Trump aims to bring in overseas workers to train Americans

(UNITED STATES) The Trump administration on November 12, 2025, set out a sharp shift in how it wants the H-1B visa system to operate, saying the program should focus on bringing in skilled overseas workers for a limited time to help “train Americans” and then return home. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent described the plan in a Fox News interview, framing it as a knowledge-transfer strategy that uses foreign experts to rebuild U.S. know‑how in key industries where domestic skills have thinned. The approach affects employers, foreign professionals, and training pipelines in sectors targeted for industrial growth across the United States 🇺🇸.

Administration rationale and rhetoric

Bessent said President Trump’s goal is to fill immediate gaps while rebuilding the country’s own talent base. “The President’s vision here is to bring in overseas workers… who have the skills. Three, five, seven years to train US workers, then they can go home. The US workers fully take over,” he said.

He argued this direction addresses the long-term impact of offshoring: “We can’t snap our fingers and say you’ll learn how to build ships overnight… we haven’t built semiconductors here for years.” That message echoes the administration’s push to reshore manufacturing and reduce reliance on global supply chains.

The administration highlights shipbuilding, battery manufacturing, and semiconductors as priority areas—industries it views as vital for national and economic security and where firms face a shortage of experienced workers. Bessent called the strategy “a home run,” treating foreign experts as temporary knowledge brokers rather than permanent labor. President Trump has also emphasized that the U.S. must rebuild its own workforce while still needing to “bring in talent from around the world” to meet urgent needs in advanced industries.

Policy actions: surcharge and enforcement

Alongside the rhetorical shift, the administration has paired the policy with an enforcement push. A presidential proclamation issued on September 19, 2025, imposed a $100,000 surcharge on H-1B petitions filed on or after September 21, 2025, for workers currently outside the country.

Key points about the surcharge:
– Amount: $100,000 per petition (for workers outside the U.S. at filing)
– Effective date: petitions filed on or after September 21, 2025
– Expiration: temporary, expiring September 21, 2026
– Purpose: to shift costs and deter low-value or volume hiring; to push employers to reserve H-1B use for truly specialized, high‑paying roles

Officials say the fee will force companies to think twice before bringing in workers unless roles are clearly specialized and well-compensated.

Warning: The surcharge represents a dramatic cost shift, especially for high-volume users of the H-1B visa. Employers planning filings for abroad-based hires should factor this into budgeting and strategy.

Examples cited by the administration

The proclamation cites alleged systemic abuse of the program to hold down wages and substitute for domestic labor. It points to:
– A large software company approved for more than 5,000 H-1B workers in fiscal year 2025 while laying off over 15,000 employees around the same period.
– An IT firm that received approvals for nearly 1,700 H-1B workers but announced 2,400 layoffs in Oregon in July.

The administration argues these cases show misuse of the H-1B system to replace or undercut American workers.

Rulemaking: wages and prioritization

The proclamation also instructs the Department of Labor and the Department of Homeland Security to begin rulemaking to:
– Raise prevailing wage levels
– Prioritize admissions for higher-skilled, higher-paid professionals

Stated aim: ensure H-1B slots go to roles that clearly require advanced knowledge and pay accordingly, aligning selection more closely with specialty occupation standards.

According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, the combination of higher fees and wage-focused selection could:
– Shift demand toward research-intensive employers
– Move away from companies relying on large cohorts of mid-level contractors

Impact on foreign professionals

For foreign professionals weighing offers, the short-term picture is complicated:
– The plan offers access to high-impact projects in shipyards, chip fabs, and battery plants.
– At the same time, the $100,000 surcharge applies if their employer files while they are outside the U.S., creating a steep additional cost.
– Companies that still sponsor may signal the role involves critical, high-value work and genuine training plans for U.S. teams.
– Smaller firms or start-ups may struggle to meet both the fee and the higher prevailing wage expectations, narrowing the field of potential sponsors.

Those who arrive under this model may find themselves central to factory ramp-ups and technical problem-solving, with a defined timeline to hand off responsibilities and depart.

Impact on employers and hiring strategies

Employers are rethinking workforce plans amid tight production timelines and federal incentives for domestic builds.

