H-1B Filings Drop Sharply at Walmart, Goldman as New Fees Bite

The Trump administration's decision to impose a $100,000 fee on new H-1B visas last September has produced an immediate and measurable decline in corporate demand for the program, according to the latest Department of Labor data covering the first quarter of fiscal year 2026. The figures offer the clearest evidence yet that higher costs are prompting some of the nation's largest employers to reconsider how heavily they draw on foreign skilled labor.

Walmart, long one of the program's more active retail users, submitted only 312 certified H-1B applications between October and December 2025. That represents a drop of more than 50 percent from roughly 860 applications in the same period a year earlier and about 40 percent below levels from two years ago. The retail sector as a whole showed similar restraint. Competitors such as Target, Home Depot, and Lowe's maintained relatively steady but modest filings, suggesting many large employers are absorbing the new economic reality rather than passing the added expense along.

Wall Street followed a comparable pattern. Major banks and financial institutions that filed the most H-1B applications in the quarter recorded an overall 10 percent decline compared with the prior year. Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase both reduced their petitions, continuing a trend visible in earlier glimpses of the data. Citigroup proved an exception, increasing its filings, though the net effect across the sector pointed downward. Financial firms have historically used the visas to expand technical teams in areas such as software development and data analysis, but the higher price tag appears to be forcing prioritization.

These shifts arrive after years of debate over the H-1B program's real-world operation. Created three decades ago to address genuine shortages of specialized talent, the visa has increasingly functioned as a routine channel for large organizations to access lower-cost overseas labor. Critics, including economists who study labor markets, have pointed out that the program can suppress wage growth in technical fields and reduce incentives for companies to invest in domestic training and recruitment. The fee increase, whatever its other effects, has at least altered the cost-benefit calculation that once made the visas an almost automatic choice.

The impact has fallen unevenly. Smaller employers, nonprofits, and rural hospitals report the greatest difficulty. The Wayside Youth & Family Support Network, a Massachusetts nonprofit that runs a private special education school, provides a clear example. President Sara McCabe told reporters the organization has five open teaching positions it once filled with H-1B hires from countries including Brazil, Mexico, and Germany. The new fee makes that option unaffordable. As a result, the school has turned away roughly a dozen students whose needs cannot be met with the current staff.

Similar stories have emerged from rural medical facilities that depend on foreign doctors and from smaller technology firms lacking the cash reserves of industry giants. The administration's change has effectively redrawn access to the program along lines of financial capacity. Larger corporations with deep pockets can still absorb the cost when they judge a hire essential. Smaller entities cannot. This outcome was predictable once the fee was announced, yet it underscores a deeper tension the H-1B program has long contained: its rules often favor scale over need.

The data arrive at a moment when artificial intelligence and automation are already reshaping technical hiring. Many of the roles once filled through H-1B visas, particularly routine coding and support functions, are now susceptible to productivity gains that reduce headcount requirements. Several technology executives have noted publicly that the combination of higher visa costs and advancing AI tools is accelerating a shift toward domestic and more experienced workers. Whether this represents a temporary adjustment or a longer-term reorientation of the American labor market remains to be seen.

Supporters of the fee argue it restores integrity to a system that had drifted from its original purpose. By raising the price of new visas, the policy seeks to ensure that employers turn to foreign talent only when domestic alternatives have been genuinely exhausted. Skeptics counter that the blunt instrument of a flat six-figure charge harms institutions that serve vulnerable populations without addressing underlying shortages in fields such as special education and rural medicine.

What cannot be disputed is the behavioral response. Corporate filings have fallen, and the largest users have scaled back. Walmart's 64 percent year-over-year reduction is particularly striking for a company not normally associated with heavy tech recruiting. The drop suggests that even organizations with sophisticated global supply chains are finding the new economics unappealing for all but the most critical roles.

Labor economists have long observed that visa programs operate within broader market signals. When the cost of one input rises, rational actors seek substitutes, whether through higher wages for Americans, expanded training programs, relocation of work, or technological replacement. The early evidence from the first quarter of fiscal 2026 indicates many large employers are making precisely those calculations.

The H-1B pipeline has not disappeared. Thousands of visas will still be issued, and certain sectors will continue to rely on them. Yet the sharp contraction in applications from household-name companies and the struggles of smaller organizations reveal how sensitive the system is to changes in price. For years the program operated with an artificially low cost that encouraged overuse. The new fee, for better or worse, has removed part of that distortion.

As additional quarters of data accumulate, a clearer picture will emerge of whether the reforms produce tighter labor markets that ultimately benefit American workers and encourage investment in domestic human capital. The initial numbers, however, leave little doubt that the Trump administration's adjustments have altered employer behavior in tangible ways. The H-1B program that exists in practice today is already different from the one that operated a year ago, and the difference traces directly to the higher price now attached to new visas.