'H-1B should not exist to replace US workers': JD Vance backs $100,000 fee

US Vice-President says the country is reviewing employer practices and visa costs, as Indian professionals closely watch changes to the visa programme

The United States is increasing scrutiny of the H-1B visa programme, with President Donald Trump’s team pushing for the route to be used primarily for highly skilled foreign professionals rather than as a source of lower-cost labour.

 

US Vice-President JD Vance has now offered a clearer picture of how the administration views the programme, saying companies should not use H-1B visas to replace American employees with cheaper foreign workers. His comments come as the administration pursues tighter rules and higher costs for employers sponsoring H-1B workers.

 

Speaking on the All-In Podcast on Tuesday, Vance defended the administration’s approach and the $100,000 payment requirement for certain H-1B petitions. He said the aim was to ensure that the programme brings workers who make a significant contribution to the US economy.

  

The remarks are relevant for Indian professionals, who account for a large share of H-1B beneficiaries. They also offer an indication of what employers and prospective applicants may face as Washington continues to tighten scrutiny of the programme.

 

Why is the US tightening H-1B rules?

 

Vance said the administration had examined what it considers fraud and misuse in the H-1B system and concluded that some changes could be made through administrative action rather than waiting for Congress to amend the law.

 

“Congress is not going to pass a law changing this,” Vance said on the podcast.

 

The administration's stated objective is to ensure that H-1B visas are used for workers whose skills add significant value to the US economy, rather than for positions where an employer could simply hire a lower-paid foreign worker.

 

“If a tech company is going to try to get an H-1B visa, it’s an actual genius. It’s a person that is going to significantly enrich the tech ecosystem or the American economy,” Vance said.

 

He illustrated the administration’s concern with a hypothetical example of an American accountant earning $60,000 being replaced by a foreign worker earning $45,000.

 

“That is not what the programme exists for,” he said.

 

What is the $100,000 H-1B payment?

 

The administration introduced a $100,000 payment requirement for certain new H-1B petitions in September 2025. The White House said the measure applies to new petitions covered by the presidential proclamation and does not apply to previously issued H-1B visas or petitions submitted before the specified effective date.

 

The additional cost is significant for employers because H-1B sponsorship already involves filing fees and other expenses. A much higher payment could make companies more selective about the positions for which they are willing to sponsor foreign workers.

 

The administration has also pursued changes aimed at shifting the H-1B system towards higher-skilled and higher-paid workers.

 

For Indian applicants, this means the cost and conditions attached to sponsorship could become increasingly important alongside the availability of the visa itself.

 

Companies laying off US workers also under scrutiny

 

Vance also highlighted the administration's concern about companies that reduce their US workforce while continuing to seek foreign workers.

 

He questioned the logic of an employer claiming that it cannot find workers while having recently carried out large-scale layoffs.

 

“You’ll have a company that applies for an H-1B and they’ll say, ‘Oh, we’re desperate for workers. We can’t find the workers.’ And then you go and look at their history and they’ve laid off 5,000 people. Well, that’s ridiculous,” Vance said.

 

The administration is therefore looking at ways to prevent companies that use H-1B visas from laying off American workers and then hiring foreign workers for similar positions, Vance said.

 

“If you’re laying off American workers, you shouldn’t be going to the market searching for foreign workers to replace them,” he added.

 

What does this mean for Indians?

 

Vance’s remarks do not amount to a ban or nationality-specific restriction on Indian H-1B applicants. Instead, they indicate a shift in how the administration wants employers to use the programme.

 

Indian technology professionals and IT services companies have traditionally been major users of H-1B visas. Any changes affecting employer costs, wage requirements, selection criteria or scrutiny of applications can therefore have a direct bearing on Indian workers seeking US employment.

 

For applicants, the evolving system could make the nature of the job and the employer's circumstances more important. A company sponsoring a foreign professional may increasingly have to demonstrate that the role requires specialised skills and is not simply being filled because overseas labour is cheaper.

 

Vance acknowledged that some of the administration's measures have already faced legal challenges. The final impact will therefore depend not only on the administration's policies but also on how courts respond to them.

 

Still, his comments provide an indication of the policy direction. “The H-1B should not exist to replace American workers with low-wage foreigners,” Vance said. “It should exist to enrich the American economy.”