Employers face several pressures:
– Need immediate, seasoned engineers and technicians to set up tools, write procedures, and certify processes.
– The surcharge and rising compliance costs could slow transfers and stretch project timelines.
– Some companies may shift to hiring candidates already in the U.S. (to avoid the fee); others will pay the surcharge for critical skills.

A human resources manager at a Midwestern manufacturer, speaking generally, said firms are “caught between the need to move fast and the risk of expensive filings that may not get picked” if future rules change selection priorities.

Training outcomes and program purpose

Bessent’s vision centers on clear training outcomes: foreign professionals would embed in U.S. teams to:
– Build standard work
– Transfer process knowledge
– Develop local supervisors and engineers capable of independent operations

The point, he said, is not to replace Americans but to ensure they can “fully take over” within a few years. This marks a rhetorical shift from H-1B usage as long-term staffing—especially common in software and IT services—to using the program as a time-limited training bridge.

Supporters and critics

Supporters argue:
– The plan aligns with the broader reindustrialization push
– Importing know-how temporarily can accelerate standing up new production lines
– Follow-on investments in domestic workers yield longer-term capability

Critics warn:
– The surcharge could block legitimate hires, delay buildouts, or push projects overseas
– Worker advocates welcome higher prevailing wages and screening but demand close monitoring to ensure H-1B workers aren’t exploited as stopgaps without real training pathways

Legal and practical uncertainties

Legal and policy watchers are focused on details:
– Raising prevailing wages could change how employers write job descriptions, titles, and requirements.
– Prioritizing higher-paid roles would likely favor doctorate-level scientists and experienced engineers, especially in semiconductor design, process engineering, and advanced manufacturing.
– Agencies must clarify how they will measure “training outcomes”, since the H-1B statute currently centers on specialty occupation criteria rather than explicit knowledge-transfer mandates.

From a process standpoint, the proclamation does not change the basic filing mechanics. However, the financial and selection landscape is shifting, and proposed rules will go through a formal notice-and-comment process before taking effect.

For official program information, employers and workers can review guidance from USCIS: H-1B Specialty Occupations on the H-1B specialty occupation category at:
– USCIS: H-1B Specialty Occupations

Business responses and internal changes

Inside many companies, the policy is already changing conversations and planning:
– Contract-heavy staffing models, particularly in IT services, face stronger headwinds.
– Manufacturing leaders—especially in shipbuilding and battery assembly—are exploring short, intensive assignments focused on technology transfer.
– Training plans are moving higher on boardroom agendas, with executives pressing managers to map out how and when U.S. teams will take over.
– For many workers, this could mean more paid upskilling, apprenticeships, and mentorship tied to production targets.

Political and economic calculus

The administration’s approach balances two forces:
– Openness to targeted talent who can transfer skills quickly
– A crackdown on perceived abuse of the H-1B program

The White House highlights public support for confronting cases where heavy H-1B use and layoffs coincide, while also accommodating specialists who can unlock production goals. Business groups warn sweeping fees and stricter wage floors could reduce flexibility and slow growth. Worker groups press for real learning opportunities and advancement tied to any foreign hiring.

This tug-of-war will likely intensify as agencies roll out proposed rules and companies adjust hiring strategies.

Bottom line and near-term outlook

Bessent’s Fox News remarks were unusually direct about the administration’s intent to recast the H-1B from a staffing pipeline into a training bridge. The policy’s bet is that a time‑limited influx of skilled overseas workers can jump‑start U.S. capacity in strategic sectors.

The immediate costs and constraints include:
– A $100,000 surcharge for overseas hires during the one-year window (through September 21, 2026)
– A tougher selection environment favoring higher-paid, higher-skilled roles
– Uncertainty over how agencies will define and enforce training outcomes

Over the next year, companies will face hard choices:
1. Pay the surcharge for essential outside hires
2. Hire candidates already in the U.S. to avoid the fee
3. Shift projects or timelines in response to higher costs and uncertain rule changes

How employers and candidates respond will determine whether this model spreads beyond the first wave of shipyards, chip plants, and battery lines—and whether the administration’s goal of training Americans through temporary foreign expertise is achievable in practice.