North America
Key trends shaping North America's labor and immigration landscape
Increasing regulation and scrutiny of temporary immigration programs
Governments are adopting more restrictive measures for temporary visa holders, reflecting a broader trend of tightening controls on short-term immigration. In the United States, multiple Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designations are being terminated, affecting thousands of beneficiaries. Authorities have also proposed ending the flexible “duration of status” framework for student and exchange visas, shifting to fixed entry periods and stricter departure timelines. While not introducing new restrictions, Canada has maintained its position following actions taken earlier in the year, including the closure and more restrictive eligibility criteria for select open work permit categories as well as the elimination of arranged employment points under the Express Entry pathway. These moves reflect a shared emphasis on managing temporary migration through clearer timelines, stronger employer obligations, and more robust eligibility enforcement.
Rising costs and procedural barriers in immigration pathways
Both the United States and Canada are introducing new financial and administrative hurdles that increase the complexity and cost of securing immigration benefits. The United States has announced a forthcoming USD 250 Visa Integrity Fee across most nonimmigrant visa categories, alongside a pilot program requiring certain visitors to post visa bonds. A significant increase in H-1B petition fees—up to USD 100,000 for certain high-volume employers—adds further financial strain, particularly in sectors reliant on skilled foreign talent. In parallel, changes to interview scheduling and processing (including limits on third-country visa applications and stricter residency-based interview rules) are narrowing procedural flexibility. Collectively, these measures signal a trend toward monetizing immigration processing and reducing discretionary access, which may particularly impact lower-income applicants or encourage employers to seek alternative immigration routes.
Expansion of data-driven decision-making and security-focused screening
Immigration agencies are increasingly leveraging technology and data to assess applicant risk and inform adjudication decisions. Canada has begun piloting AI-based screening tools at land border crossings through the Travel Compliance Indicator (TCI), assigning compliance scores to travelers using historical data and predictive analytics. In the United States, new guidance on discretionary immigration benefits outlines that any past support for anti-government or extremist views will be treated as a heavily negative factor in application adjudication. These developments highlight a growing reliance on digital tools and security profiling in immigration systems, with decisions increasingly shaped by behavioural data, compliance history, and other perceived risks.
Canada
Enhanced compliance in employer processes and growing use of technology at the border
Canada has introduced several updates aimed at tightening compliance for employers and enhancing border security through digital tools. Employers seeking to hire foreign workers under the Labour Market Impact Assessment (LMIA) process must now use the “Direct Apply” feature on the National Job Bank, ensuring that all applications from Canadian citizens and permanent residents are reviewed. While the impact may be limited due to this applying to only certain LMIA streams, this development reflects a trend to prioritize local labor and enforce transparency in recruitment practices.
At the border, the Canada Border Services Agency has begun piloting an artificial intelligence tool—the Travel Compliance Indicator (TCI)—at select land entry points. The implementation of this tool and its planned broader rollout signal a strategic move toward more data-driven screening and risk management at ports of entry.
United States
Restrictive policy shifts and termination of protections
The United States is undergoing a notable policy recalibration focused on narrowing access to temporary immigration protections and revising long-standing frameworks. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has announced the termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for multiple jurisdictions, with upcoming expiration dates in 2025. In parallel, DHS has proposed the elimination of the long-standing “duration of status” policy for F-1 students and J-1 exchange visitors, replacing it with a fixed four-year entry limit. These changes reflect a broader shift toward fixed immigration timeframes and reduced discretionary leeway for long-term temporary residents.
Greater financial and procedural burden on visa applicants
Administrative and financial requirements for immigration applicants are also increasing. A new USD 250 Visa Integrity Fee is expected to apply to nearly all nonimmigrant visa categories in the next fiscal year, and a visa bond pilot program has been launched targeting select visitor categories. USCIS has confirmed that the annual H-1B visa cap has been reached for FY2026, and DHS has proposed a new selection model that would favor higher-wage earners under a tiered lottery system. In addition, filing fees for H-1B petitions have been significantly increased, further raising the cost burden on sponsoring employers. These developments coincide with stricter procedural requirements, such as mandatory in-country visa interviews and revised eligibility for waiver programs, collectively adding both cost and complexity to key employment-based and temporary visa pathways.
Judicial pushback amid evolving legal landscape
Despite these restrictive shifts, parts of the U.S. immigration landscape remain dynamic due to ongoing judicial intervention. In July 2025, a federal judge blocked an attempt to deny citizenship to certain U.S.-born children, effectively countering a Trump-era policy by invoking a legal exception to a recent Supreme Court ruling. While this decision may be subject to further legal challenges, it underscores the continued role of the judiciary in shaping immigration outcomes, especially in areas where executive policy seeks to impose broad restrictions.