Chevening Scholarships are for people from all backgrounds who show the potential to be future leaders. To apply, you need to have a clear and realistic idea for positive change in your country and explain how a UK master’s degree will help you achieve it.
The scholarship covers all expenses for studying a master’s degree at over 150 UK universities. It also offers unique academic, professional, and cultural experiences.
Since it started in 1983, Chevening has helped over 57,000 professionals advance their careers, including more than 370 from Bangladesh. For the 2025/26 academic year, around 1,500 scholarships are available globally, showing the UK’s dedication to developing future leaders.
Sarah Cooke, the British High Commissioner to Bangladesh, said:
“If you want to drive change locally or globally, excel in your field, and inspire others, a Chevening Scholarship for a master’s degree in the UK is a great opportunity. Apply before the November 5, 2024 deadline and join an amazing global network.”
Chevening Scholarships are the UK Government’s global scholarship program, funded by the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) and partner organizations. The scholarships support one-year master’s degrees at UK universities for those with the potential to be future leaders. Since its launch in 1983, Chevening has become a prestigious international program. There are over 57,000 Chevening Alumni worldwide, forming a highly regarded global network.
Applications for Chevening Scholarships to study in the UK are open until November 5, 2024. You can apply online at chevening.org/apply and also contact us for other visa services.
In today’s globalized economy, professionals from various fields are increasingly seeking employment abroad to enhance their careers, gain international experience, and immerse themselves in different cultures. One of the most effective tools facilitating this international job hunt is the job seeker visa. Understanding the benefits and requirements of job seeker visas can open doors to global job opportunities and provide a pathway to a fulfilling career abroad.
A job seeker visa is a type of temporary visa that allows individuals to enter a country specifically to look for employment. Unlike work visas, which require a job offer before application, job seeker visas enable applicants to travel to the desired country and search for a job while residing there. This approach provides several advantages, making it an attractive travel route for many.
If you need guidance with this Visa process, reach out to us on WhatsApp: +23409116762327
Why a Job Seeker Visa is a Good Travel Route
Direct Access to Employers: Being physically present in the country allows job seekers to attend interviews, career fairs, and networking events in person, significantly increasing their chances of securing employment.
Immersion in the Local Job Market: Understanding the local job market, including its demands, culture, and practices, is easier when one is living in the country. This immersion helps job seekers tailor their applications and approach more effectively.
Flexibility: Job seeker visas offer a flexible timeframe to find suitable employment. During this period, job seekers can explore various job opportunities, industries, and locations without the immediate pressure of securing a position before arriving.
Cultural Integration: Living in the country while job hunting allows individuals to adapt to the local lifestyle, learn the language, and build a social network, which can be beneficial both personally and professionally.
Potential for Permanent Residency: In many cases, securing a job through a job seeker visa can be a stepping stone to obtaining a work visa or even permanent residency, opening the door to long-term career and life opportunities in a new country.
Countries Offering Job Seeker Visas
Here are some countries that offer job seeker visas along with their requirements:
Germany
Visa Type: Job Seeker Visa
Duration: Up to 6 months
Requirements: Bachelor’s or Master’s degree from a German or recognized foreign university, sufficient funds to cover the stay, and health insurance.
Portugal
Visa Type: Job Seeker Visa
Duration: Up to 6 months (120 days initially, extendable for another 60 days)
Requirements: Proof of financial means, travel insurance, and evidence of qualifications.
Austria
Visa Type: Job Seeker Visa
Duration: Up to 6 months
Requirements: Points-based system considering qualifications, work experience, language skills, and age. Proof of funds and health insurance are also needed.
Sweden
Visa Type: Job Seeker Visa
Duration: Up to 9 months
Requirements: Completed studies corresponding to an advanced level degree, sufficient funds to support oneself during the stay, and health insurance.
