Search

Cookies

We use cookies to improve your experience. By continuing, you accept our use of cookies.

Business

New 'End H-1B Visa Abuse Act of 2026' Proposed: Major Changes for Skilled Workers

· · 3 min read

A new bill, the 'End H-1B Visa Abuse Act of 2026,' introduced in the US Congress by Rep. Eli Crane, seeks to drastically restructure the H-1B visa program. The proposed changes, including cap reductions and salary floors, would significantly impact Indian technology professionals.

A new legislative proposal, the "End H-1B Visa Abuse Act of 2026," has been introduced in the United States Congress, aiming to significantly overhaul the H-1B visa program. Spearheaded by Arizona Republican Representative Eli Crane, the bill seeks to address perceived abuses within the system, which allows U.S. employers to hire skilled foreign workers for specialized roles.

Understanding the 'End H-1B Visa Abuse Act of 2026'

Representative Crane and his supporters contend that the existing H-1B program has been exploited by large corporations, leading to the replacement of American workers with cheaper foreign labor. Crane stated, "The federal government should work for hardworking citizens, not the profit margins of massive corporations. We owe it to the American people to prevent the broken H-1B system from boxing them out of jobs they are qualified to perform."

Key Proponents and Their Stance

The bill has garnered support from several House Republicans, including Brian Babin, Brandon Gill, Wesley Hunt, Keith Self, Andy Ogles, Paul Gosar, and Tom McClintock. Congressman Paul Gosar alleged that the program has been "hijacked to replace American workers with cheaper foreign labour, plain and simple." Notably, Congressman Brandon Gill, married to an Indian-origin individual, is also a co-sponsor, emphasizing his commitment to "ensuring that our immigration system serves American workers first before foreigners."

Sweeping Changes Proposed by the Legislation

The "End H-1B Visa Abuse Act of 2026" introduces a series of stringent measures designed to reshape the H-1B program:

  • Cap Reduction: The annual issuance of H-1B visas would be drastically cut from 65,000 to 25,000.
  • Increased Wage Floor: H-1B visa holders would be mandated to earn a minimum annual salary of $200,000.
  • No Dependents: The bill proposes to bar H-1B visa holders from bringing family members to the U.S.
  • Elimination of Green Card Pathway: H-1B holders would be prevented from transitioning to permanent residency.
  • Optional Practical Training (OPT) Scrapped: The OPT program, widely utilized by international students, would be terminated.
  • Mandatory Visa Switching Departure: Nonimmigrants would be required to leave the U.S. before applying for a change to another visa category.
  • Federal Agencies Restriction: Government bodies would be prohibited from sponsoring or employing non-immigrant workers.

Significant Impact on Indian Professionals

Indian workers, particularly those in the technology sector, constitute the largest demographic of H-1B visa holders. The proposed changes—especially the sharp reduction in the annual cap, the high $200,000 salary threshold, and the removal of dependent visas—would make the program considerably more difficult to access and significantly less appealing for both professionals and their families.

This legislative push follows previous pressures, such as the $100,000 fee on new H-1B applications announced by the Trump administration, which had already caused widespread concern among prospective and current visa holders.

A Landmark Challenge to the H-1B Program

Immigration policy expert Rosemary Jenks, who contributed to drafting the legislation, described its gravity: "This is the strongest H-1B bill that has ever been introduced in Congress." Jenks highlighted that H-1B visas were initially presented as short-term solutions for temporary labor gaps, allowing time to train American workers. She added that without the possibility of extensions, H-1B workers would be compelled to return to their home countries after three years. Proponents argue this would force companies to invest in recruiting and training new American hires, potentially increasing short-term costs but ultimately reducing reliance on foreign labor.

Related