MAGA Republicans have long criticized the H-1B visa program, arguing it takes jobs away from American workers. So it wasn’t surprising when President Trump issued a proclamation requiring any organization petitioning to employ an H-1B worker to pay $100,000—a de facto ban.
But as Robert Atkinson argues in Washington Monthly, this approach won’t protect U.S. workers. Instead, it will push U.S. tech firms to hire more workers overseas, worsen the trade balance by eroding America’s surplus in service exports, and leave U.S. companies less competitive than foreign counterparts, including Chinese firms.
While opponents of the H-1B program base their critique on faulty assumptions, studies show H-1B employees tend to earn slightly more than their U.S. peers, raise wages at their firms, and help companies grow without displacing native-born workers. Atkinson explains the real problem is that the United States simply isn’t producing enough STEM graduates to meet soaring demand, in large part due to weaknesses in the U.S. education system.
If the president is worried about firms bypassing skilled Americans, Atkinson proposes a better solution: Congress should allow the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to auction off the 85,000 H-1B visa slots available each year. Companies that truly need foreign talent would pay the price, while others would hire Americans instead—ensuring the United States attracts top global talent without undercutting domestic workers.
Given the world’s population, the sheer volume of talent outside the U.S. is larger than inside it. Restricting visas will only limit access to the best and brightest, resulting in fewer U.S. jobs and weaker U.S. companies.
Read the commentary in Washington Monthly.