United Arab Emirates (UAE)
Visa Type: Job Seeker Visa
Duration: 3, 6, or 12 months
Requirements: Bachelor’s degree or equivalent, financial means to support the stay, and a refundable security deposit.
Finland
Visa Type: Residence Permit for Seeking Work after Graduation
Duration: Up to 1 year
Requirements: Completed degree in Finland or a research scholar position, sufficient financial resources, and health insurance.
South Africa
Visa Type: Critical Skills Work Visa
Duration: Up to 12 months
Requirements: Proof of qualifications and work experience in a critical skills area, proof of financial means, and health insurance.
New Zealand
Visa Type: Job Search Visa (part of the Silver Fern Visa category)
Duration: Up to 9 months
Requirements: Age between 20-35 years, recognized qualifications, and proof of funds. Note: The Silver Fern Visa category is currently closed and under review.
Spain
Visa Type: Job Seeker Visa
Duration: Up to 12 months
Requirements: Graduate or postgraduate degree from a recognized university within the past two years, health insurance, and sufficient funds.
Brazil
Visa Type: Job Seeker Visa
Duration: Up to 180 days
Requirements: Bachelor’s degree or higher, health insurance, proof of funds, and clean criminal record.
Conclusion
Understanding the benefits and requirements of job seeker visas not only facilitates the job search process by providing on-the-ground access to opportunities but also offers a unique chance to experience and integrate into a new culture. For professionals looking to broaden their horizons and enhance their career trajectories, this visa presents a practical and enriching pathway.
If you need guidance with this Visa process, reach out to us on WhatsApp: +23409116762327
President Trump’s October 5, 2026 remarks at a Nebraska rally have set off a Trump Iran remarks backlash across California and Washington. Trump spoke at the rally about the cost of confronting Iran’s nuclear program. He told the crowd: “Let them take out Los Angeles. Let them take out San Diego. That’s — this is a very small price to pay.” Trump tied the comment to the financial burden of opposing Tehran, including high gas prices. He argued the cost was justified to protect national security, according to Axios.
What Trump Told the Nebraska Rally Crowd
Trump delivered the remarks at the Nebraska rally on October 5, 2026. He discussed the economic toll of standing against Iran’s nuclear program. Trump pointed to high gas prices as part of that toll. He argued the United States had already paid heavily to confront Tehran. Trump then made the comment about Los Angeles and San Diego. He called the potential loss “a very small price to pay” next to the stakes of stopping Iran. Trump framed the remark as a tradeoff between national security and local risk. He did not elaborate further on the comparison during the rally. Axios first reported the comments on October 6, 2026, a day after the rally. The report quickly drew attention well beyond Nebraska, reaching audiences following U.S. politics around the world.
Bipartisan Criticism From California Officials
California Governor Gavin Newsom responded first. Newsom called Trump “deranged and dangerous” for suggesting enemies could attack California cities. San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria issued his own statement next. Gloria said: “San Diego is not collateral damage. We are not expendable.” Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass also weighed in on the remarks. Bass warned the statements could compromise city safety. She said the comments could undermine the president’s duty to protect the nation. Each official spoke from a different office and a different level of government. Their shared objection centered on the safety of their own residents. The reactions amount to bipartisan criticism of Trump’s framing, voiced by officials across different offices. None of the three officials disputed that Trump made the statement itself.
White House Responds to the Trump Iran Remarks Backlash
White House Communications Director Steven Cheung addressed the growing Trump Iran remarks backlash directly. Cheung said Trump meant something different than his words suggested. He explained that the administration is fighting to prevent a nuclear Iran. Cheung said that goal is meant to stop Iran from threatening Los Angeles and San Diego. He described the “take out” phrasing as misunderstood. Cheung did not dispute that Trump made the statement. Instead, he focused on clarifying its intended meaning. Cheung framed the policy itself as protective rather than threatening toward any American city. The White House has not issued a further statement beyond Cheung’s remarks.
