Will Wage-Based H-1B Rule Impact Master’s Cap Selection?

The new DHS/USCIS weighted-selection rule will change how every H‑1B cap case is picked, including cases eligible for the master’s cap. If it takes effect as planned, a U.S. master’s degree will still matter, but offered wage level will shape the odds far more than before.

For employers, students, and workers, the immediate impact is practical: registrations will need new data points, and selection chances will rise or fall based on the Department of Labor’s wage-level framework. For many U.S.-educated candidates, the master’s cap remains a second chance, but it won’t be a “pure lottery” second chance anymore.

Core shift: from a random lottery to wage-weighted selection

DHS/USCIS is replacing the prior random selection model with a wage-weighted method for cap-subject cases. Under the rule, each registration enters the selection pool multiple times based on the OEWS wage level tied to the offered job.

The weighting is straightforward:

• Level IV = 4 entries
• Level III = 3 entries
• Level II = 2 entries
• Level I = 1 entry

That same structure applies across the board. A beneficiary eligible for the master’s cap does not get a different wage weighting. They simply participate in a two-stage cap allocation process where both stages use weighted draws.

How the master’s cap process changes under weighting

USCIS has long used a two-step cap selection structure:

1. Select cases for the regular cap of 65,000 from the full pool.
2. Run a separate selection for the 20,000 advanced degree exemption (the master’s cap) from remaining eligible registrations not chosen in the first stage.

The new rule preserves these two-stage cap allocations. What changes is the selection engine inside each stage: instead of random draws, both draws become weighted draws. That means:

• A U.S. master’s degree holder still gets considered in the first stage with everyone else.
• If not selected there, the master’s-eligible registration still moves to the second stage.
• In both stages, the number of “chances” depends on the OEWS wage level.

For many readers, this is the headline: a master’s degree still provides an extra path into selection, but wage levels now drive the probability inside that path.

What “OEWS wage level” means in plain language

OEWS is the Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics system used to group wage data by job type and location. Employers typically use it to set a wage that fits the job’s duties and the location where the employee will work.

Under the rule, those wage levels become selection weight:

• A Level IV job gets four entries.
• A Level I job gets one entry.

Over large volumes, that shifts selections away from lower wage levels and toward higher ones. It also changes employer planning: under the prior lottery, a high-paying job and a lower-paying job had the same selection odds if both were registered properly. Under the weighted-selection rule, they will not.

Practical selection impacts for master’s-cap candidates

The effect on master’s-cap eligible workers depends heavily on wage level.

• A master’s-cap beneficiary offered a Level III or Level IV wage gains more “entries” in the first-stage regular cap pool. If not selected there, they enter the second-stage master’s-cap pool with the same higher number of entries.
• A master’s-cap beneficiary offered a Level I wage gets only one entry in the first-stage pool and one entry again in the second-stage pool.

Compared with a pure random draw, this lowers the share of selections likely to go to lower wage levels. Law-firm analyses summarized in the background material describe this as a material change in selection probability and warn that it can pressure employers to raise wages—especially for roles that would otherwise fall into Level I or Level II.

New required data at registration, and why consistency will matter

The rule also changes what must be provided at registration. Registrants must submit details that connect the case to a wage level determination, including:

• OEWS wage level
• SOC code (the occupational classification for the job)
• Area of intended employment (the work location used for wage analysis)

After selection, the petitioner must support the wage-level claim when filing the full H‑1B petition. The rule also anticipates enforcement: USCIS may deny or revoke cases where wage-level information appears manipulated or inconsistent between the registration, the Labor Condition Application process, and the petition filing record.

This is where process discipline matters. Employers will need tighter coordination between human resources, immigration counsel, and compensation teams. Small differences in job description wording, worksite location, or SOC coding can create misalignment that becomes a case risk later.

Timing: effective date mechanics and FY2027 expectations

The final rule takes effect 60 days after publication in the Federal Register. USCIS will apply it to cap registrations submitted on or after the effective date, including those eligible for the advanced degree exemption.

Practice guidance described in the material expects implementation in time for the FY2027 registration season, pointing to an early 2026 effective timeframe. That puts employers on notice now, because wage-setting, role leveling, and hiring budgets are often locked in months ahead of registration.

For official program basics and cap-season references, USCIS maintains its H‑1B electronic registration information here: USCIS H‑1B Electronic Registration Process.

What employers should do differently before registration opens

The weighted-selection rule makes wage strategy into selection strategy, and it raises compliance stakes. Employers that treat wage level as a “knob to turn” without supportable job facts risk denials later.

Before submitting registrations, employers should focus on four actions:

1. Confirm the SOC code and job duties match. Avoid inflated duties that do not reflect the real role.
2. Check the intended worksite location early. Location drives wage data; late location changes can create inconsistencies.
3. Map the offered wage to the OEWS wage level. Document how the role’s requirements align with the wage level used.
4. Plan for post-selection proof. Keep internal records that support why the wage level fits the job and location.

This preparation matters even more for master’s-cap cases. A U.S. graduate often has a narrow filing window tied to work authorization timing. A later denial because the wage-level position was not defensible can trigger fast employment disruptions.

Equity questions for U.S. graduates and early-career roles

The master’s cap was designed to give U.S.-educated advanced degree holders an added chance at selection. Many of those candidates are early in their careers, and early-career roles often map to lower wage levels.

That creates a tension. Under wage weighting, a new graduate offered a Level I wage gets fewer selection entries than a more senior hire. Over time, that could reduce selection rates for entry-level professional roles—even when candidates are U.S.-educated and employers are following normal market pay patterns.

• Supporters argue the system should prioritize higher-paid roles that signal higher skill and labor market value.
• Critics point out that wage levels track seniority and geography, not just skill, and that can shift opportunities away from early-career pathways.

According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, the largest day-to-day change employers will feel is operational: wage-level documentation becomes a front-end planning requirement, not a back-end filing detail.

Key takeaway: wage-level, SOC coding, and location data move from administrative details to core strategic and compliance factors that determine selection probability.

What stays the same, and what readers should not assume

What remains unchanged:

• The program stays cap-limited with 65,000 regular cap numbers and 20,000 master’s cap numbers.
• Master’s-cap eligible cases still get two chances through the two-stage process.
• Selection still happens through the registration system first, and the full petition follows if selected.

What readers should not assume:

• A master’s degree alone will not offset a low wage level. Under weighting, the master’s cap becomes an extra round of wage-weighted selection, not a separate random lottery that “rescues” low-wage cases.

For U.S. employers hiring international graduates, the message is direct: treat wage level, SOC coding, and location data as core strategy and core compliance, because the new selection math depends on them.