[mister_mort]

If this is truly per application, the companies that try to boost their chances with the lottery by creating multiple applications for the same person are going to get hit hard. Phantom companies that only exist on paper so people can tweak the probabilities are now liabilities.

We'll see a rebalancing for sure.

[DeRock]

> the companies that try to boost their chances with the lottery by creating multiple applications for the same person

This was already addressed by changing the odds to be per unique candidate, not application, thereby reducing the incentive to game it. More context here: https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/news-releases/uscis-announces...

[namirez]

Unfortunately that doesn't work in practice since the consulting firms submit multiple applications for multiple candidates to get one candidate in. I believe charging extra for each application is a good way to discourage this practice but I'm not sure if $100k is the right number or not. To me it seems a bit too high.

[DeRock]

The odds are now per candidate, not per application. If they submit multiple applications, it does not up chances for that candidate in any way.

And yes, it does work, because we have data from the year before this change, to the year after to compare against. The "Eligible Registrations for Beneficiaries with Multiple Eligible Registrations" dropped from 47,314 for FY 2025 to 7,828 for FY 2026. Source: https://www.uscis.gov/archive/uscis-announces-strengthened-i...

[nosianu]

> If they submit multiple applications, it does not up chances for that candidate in any way.

I believe the parent commenter's argument is that they instead play the game with multiple people. The increased chance is not per person, but achieved by using more people, each with their own chance.

I don't know if they do this, I merely find the argument itself intriguing with the shift in perspective, and that you as the reader has to keep track of the change in context from the individual one level up.

[mcflubbins]

> the consulting firms submit multiple applications for multiple candidates to get one candidate in.

[sbmthakur]

Wasn't the application linked to the candidate's passport number?

[namirez]

Again, it doesn't matter. You could apply for 100 candidates hoping to get one candidate accepted. For these firms, individual candidates don't matter. They want to get X number of cheap employees into the US per year. And they never file for a green card.

[throwaway219450]

I find it odd that the H-1B has no per-country limits, which would have avoided all of this from the start.

[ActorNightly]

Ah the conservative mindset:

When faced with an arbitrarily small, insignificant problem, in lieu of the status quo, the solution he/she advocates is to completely dismantle the status quo without any form and reason instead of actually focusing on the solution.

I.e punishment over progress.

[ozozozd]

To be fair, the true conservative mindset would “not tear down the fence, if you don’t know what it’s there for.”

[ebiester]

In one sense they won't - it will reduce the queue enormously.

But you'll really need that person. It will also kill OPT in general.

[sigwinch]

It’s per-year.