Iran’s Nuclear Program and the Wider Political Backdrop
Iran’s nuclear program has long been a flashpoint in U.S. foreign policy. Confronting it carries diplomatic, military, and economic costs. Gas prices are one example Trump cited directly at the rally. The International Atomic Energy Agency, which monitors nuclear facilities worldwide, sits at the center of that broader picture. Its work continues alongside the political debate over how far the United States should go. The remarks also land days after another major move from the administration, including a newly announced super intelligence force. They also arrive against a tense domestic backdrop, with a government funding deadline approaching ahead of the midterms. Both storylines are drawing attention from voters and officials at the same time as the Nebraska rally controversy.
Where This Goes From Here
The Trump Iran remarks backlash is likely to continue in the coming days. California officials have already put their objections on record. Newsom, Gloria, and Bass have each issued public statements. The White House has offered its explanation through Cheung. Reporters are likely to seek direct comment from Trump himself. No further statement from Iran’s government has been reported. The dispute may also surface in upcoming press briefings or hearings. Officials in other states could weigh in as the story spreads further. For now, the exchange remains a public back-and-forth between California leaders and the White House. Observers are watching whether either side issues additional comment this week.
Questions Readers Are Asking
What did Trump say about Los Angeles and San Diego?
At a Nebraska rally on October 5, 2026, Trump said: “Let them take out Los Angeles. Let them take out San Diego. That’s — this is a very small price to pay.”
Why did Trump make the comment?
Trump was discussing the economic cost of confronting Iran’s nuclear program, including high gas prices, and argued the cost was justified to protect national security.
How did California officials respond?
Governor Gavin Newsom called Trump “deranged and dangerous.” San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria said San Diego is “not collateral damage.” Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass warned the remarks could compromise city safety.
How did the White House respond to the backlash?
White House Communications Director Steven Cheung said Trump meant the U.S. is fighting to prevent a nuclear Iran from threatening those cities, calling the “take out” language misunderstood.
When and where did Trump make the remarks?
Trump made the remarks on October 5, 2026, at a rally in Nebraska, as first reported by Axios on October 6, 2026.
Did Trump directly address Iran’s nuclear program?
Yes. Trump framed the remarks around the cost of confronting Iran’s nuclear program, a subject the International Atomic Energy Agency monitors internationally.
Tamara News will continue following reaction to the Trump Iran remarks backlash as officials respond. Readers can find related coverage of the administration’s recent policy moves and the broader political backdrop on tamaranews.com.
Paramount Skydance completed its acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery on October 6, 2026, closing a deal with a total enterprise value above $110 billion. The Paramount Warner Bros deal combines three movie studios and two streaming platforms. It also brings together two news networks and a lineup of cable channels under one company. Axios confirmed the closing on Tuesday. The combined firm now holds Paramount Pictures, Warner Bros. Pictures, and Skydance as studios, Paramount+ and HBO Max as streaming platforms, and CNN and CBS as news networks.
Inside the Paramount Warner Bros deal
The merged company controls a broad set of media assets. It owns three movie studios: Paramount Pictures, Warner Bros. Pictures, and Skydance. It runs two streaming platforms, Paramount+ and HBO Max, which the company plans to merge into a single service. It controls two news networks, CNN and CBS. It also owns a group of cable channels, including MTV, VH1, Comedy Central, TBS, TNT, Food Network, and Discovery.
David Ellison leads the combined company as CEO. His father, Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison, supplied billions of dollars in equity financing to help fund the acquisition. The scale of that backing underlines how much capital a media merger of this size now requires.
The Media Merger Survives a Regulatory Fight
The deal faced scrutiny from regulators and state officials before it closed. The FCC, led by Chairman Brendan Carr, approved requests that let the merger exceed standard foreign ownership limits. Twelve Democratic state attorneys general sued to block the deal. The parties settled that lawsuit in September 2026, clearing a major legal obstacle.
