H-1B, L-1 Fees: New US Rule Raises Costs for Indians

US Immigration authorities are expanding an existing $4,000 H-1B and $4,500 L-1 fee to certain visa extension petitions, increasing the employment-related costs faced by qualifying companies and potentially affecting how they sponsor and retain foreign professionals.

Indian professionals working in the United States on H-1B and L-1 visas are facing another change in the country’s employment-based immigration system. The US Department of Homeland Security has expanded the circumstances in which certain employers must pay the 9-11 Response and Biometric Entry-Exit Fee when filing employment visa petitions.

The change is important because the fee will now apply to qualifying extension-of-stay petitions. In practical terms, a covered company may have to pay the charge again when it seeks to extend the US status of an existing foreign employee, even when that employee is staying with the same employer.

The fee itself has not increased. The amounts remain $4,000 for an H-1B petition and $4,500 for an L-1 petition. The key change is the expansion of the situations in which the existing fee is collected.

The rule is scheduled to take effect on September 9, 2026. For Indian Technology professionals, consultants and other skilled workers whose US employment depends on these visa categories, the development adds another cost consideration for employers managing immigration sponsorship.

What the new H-1B and L-1 fee rule changes

The most important point is that this is an expansion of an existing fee rather than the creation of an entirely new $4,000 or $4,500 charge.

The 9-11 Response and Biometric Entry-Exit Fee was established by congress in December 2015. It is connected to the US government’s biometric entry-exit system, which uses biometric information as part of efforts to establish and verify the identities of people entering and leaving the country.

Under the expanded rule, certain employers filing H-1B and L-1 petitions will face the fee when seeking an extension of stay. That means an employer that previously paid the applicable charge for an initial petition or certain other qualifying filings may now encounter the same fee during an employee’s extension process.

The distinction matters for workers who remain in the United States with the same company. An extension is not necessarily a new employment relationship, but the qualifying petition can still trigger the expanded fee requirement.

Which employers have to pay the fee?

The rule does not apply to every company that employs H-1B or L-1 workers. The employer must meet specific workforce conditions.

The key test is commonly described as the 50-50 rule. A company must have at least 50 employees in the United States, and more than 50% of its US workforce must be in H-1B, L-1A or L-1B nonimmigrant status.

Only when the relevant conditions are met does the expanded fee become applicable to the covered petitions.

This threshold is particularly relevant when considering the types of companies that may be affected. A small US employer with a limited number of foreign workers may not meet the workforce requirements. A large company whose workforce is heavily dependent on H-1B and L-1 employees is much more likely to need to examine the rule closely.

The result is that the impact will not be uniform across Indian professionals. Two people working in the same visa category could face very different employer circumstances depending on the size and composition of their companies.

Indian IT professionals are especially exposed

The change is particularly significant for Indian professionals because India represents the largest country of birth among beneficiaries of approved H-1B petitions.

US Citizenship and Immigration Services data for fiscal year 2024 show that 71% of approved H-1B petitions were for beneficiaries born in India. China was the second-largest group, accounting for approximately 12%. The figures demonstrate the unusually large role Indian professionals play in the US H-1B workforce.

That concentration means changes affecting H-1B employers can have a disproportionate impact on Indian workers, particularly those employed by technology companies, consulting businesses and other organisations that rely heavily on international talent.

The new rule does not mean that Indian workers themselves will suddenly receive a $4,000 bill. The applicable fee is imposed on the qualifying petitioning employer. But employer costs can still influence decisions about sponsorship, recruitment and retention.

Workers do not directly pay the expanded fee

For H-1B and L-1 professionals, one of the most important distinctions is who is responsible for the payment.

The expanded fee is an employer-side immigration cost. A qualifying company filing the petition is responsible for the applicable $4,000 H-1B or $4,500 L-1 charge.

That means an Indian professional whose employer is subject to the rule does not automatically have to pay the fee personally simply because their visa status is being extended.

However, the absence of a direct bill does not mean the change is irrelevant to workers.

Companies routinely consider the total cost of employing and sponsoring foreign workers when making workforce decisions. Immigration expenses can include government filing fees, legal services, compliance costs and administrative work. An additional charge attached to extensions can therefore become one more factor in the overall cost of sponsorship.

The effect is likely to be most visible for companies with large numbers of covered employees. A $4,000 fee attached to one petition is very different from the cumulative expense created when hundreds of employees require extensions.

Why large technology and consulting firms could pay more

The structure of the rule means the financial impact depends heavily on the employer’s workforce.

Consider a company that meets the 50-50 threshold and needs to extend the status of 100 H-1B employees. At the stated fee level, the H-1B charges alone would total $400,000. If the company also has qualifying L-1 petitions, those could generate additional charges at $4,500 per petition.

