{"id":158,"date":"2026-09-20T09:45:00","date_gmt":"2026-09-20T04:15:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.wininfosoft.com\/insights\/h1b-100000-fee-extended-blocked-indian-it-gcc\/"},"modified":"2026-09-20T09:45:00","modified_gmt":"2026-09-20T04:15:00","slug":"h1b-100000-fee-extended-blocked-indian-it-gcc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.wininfosoft.com\/insights\/h1b-100000-fee-extended-blocked-indian-it-gcc\/","title":{"rendered":"H-1B’s $100,000 Fee Is Extended to 2027 and Blocked in Court: What Indian IT and GCC Leaders Should Plan For"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n

Quick Answer:<\/strong> The $100,000 payment on new H-1B petitions is on paper and off in practice. On 8 June 2026 a US district court vacated the policy used to collect it, and on 12 June the judge temporarily paused that order. The appeals court refused the government’s request for a stay on 24 July, and USCIS stopped collecting the payment while the appeal continues. On 18 September the US President extended the proclamation itself to 21 September 2027. Nobody official has said how the extension and the ruling interact. Plan for both outcomes, and put effort into what you control: the onsite-offshore mix, India-side capacity and state incentives.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The US President has extended the $100,000 requirement to September 2027<\/a>. A court has blocked the policy used to collect it, and US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has stopped collecting the payment<\/a> while the appeal continues. Read only the first and you would freeze new petitions. Read only the second and you would assume the problem had gone away. Both readings are unsafe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the time of writing, the H-1B fee impact on Indian IT is a planning problem more than a cost line. The legal sequence below is as precise as the public record allows; the rest of the article covers what Indian IT services firms and global capability centres (GCCs) control. None of it is legal advice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The H-1B fee in court, date by date<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Most of these steps changed whether the payment was being collected. Nobody official has said whether the last one did.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. September 2025.<\/strong> A presidential proclamation imposed a $100,000 payment on new H-1B petitions.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. 8 June 2026.<\/strong> In a case brought by 20 US states, State of California v. Mullin<\/em>, the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts vacated the policy implementing the proclamation, nationwide.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  3. 12 June 2026.<\/strong> The judge temporarily paused his own order<\/a> while the government asked the appeals court for a stay, so the fee could again be collected in that period.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  4. 24 July 2026.<\/strong> The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied the government’s request for a stay. In the words of the court’s order<\/a>: “We deny the motion.” USCIS then stopped collecting the payment while the appeal continues.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  5. 18 September 2026.<\/strong> The US President signed a proclamation extending the September 2025 proclamation<\/a> “until 12:00 a.m. eastern daylight time on September 21, 2027”. It keeps the $100,000 requirement and does not mention the litigation.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    USCIS has put its position on the record. Its H-1B FAQ<\/a> says the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) “strongly disagrees” with the ruling “but will comply with the court’s order”. Then comes the sentence planners should keep in view: “If this order is later lifted, DHS still plans to collect the payment.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Why the extension does not settle the question<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    The two tracks concern different documents. The court vacated the policy implementing the proclamation. The 18 September proclamation extends the original, keeps the $100,000 requirement and does not mention the litigation. On its face, neither answers the other.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    As of 20 September 2026, USCIS had not said how the extension affects the court ruling, and the appeal is still pending. That leaves two live cases. If the order is later lifted, DHS has said it still plans to collect. If the order stands, collection stays stopped unless USCIS says the extension changes that, and so far it has not. The public record gives no basis for putting odds on either.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    What the extension does settle is a date on paper: 21 September 2027. A staffing plan that reaches beyond it is guessing in both directions, so plan for both outcomes rather than betting on one.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n\n The $100,000 H-1B payment: the legal timeline as of 20 September 2026<\/title>\n Six steps in order: the September 2025 proclamation imposing the payment; the 8 June 2026 district court order vacating the implementing policy; the judge’s temporary pause of that order on 12 June; the First Circuit’s refusal of a stay on 24 July, after which USCIS stopped collecting; the 18 September extension of the proclamation to 21 September 2027; and the appeal decision, still pending.<\/desc>\n \n \n On paper, off in practice<\/text>\n The $100,000 payment on new H-1B petitions, as of 20 September 2026<\/text>\n <\/g>\n \n \n \n \n Sep<\/text>\n 2025<\/text>\n \n \n \n Proclamation imposes the payment<\/text>\n $100,000 on new H-1B petitions<\/text>\n <\/g>\n \n 8 Jun<\/text>\n 2026<\/text>\n \n \n \n District court vacates the implementing policy<\/text>\n District of Massachusetts, case brought by 20 US states, nationwide<\/text>\n <\/g>\n \n 12 Jun<\/text>\n 2026<\/text>\n \n \n \n Judge temporarily pauses his own order<\/text>\n Government seeks a stay; the fee can again be collected<\/text>\n <\/g>\n \n 24 Jul<\/text>\n 2026<\/text>\n \n \n \n First Circuit: "We deny the motion"<\/text>\n Stay refused; USCIS then stops collecting while the appeal continues<\/text>\n <\/g>\n \n 18 Sep<\/text>\n 2026<\/text>\n \n \n \n Proclamation extended to 21 September 2027<\/text>\n Keeps the $100,000 requirement, does not mention the litigation<\/text>\n <\/g>\n \n Next<\/text>\n pending<\/text>\n \n \n \n Appeal decision<\/text>\n USCIS has not said how the extension and the ruling interact<\/text>\n <\/g>\n Clay: presidential action. Amber and saffron: court steps. Olive: pending. Not legal advice.<\/text>\n <\/g>\n<\/svg>\n<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    Planning for both outcomes at once<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    The test for any plan is whether it survives either court result without a rewrite. That rules out freezing every new petition as though the payment were certain, and filing freely as though it had gone for good.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    If collection resumes<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

    Each new H-1B petition then carries a $100,000 payment on top of the usual costs. Roles that genuinely need someone in the client’s building can still justify it; habitual ones mostly cannot.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    If the block holds<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

    USCIS is not collecting the payment while the appeal continues. Treat that as provisional, since DHS has said it still plans to collect if the order is later lifted. Whether a petition filed in this period could be affected by a later ruling is a question for immigration counsel, not a planning spreadsheet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Moves that hold up either way<\/h3>\n\n\n\n