Those approvals let the companies finalize the transaction on October 6, 2026, as Axios reported. The settlement ended a legal fight that had run alongside the FCC review for months.
How Skydance Financed the Acquisition
Skydance raised $52 billion in new debt to help pay for the deal. The company also assumed Warner Bros. Discovery’s existing $87.5 billion in liabilities.
The numbers shifted since the companies first signed their merger agreement in February 2026. At signing, Paramount Skydance agreed to pay $31 per share for Warner Bros. Discovery, valuing the company at roughly $77 billion, according to NBC News. Total enterprise value, including debt, already exceeded $110 billion at that point. The February agreement included a $7 billion reverse termination fee if regulators blocked the deal. Paramount Skydance also collected a separate $2.8 billion termination fee from Netflix. Netflix had competed as a rival bidder for Warner Bros. Discovery before that agreement.
David Ellison said in February that bringing together the studios, streaming platforms, and talent would “create even greater value.” Then-WBD CEO David Zaslav said the deal “maximizes the value of our iconic assets and our century-old studio while delivering as much certainty as possible for our investors.” Warner Bros. Discovery’s assets at signing included the Warner Bros. film studio, HBO Max, CNN, and intellectual property such as Batman and “Casablanca.”
Investors are also watching other big financial news this month, including the start of Wall Street’s earnings season for major banks.
Streaming Consolidation Changes What Viewers Get
The combined company plans to merge Paramount+ and HBO Max into a single streaming service. That change will reduce the number of major streaming platforms available to viewers worldwide.
The merger is likely to bring job cuts across the creative industry. The combined company plans to trim overlapping roles across three studios, two news networks, and several cable channels. Streaming consolidation of this scale typically produces that kind of overlap.
What This Means Going Forward
The combined company must still carry out the integration it promised. Paramount+ and HBO Max will combine into one platform, though the companies have not set a date for that change.
The settlement with the twelve state attorneys general closed one legal front, but the operational work continues. CNN, CBS, and the cable channel lineup still need to consolidate under one corporate structure.
The closing also marks a point in the wider streaming consolidation trend. That trend follows the earlier Netflix bidding effort. Paramount Skydance collected a $2.8 billion termination payment from Netflix after that bid ended.
Common Questions About the Paramount-Warner Deal
When did the Paramount Warner Bros deal close?
The deal closed on October 6, 2026, a Tuesday, according to Axios.
What does the combined company own?
It owns three movie studios: Paramount Pictures, Warner Bros. Pictures, and Skydance. It runs two streaming platforms, Paramount+ and HBO Max, which will merge into one service. It also owns two news networks, CNN and CBS, plus cable channels including MTV, VH1, Comedy Central, TBS, TNT, Food Network, and Discovery.
Who leads the combined company?
David Ellison serves as CEO of the combined Skydance entity. His father, Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison, provided billions of dollars in equity financing for the acquisition.
What regulatory hurdles did the deal clear?
The FCC, led by Chairman Brendan Carr, approved requests allowing the deal to exceed foreign ownership limits. Twelve Democratic state attorneys general sued to block the deal, and that case settled in September 2026.
How much debt did Skydance take on?
Skydance raised $52 billion in new debt and assumed Warner Bros. Discovery’s existing $87.5 billion in liabilities.
How did the deal terms change since the original February 2026 agreement?
At signing, Paramount Skydance agreed to pay $31 per share, valuing Warner Bros. Discovery at roughly $77 billion, with total enterprise value exceeding $110 billion. That agreement included a $7 billion reverse termination fee and a separate $2.8 billion fee Paramount Skydance collected from Netflix.
Tamara News will continue following developments inside the newly combined company. Readers tracking other major deals this month can also read our coverage of Novartis’s drug deal with China’s Abogen Biosciences. That deal is reshaping its own industry too.
