Geography / State

Arizona

Employers in Arizona filed 133,004 certified H-1B applications requesting 238,699 workers across 11,609 companies. The median offered wage is $84,000/yr. The largest filers are Infosys Limited, Cognizant Technology Solutions U.S. Corporation and Syntel Consulting Inc.. The displacement model assigns 293.6K worker-equivalent exposures to these filings.

Data current as of Sep 2, 2026

Workers requested

238.7K

Requests on filings, not hires

Median offered wage

$84K

Annual, certified filings

Below prevailing

0.02%

Share of 125.1K filings with a wage on record

Latest year

1.9K

Calendar 2026 · peak 2019 at 11.4K

Americans displaced (modeled estimate)

293,635

The math
Base (1 per certified worker)
+238,699
Wage-gap multiplier

97119 of 133004 filings below BLS median

+54,936
Total293,635

Σ workers×(1+wage_gap) + Σ WARN layoffs. The 1.0 base rate per certified H-1B worker request is a site model assumption. Wage gap multiplier = (BLS median − offered wage) / BLS median, applied only to filings offering less than the BLS median. Related research provides context, not validation of these exact coefficients. This is a modeled estimate, not a count of actual displacements.

Exposure method v1.2 · This is a modeled worker-equivalent count.

Inside the state

Where inside the state the activity concentrates.
Loading map…

Counties by filings (15)

1Maricopa 113,201
2Pima 7,564
3Pinal 1,258
4Yuma 701
5Coconino 621
6Yavapai 467
7Cochise 438
8Navajo 420

Modeled consequences

Estimates scaled from the modeled displacement figure above. Not observed outcomes.

Modeled consequence estimates

Conditional impacts associated with modeled displacement

Explore Arizona’s scenarioEarnings · children · health · adjust the worker count

These are conditional population estimates scaled from Arizona's current modeled displacement count. They are not observed outcomes, a prediction about any person, or evidence that this entity caused displacement.

Exposure method v1.2 (stored with this aggregate) · benchmarked to the latest BLS survey. Consequence parameters v1.52; build v1.52+engine0.4.0+99173fbf23e75037da3fb9b4a9017a1e56909260ccb112f9902bc5ac86242153+national-reference1

Excess deaths over 20 years

Illustrative reference calculation · population applicability is not established

8,444.57

Range: 3,307 to 14,709.83

20-year reference scenario: high-seniority male displacement effect. This is not an expected count for an unknown population.

Source-profile mortality point (deaths)
8,444.57255351
No sustained excess from year 7 (deaths)
6,026.37662893

Declared structural comparison; not a confidence interval or a model probability.

Baseline population: US prime-age men (45-54).

Child lifetime earnings lost

Illustrative reference calculation · population applicability is not established

$140.6B

Range: $36.5B to $237.4B

Canadian father–son firm-closure effect, applied to a US male lifetime-earnings baseline in 2024 dollars. The reference result uses 2 children per worker.

Baseline population: US male median lifetime earnings.

The mortality effect comes from a high-seniority male study cohort. Treat the count as a reference scenario unless the population matches. A mixed population needs a reviewed transport rule.

The range is the engine's parameter-support envelope: it varies declared parameters only and adds none of the exposure input's uncertainty.

The math, limits, and citations

Illustrative reference calculation scaled by the supplied worker-equivalent exposure. Two children per worker; 20-year mortality follow-up. This does not establish that an entity caused these outcomes.

Input SHA-256: 65625244b6014b6429cf6d6fd7f3f525fdafb6dce287e996ad1a82b5db273d17

Excess deaths over 20 years: {"status":"illustrative_reference_calculation","eligible_for_public_headline":false,"target_population":null,"decision":null,"transport_assumptions":["high-tenure male mass-layoff cohort, ages 45–54","Pennsylvania early-1980s response transported to target place and calendar time","fixed baseline age rate over follow-up; cohort aging is not modeled"],"reason":"Target cohort applicability and transport have not been established for this outcome; display as an illustrative reference calculation."}

Child lifetime earnings lost: {"status":"illustrative_reference_calculation","eligible_for_public_headline":false,"target_population":null,"decision":null,"transport_assumptions":["Canadian father-son firm-closure estimate transported to the target families","US male synthetic career earnings convert a relative adult earnings effect to dollars","lifetime dollars are undiscounted; this is not an annual loss"],"reason":"Target cohort applicability and transport have not been established for this outcome; display as an illustrative reference calculation."}

Projection eligibility: {"child":{"status":"direct_estimate","eligible_for_validated_direct_contrast":true,"reason":"direct displacement-to-child adult earnings estimate; transport still requires an applicability decision"},"grandchild":{"status":"structural_projection","eligible_for_validated_direct_contrast":false,"reason":"combines a direct child estimate with an intergenerational persistence assumption; not an identified displacement intervention effect"},"greatgrandchild":{"status":"structural_projection","eligible_for_validated_direct_contrast":false,"reason":"repeats an intergenerational persistence assumption beyond the identification core"}}

Exposure source: {"source":"one-worker normalized reference input","method":"scale by the stored warehouse worker-equivalent exposure at read time"}

Exact values: excess deaths over 20 years 8,444.57255351 (range 3,307.00250251 to 14,709.8285265); child lifetime earnings lost $140,620,106,471.90 (range $36,524,702,979.72 to $237,410,569,368.15);

The displayed range is a parameter-support envelope, not a confidence interval.

