Business
H-1B: What Trump’s $100,000 visa means for India and US industries
Soutik Biswas and Nikhil InamdarBBC News
Getty ImagesPanic, confusion and then a hasty White House climbdown – it was a weekend of whiplash for hundreds of thousands of Indians on H-1B visas.
On Friday, US President Donald Trump stunned the tech world by announcing an up to 50-fold hike in the cost of skilled worker permits – to $100,000. Chaos followed: Silicon Valley firms urged staff not to travel outside the country, overseas workers scrambled for flights, and immigration lawyers worked overtime to decode the order.
By Saturday, the White House sought to calm the storm, clarifying that the fee applied only to new applicants and was a one-off. Yet, the long-standing H-1B programme – criticised for undercutting American workers but praised for attracting global talent – still faces an uncertain future.
Even with the tweak, the policy effectively shutters the H-1B pipeline that, for three decades, powered the American dream for millions of Indians and, more importantly, supplied the lifeblood of talent to US industries.
That pipeline reshaped both countries. For India, the H-1B became a vehicle of aspiration: small-town coders turned dollar earners, families vaulted into the middle class, and entire industries – from airlines to real estate – catered to a new class of globe-trotting Indians.
For the US, it meant an infusion of talent that filled labs, classrooms, hospitals and start-ups. Today, Indian-origin executives run Google, Microsoft and IBM, and Indian doctors make up nearly 6% of the US physician workforce.
Indians dominate the H-1B programme, making up more than 70% of the recipients in recent years. (China was the second-largest source, making up about 12% of beneficiaries.)
In tech, their presence is even starker: a Freedom of Information Act request in 2015 showed over 80% of “computer” jobs went to Indian nationals – a share industry insiders say hasn’t shifted much.
The medical sector underlines the stakes. In 2023, more than 8,200 H-1Bs were approved to work in general medicine and surgical hospitals.
India is the largest single source of international medical graduates (who are typically in US on H-1B visas) and make up about 22% of all international doctors. With international doctors forming up to a quarter of US physicians, Indian H-1B holders likely account for around 5-6% of the total.
Experts say pay data shows why Trump’s new $100,000 fee is unworkable. In 2023, the median salary for new H-1B employees was $94,000, compared with $129,000 for those already in the system. Since the fee targets new hires, most won’t even earn enough to cover it, say experts.
“Since the latest White House directive indicates that the fee would only apply to new H-1B recipients, this is more likely to cause medium and long-term labour shortages instead of immediate disruption,” Gil Guerra, an immigration policy analyst at the Niskanen Center, told the BBC.
India may feel the shock first, but the ripple effects could run deeper in the US. Indian outsourcing giants such as TCS and Infosys have long prepared for this by building local workforces and shifting delivery offshore.
The numbers tell the story: Indians still account for 70% of H-1B recipients, but only three of the top 10 H-1B employers had ties to India in 2023, down from six in 2016, according to Pew Research.
To be sure, India’s $283bn IT sector faces a reckoning with its reliance on shuttling skilled workers to the US, which accounts for over half its revenue.
IT industry body Nasscom believes the visa fee hike could “disrupt business continuity for certain onshore projects”. Clients are likely to push for repricing or delay projects until legal uncertainties are cleared, while companies may rethink staffing models – shifting work offshore, reducing onshore roles and becoming far more selective in sponsorship decisions.
Indian firms are also likely to pass on the increased visa costs to US clients, says Aditya Narayan Mishra of CIEL HR, a leading staffing firm.
“With employers reluctant to commit to the heavy cost of sponsorship, we could see greater reliance on remote contracting, offshore delivery and gig workers.”
The broader impact on the US could be severe: hospitals facing doctor shortages, universities struggling to attract STEM students, and start-ups without the lobbying muscle of Google or Amazon are likely to be hit hardest.
“It [visa fee hike] will force US companies to radically change their hiring policies and offshore a significant amount of their work. It will also ban founders and CEOs coming to manage US-based businesses. It will deal a devastating blow to US innovation and competitiveness,” David Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, told BBC.
San Francisco Chronicle via Getty ImagesThat anxiety is echoed by other experts. “The demand for new workers in fields like tech and medicine [in US] is projected to increase (albeit in uneven ways), and given how specialised and critical these fields are, a shortage that lasts even a few years could have a serious impact on the US economy and national well-being,” says Mr Guerra.