Spain Italy border checks have returned at air and sea crossings between the two countries, temporarily suspending one of the basic freedoms of the Schengen Area — travel without routine document checks — for travelers moving directly between them. Spain’s controls run from September 23 through October 7, under a series of orders published in the country’s official state gazette, while Italy’s checks extend further, from October 1 through October 16, citing concerns that include what it called “the continuing situation in the Spanish autonomous city of Ceuta.”
Both countries have framed the move as a response to irregular migration risks, potential secondary movements of migrants within the Schengen Area, and broader public order and internal security concerns, rather than any change in the two countries’ underlying relationship. As Italy’s Ministry of the Interior put it in its notification, the two nations “remain open to each other” — but travelers should still expect identity and document checks they would not normally face.
Who the Spain Italy border checks actually affect
The reinstated checks apply to all passengers on air and sea routes directly between Spain and Italy — a route normally exempt from border controls under Schengen rules, since both countries are full members of the passport-free zone. EU citizens travelling the route must still carry a valid passport or national ID card even though they aren’t normally required to present documents on intra-Schengen routes. Non-EU citizens holding a Schengen visa need a valid passport and visa, and third-country nationals with a residence permit in either country should expect their documentation checked as well.
Both governments have notified the European Commission’s Schengen registration system of the controls, a step required under EU rules whenever a member state temporarily reinstates internal border checks — confirming this is a legally sanctioned, time-limited exception rather than a unilateral breach of Schengen rules.
Why Spain and Italy can legally do this
The Schengen Borders Code allows member states to temporarily reintroduce internal border controls in response to a serious threat to public policy or internal security, provided the measure is proportionate, time-limited, and formally notified to the European Commission and other member states. Spain’s orders — tracked under reference numbers INT/846/2026, INT/932/2026, and INT/977/2026 — and Italy’s parallel notification both follow that framework, which is why the checks can be legally justified as an exception rather than treated as a breach of the Schengen Area’s core principle of free movement.
This is not the first time Schengen states have used this mechanism in 2026, and the specific reference to Ceuta — the Spanish enclave on Morocco’s coast that has repeatedly been a flashpoint for irregular crossings — signals that migration routes through North Africa remain the primary driver behind the current controls, rather than any dispute between Madrid and Rome themselves.
What travelers should actually expect
In practice, travelers on direct Spain-Italy air and sea routes during the control periods should budget extra time for identity checks that would not normally happen on an intra-Schengen trip, and should make sure they are carrying valid passport or ID documentation rather than relying on being waved through. The controls do not affect travel between either country and other Schengen states, only the direct routes between Spain and Italy specified in the respective national orders.
What happens when the controls expire
Spain’s current authorization runs through October 7 and Italy’s through October 16, after which the countries will need to either let the checks lapse and return to normal Schengen rules, or file a fresh notification to extend them if migration pressures and security concerns persist. Given how frequently member states have renewed similar temporary controls elsewhere in the Schengen Area in recent years, a further extension would not be unusual if the underlying pressures driving the current controls haven’t eased by mid-October.
Travelers’ most common questions
Why did Spain and Italy reinstate border checks? Both countries cited concerns about irregular migration, potential secondary movements within the Schengen Area, and public order and internal security risks, with Italy specifically referencing the situation in Ceuta.
How long will the checks last? Spain’s controls run from September 23 through October 7, 2026; Italy’s run from October 1 through October 16, 2026.
Which travelers are affected? All passengers on direct air and sea routes between Spain and Italy, including EU citizens, Schengen visa holders, and third-country nationals with residence permits.
Is this a breach of Schengen rules? No. The Schengen Borders Code permits temporary reinstatement of internal border checks for security reasons, provided it is proportionate, time-limited, and formally notified to the European Commission.
Does this affect travel to other Schengen countries? No. The controls apply only to direct routes between Spain and Italy, not to travel between either country and other Schengen states.
What documents should travelers carry? EU citizens should carry a valid passport or national ID card; non-EU travelers should carry a valid passport and, where required, a valid Schengen visa or residence permit.
