Amazon H-1B Analysis: 80,000 Visa Approvals During Period of 57,000 Layoffs

H-1B Approvals vs. Employee Layoffs

A side-by-side comparison of Amazon's H-1B petition approvals and workforce reductions:

Year-by-Year Comparison

What the Data Shows

The H-1B visa program was created to allow U.S. companies to hire foreign workers in "specialty occupations" when qualified American workers are unavailable. The program assumes a genuine shortage of domestic talent.

The data raises questions about this assumption. In fiscal year 2023, Amazon received approval for 11,322 H-1B petitions. That same year, the company laid off 27,000 employees—including thousands of corporate and technical workers in roles similar to those filled by H-1B holders.

If Amazon faced a genuine talent shortage requiring foreign workers, it would not simultaneously be eliminating tens of thousands of existing positions in similar job categories.

Who Is Being Laid Off?

A common counterargument holds that layoffs and H-1B hiring affect different job categories—that warehouse workers are laid off while software engineers are hired. The evidence does not support this distinction:

• •January 2023 (18,000 layoffs): Amazon CEO Andy Jassy explicitly stated cuts targeted "corporate roles," including technology teams, human resources, and retail divisions—not warehouse operations.
• •October 2025 (14,000 layoffs): The company announced these cuts focused on "managerial and professional roles" with a goal of increasing the ratio of individual contributors to managers.
• •January 2026 (16,000 layoffs): Announced cuts target AWS (Amazon Web Services), advertising, and Twitch—divisions with heavy concentrations of software development and engineering roles.
• •H-1B job categories: According to Department of Labor data, 85%+ of Amazon's H-1B positions are for software development engineers, systems engineers, and related technical roles—the same job families affected by corporate layoffs.

The overlap is substantial. Amazon is simultaneously laying off software engineers and related technical workers while sponsoring thousands of H-1B workers for the same job titles. This suggests the H-1B program is not filling genuine talent gaps but rather providing access to a labor pool with lower wage expectations and reduced job mobility.

The Wage Question

Research consistently finds that H-1B workers are paid below market rates:

• •A 2020 Economic Policy Institute study found H-1B workers are paid 17-34% less than comparable American workers
• •The Department of Labor sets H-1B "prevailing wages" using outdated methodology that allows below-market compensation
• •H-1B workers are tied to their sponsoring employer, reducing their bargaining power and mobility

This wage differential creates an economic incentive to hire H-1B workers even when domestic workers are available. The result: companies can maintain high hiring of foreign workers while simultaneously laying off American employees.

Industry Context

Amazon is not alone. The Economic Policy Institute found that in 2022, the top 30 H-1B employers collectively:

• •Hired 34,000 new H-1B workers
• •Laid off at least 85,000 employees

The pattern extends across major technology companies: Google, Microsoft, Meta, and Salesforce all conducted mass layoffs while maintaining or increasing their H-1B hiring.

Policy Response

The Affordability Act of 2026 proposes ending the current H-1B program and restoring the original H-1 visa requirements:

• •Direct employment only—no staffing agencies or body shops
• •Genuine specialty occupations—not routine IT positions
• •Demonstrated need—employers must prove they cannot find American workers at market wages

Transition rules for current H-1B holders:

• •Less than 5 years on H-1B: Visa expires within 1 year. May apply for H-1 visa under new requirements.
• •5+ years on H-1B: Must convert to H-1 visa or Green Card within 2 years.

The goal is not to eliminate pathways for exceptional foreign talent, but to ensure the program serves its intended purpose: filling genuine skills gaps rather than providing access to lower-cost labor.