“It will likely also incentivise more skilled Indian workers to look at other countries for international study and have a cascading effect on the American university system as well.”
The impact, in fact, will be felt most sharply by Indian students, who make up one in four international students in the US.
Sudhanshu Kaushik, founder of the North American Association of Indian Students, which represents 25,000 members across 120 universities, says the timing – just after September enrolments – has left many new arrivals stunned.
“It felt like a direct attack, because the fees are already paid, so there’s a big sunk cost of anywhere between $50,000 and $100,000 per student – and the most lucrative route to entering the American workforce has now been obliterated,” Mr Kaushik told the BBC.
He predicts the ruling will hit US university intake next year, as most Indian students opt for countries where they can “put down permanent roots”.
For now, the full impact of the tax hike remains uncertain.
Immigration lawyers expect Trump’s move to face legal challenges soon. Mr Guerra warns that the fallout could be uneven: “I expect the new H-1B policy will bring a number of negative consequences for the US, though it will take some time to see what those may be.”
“For example, given that the executive order allows for certain companies to be excepted, it could be possible that some heavy H-1B users such as Amazon, Apple, Google, and Meta will find a way to be exempted from the H-1B fee policy. If they all get exemptions, however, this would largely defeat the purpose of the fee.”
As the dust settles, the H-1B shake-up looks less like a tax on foreign workers and more like a stress test for US companies – and the economy. H-1B visa holders and their families contribute roughly $86bn annually to the US economy, including $24bn in federal payroll taxes and $11bn in state and local taxes.
How companies respond will determine whether the US continues to lead in innovation and talent – or cedes ground to more welcoming economies.
Liv McMahon and
Chris Vallance,Technology reporters
Getty ImagesGrand Theft Auto (GTA) maker Rockstar Games has been accused by a trade union of sacking staff in the UK to stop them from unionising.
The Independent Workers’ Union of Great Britain (IWGB), which represents people working in the gaming sector, said 31 workers were fired from Rockstar’s UK studios on 30 October.
The union led rallies outside the company’s offices in Edinburgh and London on Thursday to protest what it described as “the most blatant and ruthless act of union busting in the history of the games industry”.
The BBC has approached Rockstar’s parent company, Take-Two Interactive, for comment, which has reportedly claimed staff were sacked for sharing confidential information.
IWGB“Last week, we took action against a small number of individuals who were found to be distributing and discussing confidential information in a public forum, a violation of our company policies,” a Rockstar spokesperson told Bloomberg in a statement.
“This was in no way related to people’s right to join a union or engage in union activities.”
At large video game studios, information about game development is tightly controlled – with employees often signing agreements not to share confidential information.
Rockstar’s upcoming GTA 6 is expected to be one of the best-selling games of all time, with fans clamouring for any news ahead of its May 2026 release date – meaning security around any information will be heightened at the studio.
But union president Alex Marshall accused Rockstar of deflecting from the “real reason” for firing staff – which the IWGB believes is their union involvement.
“They are afraid of hard working staff privately discussing exercising their rights for a fairer workplace and a collective voice,” he said.
“Management are showing they don’t care about delays to GTA 6, and that they’re prioritising union busting by targeting the very people who make the game.”
According to the IWGB, the UK workers fired at the end of October were part of a group discussing forming a union at the company.
Mr Marshall said its only non-Rockstar employees were union organisers.
“We refute that confidential information was shared publicly,” IWGB said in a statement.
Dr Paolo Ruffino, senior lecturer in digital curation and computational creativity at Kings College London, said it was a “textbook” case of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) being used by gaming firms.
“They’re used at every level in gaming, creating a culture of secrecy that makes investigating working conditions nearly impossible,” he said.
“The real question is whether these dismissals were about leaked information or protected union activity – a distinction UK employment law requires but which NDA allegations make difficult to prove.”
‘Equalising the scales’
Speaking to the BBC at a picket outside the Rockstar North office in Edinburgh, organiser Fred Carter said he was standing alongside staff who had been sacked “without warning” and “without reason”.
“They’ve been fired, we believe, because they’re union members – which is a protected activity in the UK,” he said.