A fresh round of UK immigration rule changes takes effect October 8, 2026, under a Home Office statement of changes published September 3 as HC 584. The amendments touch several visa routes at once — victims of modern slavery, visitors, EU Settlement Scheme holders, Hong Kong BN(O) applicants, and people on the domestic abuse route — without the kind of fee increases or salary threshold shake-ups that have made headlines in past statements of changes.
That lower profile doesn’t mean the changes are minor for the people they affect. Several provisions close long-standing gaps that immigration lawyers and advocacy groups have flagged for years.
What the UK immigration rule changes actually cover
The most significant shift affects victims of modern slavery on the Skilled Worker route: under the new rules, they can work for a different employer for the remainder of their visa validity, rather than being tied to the employer connected to their exploitation. Immigration advocates have long argued that employer-tied visas make it harder for trafficking and modern slavery victims to safely leave abusive situations, since doing so previously risked their immigration status along with their job.
On the Visitor route, several niche but meaningful changes take effect: training visits no longer require applicants to show the training is unavailable in their home country, and artists, entertainers, and musicians visiting the UK may now attend rehearsals as part of permitted activities, alongside qualifying entertainment staff supporting them. New provisions also accommodate Erasmus+ exchange participants under the visitor rules.
EU Settlement Scheme and Hong Kong BN(O) changes
The EU Settlement Scheme sees adjustments to how proportionality is assessed for pre-settled status holders in certain circumstances, along with a modified three-month deadline for family members joining an EUSS holder for the first time, now linked to the date of their most recent lawful UK entry rather than a fixed point. On the Hong Kong BN(O) route, dependent children of BN(O) status holders will no longer need to separately complete their own five-year continuous residence period before qualifying for settlement alongside their parents — a change that should speed up settlement for BN(O) families with children who arrived at different times.
The domestic abuse route also expands: certain adult dependent children whose relationship with their sponsor broke down permanently due to abuse become newly eligible, addressing a gap where only the primary applicant’s circumstances were previously considered.
The smaller print worth knowing
A handful of technical changes round out the statement of changes. Fee waiver requests must now match the specific immigration route of the subsequent application for the waiver to carry forward, a procedural tightening the Home Office says is meant to prevent mismatched applications. Biometric enrollment deadlines are unaffected by application variations, meaning switching or amending an application does not reset the clock on required biometrics. The rules around suitability — the grounds on which an application can be refused for prior immigration law breaches, including bail failures and absconding — have also been clarified.
Transitional provisions mean applications submitted before October 8 will generally continue to be assessed under the prior rules for the specific provisions being changed, so applicants mid-process should check which version of the rules applies to their specific situation rather than assuming the new rules apply retroactively.
What happens for applicants after October 8
Immigration practitioners typically see a wave of questions in the weeks following any statement of changes, particularly from modern slavery victims and their advocates trying to understand the new employer-switching provision, and from Hong Kong BN(O) families working out whether their children now qualify for settlement sooner than previously expected. The Home Office has not signaled another statement of changes is imminent, meaning October 8’s rules are likely to stand without further amendment for at least the next few months.
Questions about the October 8 changes
When do the new UK immigration rules take effect? The changes take effect October 8, 2026, under Home Office statement of changes HC 584, published September 3, 2026.
What changes for modern slavery victims? Victims of modern slavery on the Skilled Worker route can now work for a different employer for the remainder of their visa, rather than being tied to the employer connected to their exploitation.
How does the Hong Kong BN(O) route change? Dependent children of BN(O) status holders no longer need to separately complete their own five-year residence period before qualifying for settlement alongside their parents.
Do these changes affect visa fees or salary thresholds? No. Unlike some past statements of changes, this round does not include fee increases or salary threshold adjustments.
Do the new rules apply to applications already submitted? Generally no. Transitional provisions mean applications submitted before October 8 continue under the prior rules for most of the affected provisions.
