The $100,000 H-1B payment in October 2026: vacated, extended, and vacated again

Thirteen months after it was announced, the $100,000 payment on certain new H-1B petitions exists on paper and is not being collected. For an employer the practical question is not whether the payment is lawful but how to plan hiring while three courts and a renewed proclamation disagree.

The sequence so far

Proclamation 10973 restricted the entry of H-1B workers unless the petition was accompanied by a $100,000 payment, subject to national-interest exceptions, for twelve months from 21 September 2025.

On 8 June 2026 the District of Massachusetts vacated the agency guidance implementing the payment in California v. Mullin, No. 25-13829. DHS itself records this in its August 2026 fee proposal, adding that the government appealed to the First Circuit on 11 June and that it would collect the payment if the order were lifted. Practitioners report that the First Circuit declined to stay the judgment on 24 July 2026. A separate district court in Washington, D.C. had upheld the payment in a different case, which is on appeal.

On 18 September 2026 Proclamation 11069 renewed the restriction for twelve months from 21 September 2026. It keeps the national-interest exception, requires employers filing for a worker outside the United States to obtain and retain proof of payment before filing, and asks the agencies for a recommendation on further extension after the next H-1B lottery. On 30 September 2026, according to Forbes reporting, a federal judge in California vacated the implementing guidance again, including as applied to the extension.

Who the payment would reach

Proclamation 11069 applies the restriction to workers who must seek admission to give effect to an approved petition, including through consular notification, port-of-entry notification, pre-flight inspection or pre-clearance. That is why the filing route matters, a question developed in change of status versus consular notification. Transfers of workers already in H-1B status, covered in H-1B transfer delays, have not been the target of the payment.

How to plan while it is unresolved

• Do not pay on the assumption that a refund will follow; the payment is not being collected while the vacatur stands.
• Keep a contingency line for hires abroad in the 2027 immigration budget, because the government has said it would collect if the order is lifted.
• Prefer in-country change of status where the candidate is eligible, and time international travel with the travel policy in mind.
• Document the decision taken for each affected hire, with the date and the legal position on that date.

Why the court remedy matters

The Massachusetts ruling is a vacatur under the APA, not a universal injunction, which is why it reaches employers who were not parties. That distinction, and the open question the Supreme Court left in Trump v. CASA, is explained in after Trump v. CASA. Mandamus.com's comparison of APA and mandamus claims and its page on choice of forum cover why different district courts can reach different results on the same policy.

Questions

Must employers pay the $100,000 today?

Not while the court vacatur remains in effect. DHS has said it would collect the payment if the order is lifted, so the position can change.

Did Proclamation 11069 override the court order?

No. It renewed the restriction, but the order setting aside the implementing guidance was not withdrawn by the proclamation.

Does the payment apply to extensions for current H-1B workers?

The proclamations target workers who must seek admission to give effect to an approved petition. Extensions filed for workers inside the United States are a different situation; confirm each case with counsel.

General information, not legal advice. Rules and processing practice change; verify against the agency's own published figures and take advice on your own facts.