H-1B Filings Drop Sharply at Walmart, Goldman Sachs After New Visa Fees

Walmart has dramatically scaled back its use of the H-1B visa program in the first clear sign of how President Donald Trump's changes are reshaping corporate behavior. The retail giant submitted just 312 certified H-1B applications during the final three months of 2025, according to Department of Labor data. That figure represents a drop of more than half from roughly 860 applications in the same period a year earlier and about 40 percent below levels from two years ago.

The decline arrives after the Trump administration imposed a $100,000 fee on new H-1B visas last September. The policy aims to raise the cost of bringing in foreign workers for specialty occupations, a move that alters incentives for employers who had grown reliant on the program. Several large companies have responded by pulling back, suggesting the higher price tag is forcing a reassessment of whether foreign hires are worth the expense.

The trend extends beyond retail. On Wall Street, H-1B petitions fell at Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase compared with the prior year, while Citigroup increased its filings. Across the largest financial firms that use the program most heavily, certified applications dropped about 10 percent in the first quarter of fiscal 2026, which runs from October through December. These institutions often tap H-1B visas to expand technical teams, yet the new costs appear to be prompting restraint at some banks even as others press forward.

The data offers the first broad snapshot of employer responses since the fee took effect. For years the H-1B program has served as a key pipeline for technology, finance, health care, and education employers seeking workers with specialized skills. Critics have long argued it allowed large corporations to import labor at wages that undercut domestic talent, distorting labor markets and reducing pressure on companies to invest in American workers. The fee appears to be correcting some of that imbalance by making the option more expensive and encouraging firms to weigh alternatives.

Smaller organizations, however, are bearing heavier burdens. Nonprofits, rural hospitals, and specialized schools that lack the financial cushion of Walmart or Goldman Sachs find the $100,000 charge prohibitive. Sara McCabe, president of the Wayside Youth and Family Support Network in Massachusetts, told The New York Times that her organization can no longer afford the program. The nonprofit runs a private special education school that has struggled to recruit local teachers. It now has five open positions it once filled with visa holders from Brazil, Mexico, and Germany. As a result, the school has turned away a dozen students seeking enrollment because it cannot staff additional classes.

"The $100,000 fee has closed the door for us," McCabe said. Similar stories are emerging from rural hospitals and other nonprofits that depend on the program to fill roles requiring advanced training. The effects have been uneven. Large employers can absorb the cost, shift toward domestic hiring, or reduce overall demand for such positions. Smaller entities often cannot. This outcome highlights a recurring pattern in government interventions: policies intended to address one problem create obstacles for those least equipped to adapt.

The H-1B program, created three decades ago, was meant to help employers find talent in short supply. In practice it became a staple for major tech firms and consultancies that filed thousands of applications annually. Walmart's sharp reduction aligns with a broader slowdown in technology hiring, a trend some analysts link to artificial intelligence tools that may reduce the need for certain specialized roles. Retailers such as Target, Home Depot, and Lowe's maintained relatively steady filing levels over the same two-year comparison, suggesting the impact varies by sector and company strategy.

Financial firms present a mixed picture. While overall petitions declined, the increase at Citigroup shows that some institutions still see value in the program despite higher costs. This variation underscores that market signals, rather than blanket mandates, are now shaping decisions. Companies facing genuine skill shortages may pay the fee when the productivity gains justify it. Others appear to be concluding that the expense outweighs the benefit or that American workers, properly compensated, can fill the gaps.

The Department of Labor figures capture only certified applications and do not reflect final visa approvals, which remain subject to federal caps and additional scrutiny. Still, the early drop offers empirical evidence of behavioral change. For proponents of reform, the numbers validate the view that the program had grown oversized and tilted toward large corporate interests. For smaller employers locked out, the fee creates real operational strain in fields like special education and rural health care where domestic recruitment has long proved difficult.

Whether these shifts ultimately expand opportunities for American workers or simply raise costs for certain services remains an open question. What the data already demonstrates is that price matters. When government raises the cost of a particular input, whether labor or anything else, rational actors adjust. Walmart's halved filings, the mixed results on Wall Street, and the closed doors at places like Wayside illustrate that principle in action. The H-1B program is not ending, but its role in the labor market is being recalibrated at a higher price point, with consequences that differ sharply by the size and resources of the employer.