Box CEO Slams $100,000 H-1B Fee Crushing Startups’ Hiring

(SILICON VALLEY, UNITED STATES) Aaron Levie, the CEO of Box, is warning that a new $100,000 H-1B fee on each new visa application will tilt the tech talent market toward the biggest players and push smaller firms to the sidelines. In remarks on the A16z Podcast, Levie said the jump turns international hiring into a “spending game” that only the largest companies can afford, raising alarm across startup circles as they plan their 2026 hiring cycles and funding needs.

Levie argued the sharp increase will change who gets to hire global engineers, data scientists, and product managers. Startups that run on tight budgets and offer equity instead of big cash packages could be shut out, while large firms can treat the cost as a routine expense. “International hiring is becoming a spending game,” Levie said, adding that the rule puts new and emerging companies at a clear disadvantage.

The policy, announced by President Trump’s administration in September 2025, applies to each H-1B petition and directly affects the annual pool of 85,000 skilled workers who come to the United States on specialty-occupation visas. Industry leaders say the rule will ripple through recruiting plans immediately, even before the next lottery season, as teams adjust headcount plans and offer letters. According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, early reactions suggest hiring managers are weighing whether they can justify the new cost per candidate, especially for entry-level roles.

Policy change and Levie’s alternative

Levie supports recalibrating the new charge to a more modest level. He proposed $20,000 as a ceiling for the H-1B fee, paired with flexible visa caps that can rise and fall with market demand. In his view, this approach would keep doors open for top global talent while maintaining wage protections for U.S. workers.

He stressed that any reform should support two goals at once: attracting the world’s best workers and keeping pay strong for people already in the labor market. The current setup, he said, risks doing neither by pricing out startups that drive much of the industry’s new product development and job creation. That shift could concentrate talent inside the largest companies and drain the diverse mix of ideas that often comes from small, fast-moving teams.

Critics across the venture community share that reading. Prominent investors, including Michael Moritz, have argued the fee misunderstands how companies actually use the H-1B program. Rather than protecting U.S. jobs, they say, the rule will push roles offshore and make it harder for the United States to keep a leadership edge in fields like artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, and clean tech.

Some founders now face a stark choice:
– Absorb the fee,
– Delay a key hire,
– Or open a team abroad.

Impact on startups, hiring plans, and U.S. competitiveness

Startups feel the hit first because they lack the balance sheets needed to swallow a six-figure charge per hire. Many early-stage companies already run lean and rely on runway measured in months, not years. A single H-1B hire at $100,000 could equal a major chunk of a seed or Series A round.

Founders say that cost will likely cut the number of candidates they can even consider, limiting the mix of skills they can bring onto critical teams. The effect extends beyond personnel budgets: founders and CFOs are updating hiring models to reflect the higher fee and the lower odds that a visa candidate will be cost-effective.

Recruiters report several immediate responses:
– Pausing new H-1B offers,
– Shifting offers to countries with friendlier, lower-cost visa rules,
– Expanding remote roles outside the United States to avoid visa complications.

Those moves could accelerate a trend from the pandemic era, when global teams became normal for many startups.

Large tech companies may not welcome the change either, even if they can afford it. Concentrating more visas in the hands of a few giants could draw political criticism and make the program appear less open. It may also raise internal questions about paying six figures per candidate while cutting costs elsewhere. Still, in the short term, well-funded firms are better positioned to bear the cost, which could help them absorb more of the international talent pool.

Policy backlash is building. Industry groups, state officials, and leading public institutions are considering legal and political challenges to the new fee. They question whether a flat $100,000 charge per application is fair or aligned with the purpose of the H-1B program. If the fee stands, advocates anticipate stronger pressure to adjust other parts of the system, such as the annual cap structure and the timeline for selections.

Levie’s critique highlights the risk of “strategic distortion”, where companies change plans not because the job moved, but because the visa did. When firms decide to place roles in Toronto or Bangalore rather than Austin or Denver just to dodge the fee, the United States loses both the job and the long-term network effects that come with it. Over time, that can weaken local ecosystems that depend on steady inflows of talent and investment.

Supporters of the fee argue it could push employers to hire more domestic workers and invest in training. Some founders acknowledge that outcome could play out in the long run. But many also note the near-term reality is different: the roles they seek to fill often require scarce skills, and the choice is not between an H-1B hire and a local hire, but between an H-1B hire and no hire at all.

Effects for foreign students and early-career workers

For foreign students and workers, the message is mixed. Demand for H-1B roles remains high, but the higher price may reduce the number of employers willing to sponsor new graduates or junior-level candidates. That dynamic could narrow entry points into the U.S. market for talented newcomers who trained at American universities and hoped to stay.

Companies that still hire may focus on senior candidates to justify the fee, leaving fewer paths for early-career growth.

Government agencies will face pressure to explain how the fee supports broader goals, including wage protection and program integrity. Readers seeking official program details can review the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services overview of H-1B specialty occupations on the USCIS website.

Key takeaway: Levie and others urge a reset — lower the H-1B fee to a level startups can handle, allow caps to flex with demand, and keep the focus on drawing the best talent while maintaining fair pay.

Without that balance, the market may tilt further toward consolidation, offshoring, and slower U.S. growth — outcomes that Levie says neither startups nor big tech truly want, and that could leave the broader economy with fewer wins in the years ahead.