Trump Administration Proposes Eliminating 60-Day Grace Period For H-1B Visa Holders After Job Loss

The Trump administration has proposed eliminating a 60-day grace period that allows skilled foreign workers, including those on H-1B visas, to remain in the United States and secure a new employer after losing their jobs. According to a government notice published in the Federal Register on Thursday, September 10, 2026, the proposed rule would require affected visa holders to depart the country immediately upon the termination of their employment.

This policy shift, drafted by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, represents the latest effort by President Donald Trump to restrict legal migration since his return to the White House in January 2025. If finalized, the regulation could disrupt operations at major American technology corporations and global professional services firms that rely heavily on specialized foreign talent to fill critical technical roles.

The 60-day grace period, which has been a staple of the U.S. immigration system since its introduction in 2017, was designed to provide a buffer for foreign professionals during sudden employment transitions. Under the current framework, laid-off workers have nearly two months to find an alternative sponsor, transition to a different visa status, or systematically manage their personal affairs. This includes complex tasks such as selling homes, terminating leases, and arranging for the relocation of school-aged children.

By removing this window, the Department of Homeland Security seeks to enforce immediate departure upon job loss. The agency argues that the change will encourage employers to prioritize domestic recruitment. However, immigration attorneys warn that the sudden elimination of the transition period will leave thousands of highly skilled workers in legal limbo the moment they receive a layoff notice, forcing rapid departures without the opportunity to secure alternative employment within the country.

While the H-1B visa is the most prominent target of the proposed regulation, the scope of the policy extends far beyond tech-focused visas. The Department of Homeland Security notice outlines that the elimination of the grace period will also apply to several other temporary visa classifications. These include L-1 visas, which are utilized by multinational corporations to transfer executives and managers to U.S. offices, and O-1 visas, reserved for individuals possessing extraordinary ability in science, education, business, athletics, or the arts.

the rule will affect E-1 visas for international traders, E-2 visas for commercial vehicle operators, and TN professional visas for Canadian and Mexican citizens under regional trade agreements. Specialty visa programs for specific nations are also included in the proposal, such as the H-1B1 visa for skilled professionals from Singapore and Chile, and the E-3 visa for specialty occupation workers from Australia. The broad application of the rule ensures that almost every category of skilled temporary foreign worker in the United States will face immediate departure if they lose their jobs.

The proposed rule is poised to fall heavily on Indian technology professionals, who historically receive the vast majority of H-1B visas issued by the U.S. government. These visas, first established by Congress in 1990, are highly sought after by global technology companies to address localized shortages of specialized technical talent. Indian nationals working in software development, engineering, and data analysis represent the core workforce of many Silicon Valley operations and global IT consulting firms.

Major outsourcing and consulting corporations are the primary sponsors of these visas and will face direct operational challenges under the new rules. Companies such as Tata Consultancy Services, Infosys, HCLTech, and LTIMindtree, alongside global advisory firms like Deloitte, PwC, and Ernst & Young, routinely sponsor thousands of H-1B workers annually. For these organizations, the sudden loss of a transition window means that any workforce reduction or project cancellation could result in the immediate deportation of their personnel, complicating human resources planning and project delivery.

In its formal proposal, the Department of Homeland Security acknowledged that American businesses could experience operational disruptions as they adapt to the new regulatory environment. However, the agency maintained that the policy serves the broader goal of protecting the domestic workforce. The department asserted that positions vacated by foreign workers could be filled by qualified American citizens, or that employers could choose to re-hire departed foreign workers through formal channels if necessary.

Specifically, the government notice stated: "DHS presumes that they will either offer the same jobs to equally qualified U.S. workers or go through the I-129 petition process depending on their workforce requirement." This perspective assumes a highly fluid domestic labor market that can rapidly absorb specialized technical roles. Conversely, business groups argue that finding local replacements with equivalent technical expertise is rarely instantaneous, particularly in highly specialized engineering fields.

Legal experts specializing in corporate immigration have expressed serious concerns regarding the administrative burden this rule will place on corporate human resources departments. Lawyers at Berardi Immigration Law, a firm specializing in business-related immigration issues, observed that the proposed policy would "sharply compress the timeline HR teams have to manage layoffs and offboarding for foreign national employees." The firm noted that the lack of a transition period removes any flexibility for employers attempting to wind down projects or manage staff reductions humanely.

This regulatory proposal is not an isolated measure but rather a key component of a wider administrative effort to restrict legal immigration pathways. Since taking office in January 2025, the Trump administration has systematically introduced measures designed to raise the barrier of entry for foreign professionals. These initiatives include the implementation of higher visa application fees for skilled workers, which has increased the financial burden on sponsoring employers.

the administration recently paused immigrant visa appointments at U.S. embassies and consulates worldwide. The State Department attributed this temporary suspension to the implementation of a new training program for consular officers, though critics view it as an administrative hurdle that slows down the legal immigration pipeline. The proposed elimination of the 60-day grace period fits squarely within this policy trajectory, aiming to reduce the overall number of temporary foreign workers residing in the United States.

The proposed rule is not yet legally binding. Before the Department of Homeland Security can finalize and enforce the regulation, it must undergo a mandatory two-month public comment period. This window allows tech companies, business associations, immigration advocates, and individual workers to submit formal feedback and legal arguments against the policy, which the government is legally required to review.

Following the conclusion of the sixty-day public comment period, the administration will evaluate the feedback before publishing a final rule in the Federal Register. Sponsoring employers and immigration advocacy groups are expected to use this period to lobby against the changes or prepare legal challenges in federal court to block the implementation of the rule, arguing that it exceeds the statutory authority of the executive branch.