“We’re asking people to come out and support us, to demand their jobs back and demand accountability from Rockstar.”
A former employee speaking at the Edinburgh rally said there was a “power imbalance” at play in conversations with management.
“Not everyone is comfortable speaking up, and even when you do you can get shut down because you’re just one person,” they said.
Workers at BAE Systems in Lancashire have been cleared to proceed with planned industrial action after the High Court dismissed the company’s last-minute bid to block strikes.
The aerospace giant had sought an injunction against Unite the Union members at its Warton and Samlesbury sites, arguing their planned walkout was unlawful.
However, Mr Justice Soole refused to grant the injunction on Thursday, stating: “Having considered the evidence, the application is dismissed. I will give my reasons later.”
The ruling paves the way for strikes, which the union said were due to begin on Wednesday and continue until 25 November, following the rejection of a 2025 pay offer.
In written submissions, Bruce Carr KC, representing BAE, contended that Unite had invalidated the strike’s lawfulness by instructing members not to train managers in aircraft testing after giving notice to ballot on 24 September.
The barrister added: “It is the claimant’s case that the evidence clearly demonstrates that at that meeting and thereafter, Unite called on its members employed as quality professionals, to take industrial action in the form of refusing to undertake the training of managers employed by the claimant.”
Mr Carr said that in mid-September BAE wanted the training after “a number of absences” and while it was “considering business continuity plans in the event of possible industrial action”.
This training occurred between 22 September and 10 October, after which the quality professionals refused to continue following instructions from the union, Mr Carr said.
These workers breached their duty to BAE because they are “required to act in the best interests of the company to carry out such duties in respect of their appointment as they may reasonably be called upon to undertake”, the barrister added.
Oliver Segal KC, for Unite, said the training was a “request”, not an “instruction” and therefore workers who refused were not in breach of their contract.
He described managers being trained for the testing role as “unprecedented” and that union representatives had asked workers to get the “request” in writing while they seek legal advice.
In written submissions, he said: “The evidence in this case is that the defendant never even suggested, let alone ‘called’ on, its members who are quality professionals to refuse to comply with a management instruction to provide training to management executives.”
Mr Segal said BAE was “ludicrously interpreting” emails between union representatives discussing the training as instructions for union members not to comply.
The barrister also said there was no refusal to train the managers after 10 October and that one of the quality professionals gave a statement saying his team never stopped providing training.
He continued: “The reality is that this application is a last-minute, desperate attempt by the claimant to neuter the industrial action, which is both factually mis-premised and legally misconceived.”
Mr Carr said on Thursday that BAE is considering an appeal.
A BAE spokesperson said: “We note the ruling by the High Court. We believe we had good grounds for the legal challenge and will consider the court’s judgment.
“We respect the right of employees to engage in industrial action and remain committed to a partnership approach with all our trade union groups.”
The PA news agency understands that less than 70 employees out of 12,000 are involved in the strike action while production lines are continuing to operate.
Speaking after the decision, Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: “This unsuccessful attempt by BAE to prevent a lawful strike will have severely damaged the goodwill it has with its workforce.
“BAE is a multibillion-pound company making record profits.
“It now needs to come back to the negotiating table with an acceptable offer for striking workers in its Air division, rather than wasting money on pointless legal threats.
“Otherwise, our members will be taking strike action throughout November in their fight for fair pay.”
Rachel Halliday of Thompsons Solicitors, which represented Unite, added: “This is a clear win for Unite and for workers everywhere.
“The High Court has confirmed that the union acted lawfully at every stage, and that BAE’s attempt to block strike action had no basis.
“Today’s decision will send a strong message to employers that the courts cannot be used to silence workers standing up for fair pay and respect.
“Unite acted responsibly throughout, adhering to all statutory requirements, and this important decision reinforces the union’s members’ right to strike.
“Thompsons is proud to have stood with Unite in defending this principle. Working people have the right to be heard – and to take lawful industrial action when negotiations fail.”
Workers at BAE Systems in Lancashire can continue to strike following the dismissal of a bid for a High Court injunction aimed at blocking industrial action.
The company asked a judge to order Unite the Union members at the Warton and Samlesbury sites to cease their planned action in a last-minute hearing on Tuesday.
Strikes were due to start on Wednesday and last until November 25, according to the union.
