On September 11, 2026, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that would eliminate the up-to-60-day grace period currently available to certain foreign workers following termination of employment. The current grace period regulation, 8 CFR 214.1(l)(2) reads in part:
An alien admitted or otherwise provided status in E-1, E-2, E-3, H-1B, H-1B1, L-1, O-1 or TN classification and his or her dependents shall not be considered to have failed to maintain nonimmigrant status solely on the basis of a cessation of the employment on which the alien’s classification was based, for up to 60 consecutive days or until the end of the authorized validity period, whichever is shorter…
This grace period has been a valuable resource for foreign nationals and their employers since it took effect in January 2017. It has allowed foreign workers whose employment has been terminated—an especially difficult time, even without visa issues to consider—to find new employment with a company willing to sponsor a visa, file for a change of status, or arrange their affairs before departing the United States.
The NPRM proposes removing 8 CFR 214.1(l)(2) entirely, cutting off this beneficial resource. Visa status would end the day after the qualifying employment ends; the worker and their dependent family members would be expected to depart the United States immediately. Coupled with employers’ legal obligation to immediately inform U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services (USCIS) about the end of foreign workers’ employment, and DHS’ increasing willingness to target and initiate removal proceedings against foreign nationals who are not maintaining their nonimmigrant status, the elimination of the grace period has the potential to be painful and disruptive.
The disruption would extend to U.S. employers’ interests. Practically speaking, the removal of the grace period would force most foreign nationals to pursue alternative US visa options from abroad, making recruiting a candidate who has just lost a job considerably harder and slower. In addition, since most foreign workers whose employment is terminated will be obliged to travel back to their home country, the employer’s obligation to pay reasonable return transportation costs to H1B and O1 workers dismissed before the end of the authorized period is likely to be triggered much more often.
Spouses and children whose status is dependent on a foreign worker would also be impacted. They would lose their status at the same time—the day after employment is terminated—and for spouses who hold their own work authorization, this would mean having to cease work the same day as their spouse, the principal nonimmigrant, until the spouse can find new employment and visa sponsorship and return to their prior visa status.
DHS is not proposing to change the separate 10-day grace period that applies after an approved petition’s validity period ends or before it begins. However, that period does not attach to a worker whose job ends mid-validity and so would provide no relief in place of a missing 60-day grace period.
The NPRM is not a final rule. Public comments are due 60 days after publication, on or about November 10, 2026. DHS would then need to consider those comments and issue a final rule. Litigation is likely if the rule is finalized. In the meantime, employers may wish to identify workers in these visa categories whose employment or assignments may end in the coming months, and build more lead time into termination, transfer, and hiring plans. Employees may wish to plan what do to if a termination of employment takes place, including being ready to obtain legal advice early about possible options, and preparing for dependent family members whose ability to stay in school or continue their own employment could be implicated.
We will continue to monitor this NPRM and report further developments here.
Chris Beckerson © Jewell Stewart Pratt Beckerson & Carr PC 2026
