire in September 2026. If the Administration allowed it to expire while its appeals were pending, the underlying restriction could disappear even if the government later prevailed in court.

Extending it keeps the policy alive through September 2027 while the litigation continues.

The new Proclamation also gives the Administration a fresh presidential determination and additional factual findings to defend.

The White House says the 2025 policies have substantially changed H-1B filing behavior. According to the new Proclamation, registrations from the largest IT staffing and outsourcing companies fell from 24,946 to 2,055, a 92 percent decrease. It also reports a nearly 97 percent decline in consular-processing requests between the FY 2025 and FY 2027 cap seasons.

The Administration also points to a shift toward higher educational credentials and higher wage levels. It reports that beneficiaries with at least a U.S. master’s degree increased from 45.1 percent of FY 2026 registrants to 66.1 percent for FY 2027, while approximately 46.3 percent of FY 2027 selections were associated with the two highest wage levels.

The Administration says these changes show that its H-1B policies are working.

There is an important distinction, however. These statistics primarily demonstrate that H-1B filing patterns changed. They do not necessarily demonstrate that U.S. workers received more jobs, higher wages, or greater job security because of the $100,000 policy.

In fact, the same Proclamation says unemployment among recent college graduates declined only slightly, from 5.8 percent in September 2025 to 5.7 percent in June 2026, while underemployment increased from 41.8 percent to 42 percent.

The Proclamation also attributes the change in filing patterns to the combined effects of the $100,000 policy and the new weighted H-1B selection system. That makes it difficult to isolate the effect of the $100,000 requirement itself.

The New H-1B Executive Order Focuses on Employer Layoffs

The Executive Order issued the same day may ultimately have a broader day-to-day effect on H-1B employers.

The order directs the Departments of Labor, Homeland Security, and State to coordinate with the Departments of Commerce and Education and the Small Business Administration when reviewing H-1B cases.

These agencies are directed to share and consider information involving wages, employment conditions, academic credentials, industry conditions, and other economic information.

Most significantly, the order instructs the agencies to consider whether an H-1B sponsoring employer has directly or indirectly conducted layoffs during the previous year, or plans future layoffs, that negatively affect similarly situated U.S. workers.

That consideration may occur during the review of Labor Condition Applications, H-1B petitions, visa applications, and admission to the United States.

Does a Layoff Now Prevent a Company From Filing an H-1B Petition?

No.

The Executive Order does not create a blanket rule that an employer that has laid off U.S. workers is prohibited from sponsoring H-1B employees.

That distinction is important because Congress has already created specific displacement protections within the H-1B statute.

Under existing law, the H-1B nondisplacement requirements generally apply to H-1B-dependent employers and employers found to be willful violators. In those situations, employers may be prohibited from displacing a U.S. worker from an essentially equivalent position during specified periods surrounding an H-1B petition or placement.

Congress did not impose the same nondisplacement requirement on every H-1B employer.

Therefore, the fact that a company has conducted layoffs does not automatically mean that the company’s subsequent H-1B petitions violate the law.

What the Executive Order Could Change

Even though a layoff is not automatically disqualifying, employers with recent layoffs should expect greater scrutiny.

For example, USCIS could examine more closely whether an H-1B position is legitimate, whether the beneficiary will actually perform the stated duties, whether the occupational classification and wage level are appropriate, and whether the employer’s representations are consistent with its broader workforce activity.

The Department of State could similarly ask additional questions during visa processing when an employer has announced significant layoffs while continuing to sponsor foreign workers.

The Department of Labor may have the most immediate enforcement role. The Executive Order directs DOL to begin reviewing data involving previously submitted LCAs within 30 days to determine whether particular employers warrant further investigation under INA § 212(n)(2)(G).

That provision already permits the Secretary of Labor to initiate an investigation of an H-1B employer when there is reasonable cause to believe that the employer is not complying with its statutory obligations.

In practical terms, employers should expect more audits, investigations, document requests, and cross-agency comparisons of information.

There Are Limits on What the Administration Can Do

The President has substantial authority to direct executive agencies to coordinate enforcement activities, share information, and make greater use of enforcement powers Congress has already given them.

That does not necessarily mean the Executive Branch can create entirely new H-1B eligibility requirements without legislation or formal rulemaking.

For example, federal law specifically states that the Department of Labor generally reviews an LCA only for completeness and obvious inaccuracies and must certify it unless it is incomplete or obviously inaccurate.

The statute separately provides procedures through which DOL may investigate suspected violations.

