Project Firewall: DOL No Longer Needs a Complaint to Investigate Your H-1B Program

Project Firewall lets the Secretary of Labor personally certify reasonable cause and open an H-1B investigation with no complaint at all. By November 2025, DOL indicated at least 175 were underway.

Worksite Compliance6 min readSubscriber
Maeve Healy, Esq.
Maeve Healy, Esq.
Lead Supervisory Associate Attorney: Complex Federal & State Litigation
All Insights by Maeve Healy
Rule in effect since
Accurate as of

For as long as the H-1B program has existed, the practical ceiling on Department of Labor enforcement has been the complaint requirement. Wage and Hour investigators generally needed an aggrieved party (a current or former employee, a competitor) to open a file. No complainant, no investigation.

Project Firewall removed the ceiling.

Announced September 19, 2025, the initiative deploys, for the first time, the Secretary of Labor's personal certification authority. Where the Secretary personally certifies reasonable cause to believe an employer has violated H-1B program requirements, WHD may open a Secretary-initiated investigation with no complaint at all.

By November 2025, DOL indicated at least 175 H-1B investigations were underway with $15 million in back wages assessed. Those figures came from a departmental statement to a news outlet rather than a DOL publication, and no updated numbers have been released. Treat the magnitude as directional, not audited. The structural change, however, is not in doubt.

What they are looking for

The violation patterns DOL has described are not exotic. They are the ordinary failure modes of an H-1B program that has grown faster than its compliance function:

  • Paying below the LCA wage. Including the subtler versions: paying the required wage but deducting business expenses that effectively reduce it below the required rate.
  • Benching. Failing to pay a worker in nonproductive status. This remains one of the most commonly misunderstood obligations, particularly at staffing and consulting firms where "between projects" is a normal condition.
  • Failing to notify USCIS of terminations. A bona fide termination requires notice to USCIS, withdrawal of the LCA, and an offer of return transportation. Employers that skip these steps remain on the hook for wages.
  • Worksites listed on filings that do not exist, or where the worker never actually reported.

Remedies run to back wages, civil money penalties, and debarment from the H-1B program. Debarment is the one that ends businesses whose staffing model depends on H-1B.

The public access file is the cheapest way in

Here is the operational point most employers underweight.

A Secretary-initiated investigation has to start somewhere, and the public access file is the least expensive place to look. It requires no subpoena and no site visit. It must be available to any member of the public who asks. And a PAF deficiency that "impedes the ability of the Administrator to determine whether a violation has occurred, or the ability of members of the public to have information needed to file a complaint" carries a civil money penalty of up to $2,364.

The penalty amount is not what should concern you. What should concern you is that a PAF audit is the front door, and a disorganized PAF is an invitation to walk through it.

The file must be assembled within one working day of LCA filing and must contain the certified LCA, documentation of the wage rate paid, the prevailing wage determination and its source, documentation of notice (posting or electronic), a summary of benefits offered to U.S. workers in similar positions, and (for H-1B dependent or willful violator employers) the additional non-displacement and recruitment attestations.

Two failure modes recur in our practice:

Decentralized filing. LCAs certified by different offices or outside counsel over several years, with no single custodian. Nobody can produce a complete file on demand because no complete file exists in one place.

Wage documentation that does not match reality. The PAF documents the rate on the LCA; payroll shows something else, usually because of a role change, a location change, or a deduction nobody flagged as a wage issue. Each mismatch is a potential willful violation at up to $9,624, and where a U.S. worker was displaced within the ninety days before or after filing, up to $67,367.

The full penalty structure

ViolationMaximum
Substantial violation: notification, LCA specificity, recruitment; material LCA misrepresentation; PAF violations impeding investigation or public complaint$2,364
Willful violation: wages or working conditions, strike/lockout, notification, LCA specificity, displacement, recruitment; willful misrepresentation; discrimination against an employee$9,624
Willful violation resulting in displacement of a U.S. worker within 90 days before or after petition filing$67,367

These amounts are unchanged from 2025. OMB cancelled the government-wide 2026 inflation adjustment in April, because the October 2025 CPI-U data was never produced during the lapse in appropriations. Any source quoting you higher 2026 figures is wrong.

The multi-agency posture is the real story

Project Firewall coordinates DOL's Office of Immigration Policy, ETA, and Wage and Hour with the DOJ Civil Rights Division, the EEOC, and USCIS. That is the detail general counsels should sit with.

It means a wage-and-hour finding can become a discrimination referral. It means a DOL investigation can surface facts that support a USCIS revocation. And it means the "immigration compliance" question is no longer contained within the immigration function.

The same convergence is visible in enforcement outcomes. The DOJ's Immigrant and Employee Rights Section spent 2026 pursuing discrimination against U.S. workers, culminating in a $3.2 million settlement with OpenAI and Statsig in August 2026 over PERM recruitment practices: the positions were not advertised on the external careers site, applicants were required to apply on paper, and roles were advertised by late-night radio. And in a criminal matter that shows where the ceiling is, a Florida construction executive received 48 months and over $55 million in restitution in a case that began with undocumented labor and ended in payroll tax evasion, workers' compensation fraud, and a worker's death.

The immigration violation is increasingly the entry point, not the endpoint.

What to do this quarter

  1. Audit every public access file against the checklist above. Confirm one custodian, one location, complete for every LCA filed in the past year plus the required retention period.
  2. Reconcile PAF wage documentation against actual payroll, employee by employee. Investigate every mismatch before someone else does.
  3. Review your benching exposure. Identify every H-1B employee who has been in nonproductive status and confirm they were paid.
  4. Audit your termination process. For every H-1B separation in the past two years, confirm USCIS notice, LCA withdrawal, and the return transportation offer.
  5. Confirm every worksite on every active LCA matches where the employee actually works. Remote and hybrid arrangements adopted since 2020 have quietly invalidated a great many LCAs.
  6. Treat a DOL inquiry as a multi-agency event from the first letter. Involve counsel before responding, and preserve privilege on the internal review.

The employers who fare worst in Secretary-initiated investigations are not the ones with the most violations. They are the ones who cannot produce a coherent file, and therefore cannot tell their own story.

Sources

Maeve Healy, Esq.
Written by
Maeve Healy, Esq.
Lead Supervisory Associate Attorney: Complex Federal & State Litigation

A former prosecutor and formidable trial attorney, Maeve commands complex federal and state litigation with an insider's mastery of courtroom and prosecutorial strategy.

This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice, nor does it create an attorney-client relationship. Immigration law and agency policy change frequently; the analysis above reflects our understanding as of the date noted. Readers should consult counsel regarding their specific circumstances.