TechNet warns fee could set U.S. back in AI race with China
TechNet, a trade association whose members include the country’s largest internet platforms and leading artificial-intelligence companies, filed a public comment Thursday asking the Trump administration to withdraw its proposed $103,265 fee on most new H-1B visa applications. The Department of Homeland Security proposed the fee last month to encourage companies to hire American workers.
The filing landed on the closing day of DHS’s public-comment period on the proposed rule. Tech companies have almost uniformly supported President Trump’s policies of minimal regulation and tax cuts, even as they have consistently opposed tightening access to immigration paths.
In its comment, TechNet warned that the proposed fee could set the United States back in the artificial-intelligence race against China. “This proposal undermines the president’s championing of American global competitiveness, preventing U.S. companies from accessing the top talent from around the world they need to lead the world in innovation, build successful businesses and create prosperity for American communities,” the group wrote.
TechNet represents Apple, Amazon.com, Google parent Alphabet, Facebook operator Meta Platforms, OpenAI and Anthropic. The group also represents smaller companies, which analysts say would be hardest hit by the fee.
Major tech employers such as Apple, Amazon, Alphabet and Meta say there isn’t adequate talent currently in the U.S. for many specialized roles and that they often struggle to find the workers they need. Amazon uses the H-1B program to hire thousands of workers every year.
The H-1B program, created by Congress in 1990, is the primary pathway to the U.S. for highly skilled foreign workers and serves as an engine of the tech industry and startup ecosystem. Visa holders can eventually become eligible to apply for green cards, which let them stay in the country indefinitely.
The program has long drawn criticism from opponents of high-skilled immigration, including White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, who argues that companies use it to substitute lower-cost foreign workers for Americans. Companies counter that foreign workers fill specialized roles for which adequate U.S. talent is unavailable and that visa holders earn competitive salaries.
Concerns about the proposed fee are sharpened by the global competition for AI talent. Tech CEOs including Jensen Huang of Nvidia, another TechNet member, have said roughly half the world’s AI researchers are Chinese. Recent studies from organizations including the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace have found that more top scientists in the field from China, South Korea and Europe are staying in their home countries rather than coming to the United States.
Huang is among the tech CEOs expected to attend Thursday’s state dinner with President Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping.
According to the Journal, the Trump administration has taken unprecedented steps to restrict legal immigration avenues, especially those that allow international students to remain in the U.S. for work and eventually become citizens.
The current DHS proposal follows an earlier attempt about a year ago to impose a steep H-1B surcharge. Trump and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick announced via a Friday-afternoon executive order that new and existing H-1B visa holders would face a $100,000 fee. The move set off a weekend scramble among tech companies, which raced to tell employees who were traveling abroad and already held H-1B visas to return to the United States because it was unclear whether existing visa holders would be allowed back in without paying the fee. The administration subsequently clarified that the fee would apply only to new applicants.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other groups sued to block the earlier fee. In June, a federal judge struck it down.
If finalized, the new DHS rule would also apply only to new applicants. Proponents of using formal rulemaking rather than executive action say the process offers a more durable path to imposing the fee, though skeptics note it could still be subject to legal challenges.