This creates an important legal distinction.

Using layoffs as a red flag that causes the government to investigate whether an employer violated existing H-1B requirements is one thing.

Creating a new rule that says an otherwise eligible employer cannot obtain approval of an H-1B petition simply because it conducted layoffs during the previous year would raise a different legal question because Congress has not imposed such a blanket prohibition.

The Executive Order itself recognizes this limitation by repeatedly requiring agencies to act consistently with applicable law.

What H-1B Employers Should Do Now

Companies using the H-1B program should begin thinking about immigration filings as part of their broader workforce planning rather than treating immigration as a completely separate function.

If a company has conducted layoffs, immigration counsel should understand what positions were eliminated, where those employees worked, what their job duties were, and whether those positions are similar to positions for which the company is now seeking H-1B workers.

Employers should also expect government agencies to compare information contained in immigration filings with other available employment information.

Consistency will therefore become increasingly important. Job descriptions, wage levels, work locations, organizational structures, public announcements, WARN notices, and other employment records could all become relevant when an agency reviews an H-1B filing.

A company that conducts layoffs should not automatically stop filing legitimate H-1B petitions. But employers should be prepared to explain why an H-1B position remains necessary and how it differs from positions affected by layoffs when those facts could reasonably attract government scrutiny.

What H-1B Workers Should Know

For H-1B workers, the new Executive Order does not cancel H-1B status, prohibit extensions, or create an automatic denial simply because an employer has conducted layoffs.

The more immediate risk is increased scrutiny.

Workers employed by companies that have announced significant layoffs may see additional questions during H-1B petition adjudication or visa processing. Employers may also become more cautious about initiating new H-1B cases while they evaluate how the agencies will implement the order.

H-1B workers should also understand that an employer’s overall layoff activity does not necessarily mean that the worker’s individual petition is legally defective. A multinational company may eliminate employees in one occupation, location, or business unit while continuing to have legitimate shortages in another.

The key question will often be whether the laid-off U.S. workers were actually similarly situated to the H-1B workers being sponsored.

What Happens Next?

The September 18 actions are best viewed as part of a larger H-1B enforcement strategy rather than as isolated policy announcements.

The Administration has already implemented a weighted H-1B cap selection system intended to favor higher-wage positions, DOL has proposed changes to prevailing wage methodology, the Administration continues to defend the $100,000 H-1B payment requirement in court, and the new Executive Order calls for considerably greater coordination among federal agencies.

For the Executive Order, much will depend on what DOL, USCIS, and DOS do next. Agency memoranda, operational guidance, RFEs, investigations, visa adjudications, and potentially new regulations will determine how aggressive the policy becomes in practice.

For the $100,000 Proclamation, the litigation remains critical. The Administration has made clear that it wants the restriction to continue through September 2027, but courts are still considering fundamental questions about whether the Executive Branch has the statutory authority to impose and implement the payment requirement.

The Bottom Line

The September 18 Executive Order and Presidential Proclamation send a clear policy signal, but their immediate legal effects are different.

The Proclamation attempts to preserve the $100,000 H-1B entry restriction for another year while the legality of that policy continues to be litigated.

The Executive Order directs federal agencies to look much more closely at the relationship between H-1B sponsorship and employer layoffs and to share information that previously may have remained within separate agencies.

For employers, that means H-1B sponsorship is likely to receive greater scrutiny when layoffs are involved.

For H-1B workers, it does not mean that employment with a company that has conducted layoffs automatically makes an H-1B petition ineligible. It does mean that the employer may need to be much better prepared to explain and document why the H-1B position remains legitimate and how its H-1B hiring complies with existing law.

The most important developments to watch next will be how DOL, USCIS, and the Department of State implement the Executive Order and how the federal appellate courts resolve the continuing challenges to the $100,000 H-1B policy.

By: Emily Neumann

Emily Neumann is Managing Partner at Reddy Neumann Brown PC with over 15 years of experience practicing US immigration law providing services to U.S. businesses and multinational corporations. Emily has helped transform the firm from a solo practice to Houston’s largest immigration law firm focused exclusively on U.S. employment-based immigration.  She received her Bachelor’s degree in Biology from Central Michigan University and her Juris Doctorate degree from the University of Houston Law Center. Emily has been quoted in Bloomberg Law, U.S. News & World Report, Inside Higher Ed, and The Times of India on various hot topics in immigration. She is a member of the American Immigration Lawyers Association and Society for Human Resource Management.