H-1B visa workers and their families could face a much tougher path to staying in America under changes pursued by Donald Trump’s administration. The proposals would affect what happens after a worker loses a job, whether a spouse can work, and how much employers must pay for a new visa.
The stakes are high for technology companies that rely on workers from outside the United States. H-1B registrations filed this year were 38.5% lower than last year, while the program already limits the number of new visas to 85,000 each year. For workers from countries with large populations such as China and India, backlogs can stretch for decades.
A shorter path after job loss
One proposal that cleared a key White House review office would eliminate the 60-day grace period for H-1B visa holders who lose their jobs. That period gives workers time to find a new job or adjust their status before their visas lapse.
Removing the grace period could make it easier to deport H-1B workers after they lose employment. A worker would face less time to secure a new position or make another immigration arrangement, turning a job change into a much more serious threat to their stay in America.
Vivek Wadhwa, an entrepreneur and tech expert, described the situation in stark terms. “This is the scariest situation possible for H-1B visa workers,” he said. Wadhwa added, “It pushes them further into indentured servitude and gives unscrupulous employers even more leverage.”
His concern centers on the balance between workers and employers. When losing a job can also put a worker’s right to remain in the country at risk, employers gain more power over people who depend on the visa system. The proposed change would remove the time H-1B holders currently have to look for another job or adjust their status.
Spouses could lose work authorization
The administration has also proposed eliminating the ability of spouses of H-1B holders to receive work authorization. Under a rule from Barack Obama’s administration, some H-4 dependent visa holders could apply for employment permission when their H-1B spouse was seeking a green card.
That rule allowed some family members to work in the United States while the principal visa holder pursued permanent residence. The proposed change would take away that option for affected spouses, adding another barrier to family sponsorship and long-term plans in America.
Taken together, the proposals would affect both parts of an H-1B family’s working life. The visa holder could have less time to recover from job loss, while the spouse could lose the ability to work. That combination helps explain why the changes reach beyond a single employment document.
Higher fees and a divided political debate
The White House has moved to make a more than $103,000 fee for H-1B visas permanent. The president has also attempted to impose a more than $103,000 fee on new H-1B visas, creating another barrier for employers seeking to bring workers through the program.
The fee proposal comes as the administration pursues wider changes to H-1B visas. It has also moved to revoke hundreds of thousands of visas from people already inside the United States and aims to remove 1 million people from the country every year.
Support for the H-1B program has not followed a single political line. During the 2024 campaign season, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, who later became future leaders, championed the program. Their support stood against criticism from other administration figures.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick called the program a “scam.” Vice President JD Vance criticized technology companies for what he called the “bullsh**” story that they cannot find enough American workers.
That disagreement leaves H-1B workers and technology employers facing an uncertain program with a fixed annual cap, long backlogs, higher proposed fees, and possible changes to job-loss protections. The administration’s plans could make it harder for workers to stay, harder for spouses to work, and more expensive for employers to use the visa system.
For H-1B holders, the proposed end of the 60-day grace period would change the meaning of losing a job. For their families, the possible end of spouse work authorization would remove an important source of employment permission. The combined effect would place more pressure on people whose ability to live and work in America depends on the program.
Based on
