Comment from Cato Institute
Cato InstituteOpposeAdvocacy
Summary: The Cato Institute opposes the proposed rule to increase prevailing wages for H-1B and other foreign workers, arguing that the rule lacks an empirical basis and will unnecessarily restrict the supply of skilled foreign labor. They contend that the current wage levels are already appropriate and that the proposed changes would harm business investment, job growth, and innovation.
Dear Mr. Pasternak:
My colleagues at the Cato Institute and I (David J. Bier) submit the following comments in response to the above-referenced notice and request for comments published by the Department of Labor (Department or DOL) in the Federal Register on March 27, 2026 (the Proposed Rule or the Rule). The notice solicits comments on the Proposed Rule which would revise the DOL Office of Foreign Labor Certification’s (OFLC) prevailing wage methodology in the H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 nonimmigrant processes and the Program Electronic Review Management (PERM) process for legal permanent residence.
The Cato Institute is a nonpartisan, nonprofit, public policy research organization in Washington, D.C. It has conducted original research on immigration policy for nearly half a century. Cato scholars submit comments on proposed rules, submit amicus briefs in federal courts, and are regularly invited to testify before Congress. This background in quantitative economic research gives Cato a unique perspective on the proposed rule.
The proposed rule increases the mandatory minimum wage—known as the prevailing wage—for employer-sponsored immigrants and H-1B nonimmigrants. DOL claims that H-1B and other employer-sponsored foreign workers are paid “below market” wages, and its rule fixes this problem. But the proposed rule just inflates wages to restrict the supply of skilled foreign workers beyond what the law allows.
Please see the attached comment.