But Mr Justice Soole refused to grant the injunction on Thursday.
He said: “Having considered the evidence, the application is dismissed. I will give my reasons later.”
Bruce Carr KC, for BAE, said in written submissions for the hearing on Tuesday that Unite had given notice to ballot on September 24 after rejecting the 2025 pay offer.
He said that following this, union representatives told members not to train managers in aircraft testing and that this amounted to a call to industrial action, therefore invalidating the lawfulness of the upcoming strike.
The barrister added: “It is the claimant’s case that the evidence clearly demonstrates that at that meeting and thereafter, Unite called on its members employed as quality professionals, to take industrial action in the form of refusing to undertake the training of managers employed by the claimant.”
Mr Carr said that in mid-September BAE wanted the training after “a number of absences” and while it was “considering business continuity plans in the event of possible industrial action”.
This training occurred between September 22 and October 10, after which the quality professionals refused to continue following instructions from the union, Mr Carr said.
These workers breached their duty to BAE because they are “required to act in the best interests of the company to carry out such duties in respect of their appointment as they may reasonably be called upon to undertake”, the barrister added.
Oliver Segal KC, for Unite, said the training was a “request”, not an “instruction” and therefore workers who refused were not in breach of their contract.
He described managers being trained for the testing role as “unprecedented” and that union representatives had asked workers to get the “request” in writing while they seek legal advice.
In written submissions, he said: “The evidence in this case is that the defendant never even suggested, let alone ‘called’ on, its members who are quality professionals to refuse to comply with a management instruction to provide training to management executives.”
Mr Segal said BAE was “ludicrously interpreting” emails between union representatives discussing the training as instructions for union members not to comply.
The barrister also said there was no refusal to train the managers after October 10 and that one of the quality professionals gave a statement saying his team never stopped providing training.
He continued: “The reality is that this application is a last-minute, desperate attempt by the claimant to neuter the industrial action, which is both factually mis-premised and legally misconceived.”
Mr Carr said on Thursday that BAE is considering an appeal.
A BAE spokesperson said: “We note the ruling by the High Court. We believe we had good grounds for the legal challenge and will consider the court’s judgment.
“We respect the right of employees to engage in industrial action and remain committed to a partnership approach with all our trade union groups.”
The PA news agency understands that less than 70 employees out of 12,000 are involved in the strike action while production lines are continuing to operate.
Speaking after the decision, Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: “This unsuccessful attempt by BAE to prevent a lawful strike will have severely damaged the goodwill it has with its workforce.
“BAE is a multibillion-pound company making record profits.
“It now needs to come back to the negotiating table with an acceptable offer for striking workers in its Air division, rather than wasting money on pointless legal threats.
“Otherwise, our members will be taking strike action throughout November in their fight for fair pay.”
Rachel Halliday of Thompsons Solicitors, which represented Unite, added: “This is a clear win for Unite and for workers everywhere.
“The High Court has confirmed that the union acted lawfully at every stage, and that BAE’s attempt to block strike action had no basis.
“Today’s decision will send a strong message to employers that the courts cannot be used to silence workers standing up for fair pay and respect.
“Unite acted responsibly throughout, adhering to all statutory requirements, and this important decision reinforces the union’s members’ right to strike.
“Thompsons is proud to have stood with Unite in defending this principle. Working people have the right to be heard – and to take lawful industrial action when negotiations fail.”
South Korea’s apparel imports dip 1% to $9.1 bn in Jan–Sept
Fake or the real thing? How AI can make it harder to trust the pictures we see
Researchers propose a new model for legible, modular software
-
Tech1 week agoUS Ralph Lauren partners with Microsoft for AI shopping experience
-
Tech1 week agoOpenAI says a million ChatGPT users talk about suicide
-
Tech1 week agoHow digital technologies can support a circular economy
-
Sports1 week agoBilly Bob Thornton dishes on Cowboys owner Jerry Jones’ acting prowess after ‘Landman’ cameo
-
Tech1 week agoAI chatbots are becoming everyday tools for mundane tasks, use data shows
-
Fashion1 week agoCalvin Klein launches Re-Calvin take-back programme across the US
-
Business1 week agoTransfer test: Children from Belfast low income families to be given free tuition
-
Business1 week agoLucid targets industry-first self-driving car technology with Nvidia