These examples illustrate the scale of the issue without implying that every covered company will file the same number of petitions.

For businesses with hundreds or thousands of foreign employees, immigration costs can become a meaningful operational expense. Employers may therefore pay closer attention to which workers require extensions, when petitions are filed and how international staffing decisions are structured.

The Department of Homeland Security has estimated that extending the fee to additional petitions could generate about $157.3 million annually. The revenue is associated with the government’s biometric entry-exit programme.

The rule does not affect every H-1B extension

One of the biggest potential misunderstandings is that every H-1B extension in the United States will now automatically carry a $4,000 fee.

That is not the case.

The employer must fall within the specified workforce category, including the requirement of having at least 50 US employees and having more than half of its workforce in H-1B or L-1 status. The type of petition being filed also matters.

This means an H-1B worker should not assume that their own extension will trigger the fee simply because they hold an H-1B Visa.

The same principle applies to L-1 workers. The $4,500 charge is relevant to qualifying employers and petitions rather than being a universal fee imposed on every L-1 employee.

How the change differs from the $100,000 H-1B fee

The expanded $4,000 H-1B charge should also be kept separate from the much larger $100,000 H-1B fee announced by the Trump administration.

These are different immigration measures with different requirements and purposes.

The $4,000 H-1B and $4,500 L-1 charges belong to the statutory 9-11 Response and Biometric Entry-Exit Fee framework. The latest rule changes when that existing fee applies to qualifying petitions.

It therefore would be misleading to describe the latest development as a blanket $4,000 increase in the cost of obtaining or extending an H-1B visa.

The actual impact depends on the employer, the petition and the circumstances of the filing.

What the change could mean for Indian professionals

For Indian professionals already working in the United States, the immediate effect may be limited if their employer does not meet the threshold for the expanded fee.

For employees of companies that do qualify, however, the rule introduces another expense into the sponsorship process.

Several possible effects are worth watching.

• Higher employer costs: Companies may have to budget for the additional fee when filing qualifying extensions.
• Greater scrutiny of sponsorship: Employers could examine immigration costs more closely when deciding which positions to sponsor or renew.
• Potential retention considerations: Businesses with large foreign-worker populations may incorporate immigration expenses into workforce planning.
• Greater importance of employer type: The effect will depend heavily on whether a company meets the 50-50 workforce threshold.

None of these outcomes is automatic. The rule creates an additional cost, but individual employers will decide how that cost affects their hiring and retention strategies.

Why the timing matters for visa extensions

The September 9, 2026 effective date gives employers a clear point at which the expanded requirement begins to apply.

For companies with large H-1B and L-1 workforces, immigration departments and legal teams will need to identify which upcoming petitions fall within the new rules. The change is therefore not only about the amount of the fee but also about planning.

Employers managing foreign-worker populations must already track visa expiration dates, petition requirements and employment changes. Adding another fee trigger to the process increases the importance of accurate workforce classification and filing preparation.

For employees, the practical question is likely to be whether their employer is covered rather than whether they personally hold an H-1B or L-1 Visa.

What Indian professionals should understand

The new rule can be reduced to a few key points.

• The $4,000 H-1B and $4,500 L-1 amounts are existing fees, not newly increased fee amounts.
• The rule expands those fees to qualifying extension-of-stay petitions.
• The requirement applies to employers meeting the 50-employee and more-than-50% H-1B/L-1 workforce conditions.
• The petitioning employer, rather than the worker, is responsible for the applicable fee.
• Indian professionals are particularly relevant because India accounted for 71% of approved H-1B beneficiaries by country of birth in fiscal year 2024.
• The rule should not be confused with the separate $100,000 H-1B measure.

What happens next for H-1B and L-1 workers

The immediate issue for employers is implementation. Companies that fall within the relevant category will need to account for the expanded fee when preparing qualifying petitions after the rule takes effect.

For Indian professionals, the broader significance is the continued rise in the cost and complexity of maintaining employment-based immigration status in the United States.

The new charge does not by itself change the eligibility requirements of the H-1B or L-1 programmes, nor does it mean every foreign worker will face a new personal payment. Its effect is more targeted: certain employers will have to absorb an additional government fee when extending qualifying workers.

That distinction is important for employees trying to understand what the rule actually means for them. The headline dollar amount may sound like a new visa cost for every worker, but the real impact depends on the employer’s workforce composition and the petition being filed.

For Indian professionals, particularly those working in large technology, consulting and IT services companies, the change is another reminder that US immigration policy affects not only whether a worker can obtain or maintain status, but also the financial calculations companies make when sponsoring international talent.