The H-1B fee struck down this week by a federal judge in California leaves the Trump administration’s $100,000 charge on new H-1B petitions blocked for now, but employers hoping the issue is settled should hold off celebrating — a proposed replacement fee of $103,265 remains under review at the Department of Homeland Security. US District Judge Haywood S. Gilliam Jr., ruling in the Northern District of California on September 30, found the fee policy “arbitrary and capricious” and vacated it entirely, saying the administration failed to consider alternatives or the reliance interests of employers and workers affected by the sudden charge.
It is the second time a federal court has struck down the fee. A Massachusetts judge issued a similar nationwide ruling back in June 2026, finding comparable procedural defects in how the policy was imposed.
Why the H-1B fee struck down ruling matters
Judge Gilliam’s ruling centers on process rather than the underlying policy goal. The court found that imposing a $100,000 fee on H-1B petitions amounted to a “legislative rule” — a substantive change requiring the formal notice-and-comment process under the Administrative Procedure Act — rather than something the administration could simply impose by fiat. “There is no question here that Agency Defendants failed to consider any alternatives or the reliance interests of the regulated parties,” Gilliam wrote in his order, according to court filings reviewed by legal reporters.
The practical effect is that enforcement of the $100,000 fee is enjoined until the administration completes proper notice-and-comment rulemaking — a process that typically takes months and allows the public, employers, and advocacy groups to formally weigh in before a rule takes effect.
What comes after the H-1B fee struck down decision
The ruling does not mean H-1B fees are off the table permanently. The Department of Homeland Security has a separate, proposed $103,265 fee already under review, and nothing in Gilliam’s decision prevents the administration from pursuing that or a similar charge through the proper rulemaking channel. Given that two separate federal courts have now struck down versions of this policy on nearly identical procedural grounds, any future attempt would likely need to clear the notice-and-comment bar explicitly to survive a legal challenge.
Immigration attorney Charles Kuck, among those who have tracked the litigation closely, has noted that the administration’s repeated attempts to impose steep H-1B fees without formal rulemaking suggest an urgency to raise the cost of the program quickly — an urgency that keeps running into the same procedural wall in court.
What this means for employers and visa holders
For now, employers filing new H-1B petitions are not subject to the $100,000 fee, restoring the prior cost structure while the legal situation remains unsettled. Companies that paid the fee before it was struck down, or that held back petitions due to the cost, will be watching closely for guidance from USCIS on how the agency plans to implement the court’s order in practice. The uncertainty itself has been costly for employers trying to plan hiring around a program whose cost structure has shifted multiple times within a single year.
What to watch next
The key date to watch is whether and when DHS formally opens notice-and-comment rulemaking on the proposed $103,265 fee, which would start a public comment period typically lasting 30 to 60 days before any new rule could take effect. Continued litigation is also likely regardless of that process, given the stakes for both the administration’s immigration agenda and the tech and consulting firms that rely heavily on the H-1B program.
What readers are asking
Is the $100,000 H-1B fee still in effect? No. The fee is currently blocked following Judge Gilliam’s September 30, 2026 ruling, which found the policy unlawful.
Why did the judge strike down the fee? The court found the fee amounted to a substantive “legislative rule” that required formal notice-and-comment rulemaking, which the administration did not conduct before imposing it.
Is this the first court to block the fee? No. A Massachusetts federal judge issued a similar nationwide ruling against the fee in June 2026.
Could a new H-1B fee be introduced? Yes. A proposed $103,265 fee announced by DHS in August 2026 remains under review and could move forward if the administration completes proper rulemaking.
What does “arbitrary and capricious” mean in this context? It is a legal standard under the Administrative Procedure Act meaning the agency failed to reasonably justify its decision, including by not considering alternatives or the interests of affected parties.
Who is affected by this ruling? Employers filing new H-1B petitions and the foreign workers those petitions cover are directly affected, as the ruling removes the $100,000 charge for now.
