Silicon Valley leaders have largely remained silent on the recent hike in H1-B visa fees, despite the policy hitting the tech industry, one of their most vulnerable sectors directly. As startups and major tech firms face higher costs for hiring international talent, the lack of public response from these influential executives has raised eyebrows.
In contrast, small-scale startups have been far more vocal about the impact of the H1-B fee hike, openly sharing how it has strained their already tight budgets. Many founders warn that the increased costs are forcing them to slow down hiring, reconsider planned expansions, and in some cases, even contemplate relocating operations to countries with more favorable immigration policies.
For these young companies, which rely heavily on skilled international talent, the fee increase poses a direct threat to growth and innovation, making their concerns both immediate and urgent.
READ: Amazon, Microsoft, Apple lead surge in H-1B sponsorships despite ‘America First’ push(
While recently, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed a legal challenge to the administration’s $100,000 fee on H-1B visa petitions, some Silicon Valley leaders have openly welcomed the H1-B fee hike with figures like Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, and OpenAI’s Sam Altman among them, others have stayed notably silent.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk, for instance, has long been a vocal supporter of the H1-B program, even crediting it in a 2024 X post as the reason for his presence in the U.S. Yet, following the sudden fee increase, Musk has not commented publicly. His silence has sparked speculation, especially given his recent fallout with former President Trump. The two were seen interacting at Charlie Kirk’s memorial service, leading some observers to wonder: is Musk keeping quiet to avoid jeopardizing potential federal deals in partnership with XAI?
San Francisco based Atal Agarwal, founder and CEO of OpenSphere and LegalBridge, says, “After the U.S. Chamber of Commerce lawsuit, I feel there is going to be more statement overall around this. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce usually is an organization that consists of many different companies, so a joint lawsuit addresses that. Another point is – we all know the way Trump works. He is not happy with people or companies that retaliate. So, the real problem here is that companies do not want to go against him in isolation. But yes, everyone was expecting that the corporates would be more active and would issue more statements.”
In 2025, major tech companies including Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, and Meta have significantly increased their reliance on H-1B visas, making them some of the largest sponsors of skilled foreign workers. Among big players, JP Morgan has been one of the few to comment while most others have chosen to remain quiet on the issue despite their growing dependence on the program. “Agarwal adds, “First of all, we have to realize that the Silicon Valley consists broadly of two types of sectors – One, the really big tech companies who have a lot of money and often pay upwards of $300k per year to many H-1B employees. So, a $100k fee while it bothers them, but they know that they can absorb it. The other sector of Silicon Valley happens to be founders who have raised VC capital or are in the early stages. These founders usually end of hiring their early employees and often the founders themselves are immigrants who often end up using the O-1A pathway so for them the fee hike does not take any impact.”
JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon has been among the few industry leaders to directly address the H-1B fee hike. Calling Trump’s $100,000 charge “something that came out of the blue,” he said the bank would be “engaging with stakeholders and policymakers” on the issue.
READ: H-1B visa fee surge forces Walmart to pause hiring (
Speaking to The Times of India, Dimon stressed the importance of visas for a global firm like JPMorgan: “For us, visas matter because we move people around globally – experts who get promoted to new jobs in different markets.” He also emphasized the broader stakes, noting, “The challenge is that the US still needs to remain an attractive destination. My grandparents were Greek immigrants who never finished high school. America is an immigrant nation, and that’s part of its core strength.”
The approval figures underscore just how heavily these companies depend on international talent to fuel their growth. Data shared by Amanda Goodall on X shows Amazon Web Services topping the list in 2025 with 10,044 H-1B approvals, nearly 800 more than the previous year. Microsoft and Meta followed closely with 5,189 and 5,123 approvals, both marking solid year-over-year gains. Apple also saw an uptick with 4,202 approvals, while JP Morgan Chase posted one of the sharpest jumps, rising to 2,440—an increase of more than 700. Together, the numbers highlight a widening reliance on skilled workers from abroad, even as policy costs mount.
Given these soaring approval numbers, the silence of most tech leaders stands out even more. Their companies are among the heaviest users of the H-1B program but are they afraid of political blowback or the risk of being blacklisted at a time when federal contracts and regulatory goodwill are critical to their businesses. For firms that depend so heavily on Washington’s support: whether through infrastructure partnerships, AI research grants, or defense-related deals, the calculation may be that staying quiet protects their interests, even if the policy directly hurts their hiring pipelines.
At the same time, if Silicon Valley giants choose to quietly accept the fee hike, they risk slowing down their hiring pipelines and narrowing their intake to only those skilled workers who can withstand the added costs. That kind of selective hiring could disrupt revenue growth, stifle innovation, and ultimately hurt competitiveness. Yet, despite these stakes, the industry’s biggest voices remain quiet.
Are they working behind the scenes on a larger strategy? Will they press the Trump administration to reconsider, or simply move forward by absorbing the blow? And if the pressure mounts, could they follow the path of smaller startups like relocating operations or leaning more heavily on remote talent ironically at a time when many of them are insisting employees return to physical offices?
(Zofeen Maqsood contributed to this report.)