Trump to impose $100k fee for H-1B worker visas, White House says

A lot of the discussion is about foreign workers competing with native ones and dragging salaries and employment down. This is a simplistic view, because it overlooks the fact that an insufficient labor supply keeps companies from growing faster, which in turn keeps them from hiring even more people.

So there is a tension between competition and increased opportunities and wage growth through increased company growth.

But how does this work out in practice? Luckily, there have been a lot of studies about the impact of the H1B program, which you can find on Google Scholar or SSRN. An extremely quick scan shows mixed findings that are hard to summarize, which is understandable because the dynamics are complex. (Contemplating getting Gemini to do a Deep Research report on this.)

So to narrow things down, I looked for empirical studies that focus on the specific counter-factual, "how would native workers fare if there were no H1B?" Interestingly, while I actually found some, even the recent studies (from 2022-2025) rely on empirical data from 2006 - 2008. That was when the H1B moved to a lottery system, creating a natural experiment allowing for comparison between firms that won and lost the lottery. (One study does find that limited data from 2022 corroborates its findings.) Not perfect, but better than hypotheticals.

Here's a government page with a very brief overview of two relevant studies: https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12966 (The page doesn't scroll, but the PDF can be downloaded.)

To summarize, the studies find that there was no negative impact on native-born workers in terms of employment, and in terms of wages, some saw increases and others saw decreases in the range of 3-5%, depending on age, tenure and level of education.

But interestingly, the 2025 study also found that winning a lottery also increased the chance by 2.5% that the firm survived. Causation and correlation etc. aside the implications for employment are clear: if a firm does not survive, all employees, native or foreign, lose their jobs. This is an example of the dynamic I mentioned above.

Beyond these studies, I follow a labor economist and it's fascinating to see how these dynamics have been playing out over the last few years in the broader economy. As a relevant example, there is a credible theory that increased immigration was what helped the US manage its inflation crisis:

https://fortune.com/2024/04/12/immigration-inflation-economy...

Tech interviewing has been dysfunctional for a long time, but yes it is much worse now because the tech job market is terrible. However I have previously commented (along with citations where possible) about how this job market is deliberately depressed. BigTech has achieved this through a few mechanisms, namely a) increasingly offshoring jobs while simultaneously b) freezing headcount in the US, and c) performing significant layoffs triggered by Elon's shenanigans at Twitter. And a highly under-reported aspect of all this is that these layoffs are causing much higher pressure on the remaining employees, which is leading to record levels of burnouts.

I'm letting my cynicism show here, but I think this is a power move by the capital class to show labor their place after an exceptionally strong labor market during ZIRP. This is much more recent and not related to the H1B program.