[DaveExeter]

Maybe because nepotism leads to untalented people getting jobs?

I think the $100K fee is a good idea. If these H-1Bs are exceptional talent, paying $100k to employ one is truly a bargain.

[seanmcdirmid]

What if China only charges $1k or even free for the same people? I mean, they are doing lots of AI work now also, and you can already see a few foreign programmers in Beijing, Shanghai, and Shenzhen. What is stopping Apple, Microsoft, Meta, or Amazon from doing even more work in India or other countries because they can't get the people they need in the US, or its just cheaper to setup more research jobs in Stockholm or London than it is in Seattle or San Jose?

Its not like it isn't already a work market for talent. $100k is a significant amount of friction to overcome.

[DaveExeter]

I think you meant "world market".

Companies are going to be offshoring as much as they can anyway. Bits fly across borders untaxed.

If there is some foreign talent that, for example, Meta thinks will benefit their bottom line by $1M/year, an extra $100K on top of a $250K benefits package is small change!

It's a human-tariff, but it is paid by wealthy corporations.

[cmxch]

Set a floor that is regionally adjusted such that the foreign ops/noncitizen cost is consistently higher no matter where. And that it also accounts for and penalizes malicious compliance/intent.

Regarding the overall problem: For the jobs that people care about keeping away from the alphabet soup provisions, the only problem is finding pliant and desperate people that take any port in a storm - not competence.

On business resistance: As for firms like Alphabet/Microsoft/Meta, they are not immune to noneconomic forces that might favor US presence and penalize non US expansion, broadly construed.

[C-x_C-f]

Do you think that the employee pool overall would be more or less talented without the H-1B program? What about the tails of the distributions?