Place reference: national reference.

Not included: exposure estimation error; baseline estimation error; unmodeled pathways.

Blocked model paths: local_service_jobs_lost: requires a documented net local loss of tradable jobs; worker displacement alone is not this exposure.

  • Excess deaths over 20 years: sullivan2009 (earnings_shock->mortality_peak; canonical) Study population: US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959.
  • Excess deaths over 20 years: sullivan2009 (earnings_shock->mortality_offset_1; canonical) Study population: US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959.
  • Excess deaths over 20 years: sullivan2009 (earnings_shock->mortality_offsets_2_3; canonical) Study population: US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959.
  • Excess deaths over 20 years: sullivan2009 (earnings_shock->mortality_offsets_4_5; canonical) Study population: US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959.
  • Excess deaths over 20 years: sullivan2009 (earnings_shock->mortality_sustained; canonical) Study population: US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959.
  • Child lifetime earnings lost: oreopoulos2008 (displacement->child_earnings; EXACT) Study population: Canada 39k father-son pairs firm closures.
Scenario assumptions, sensitivity and source records

Outcome statistics use the displayed exposure. Baselines, coefficients, annual family schedules and component records retain their source normalization.

{
  "displayed_workers": 293635.111,
  "source_normalization_workers": 1,
  "applicability": {
    "excess_deaths": {
      "status": "illustrative_reference_calculation",
      "eligible_for_public_headline": false,
      "target_population": null,
      "decision": null,
      "transport_assumptions": [
        "high-tenure male mass-layoff cohort, ages 45–54",
        "Pennsylvania early-1980s response transported to target place and calendar time",
        "fixed baseline age rate over follow-up; cohort aging is not modeled"
      ],
      "reason": "Target cohort applicability and transport have not been established for this outcome; display as an illustrative reference calculation."
    },
    "child_lifetime_earnings_lost_usd": {
      "status": "illustrative_reference_calculation",
      "eligible_for_public_headline": false,
      "target_population": null,
      "decision": null,
      "transport_assumptions": [
        "Canadian father-son firm-closure estimate transported to the target families",
        "US male synthetic career earnings convert a relative adult earnings effect to dollars",
        "lifetime dollars are undiscounted; this is not an annual loss"
      ],
      "reason": "Target cohort applicability and transport have not been established for this outcome; display as an illustrative reference calculation."
    }
  },
  "target_population": null,
  "projection_eligibility": {
    "child": {
      "status": "direct_estimate",
      "eligible_for_validated_direct_contrast": true,
      "reason": "direct displacement-to-child adult earnings estimate; transport still requires an applicability decision"
    },
    "grandchild": {
      "status": "structural_projection",
      "eligible_for_validated_direct_contrast": false,
      "reason": "combines a direct child estimate with an intergenerational persistence assumption; not an identified displacement intervention effect"
    },
    "greatgrandchild": {
      "status": "structural_projection",
      "eligible_for_validated_direct_contrast": false,
      "reason": "repeats an intergenerational persistence assumption beyond the identification core"
    }
  },
  "child_applicability": {
    "source": "oreopoulos2008",
    "source_age_at_displacement": [
      10,
      14
    ],
    "source_child_sex": "Male",
    "source_parent_sex": "Male",
    "source_geography": "Canada",
    "source_event": "father firm closure 1980-1982",
    "target_child_profiles": null,
    "incompatible_children": [],
    "unknown_children": [],
    "source_income_quartile": null,
    "income_rank_definition": null,
    "eligible_for_reviewed_transport": false,
    "status": "unknown",
    "limitations": [
      "No response curve across child ages is identified by this narrow cohort.",
      "Income groups refer to father's average pre-displacement income in 1978-1979; target rank mapping requires a transport argument.",
      "A subgroup's nonsignificant coefficient is retained with its uncertainty, not replaced with zero."
    ]
  },
  "child_valuation": null,
  "assumptions": {
    "mortality_method": "odds_survival",
    "mortality_timing": "Source-offset profile: displacement, +1, +2–3, +4–5, and +6+; displacement is follow-up year 1, so offset +6 begins in follow-up year 7. Annual baseline rates use a constant-hazard rate-to-risk conversion; odds ratios modify annual risk, and survival compounds across phases. The selected baseline age rate is held fixed over the follow-up horizon.",
    "mortality_contract": {
      "method": "odds_survival",
      "timing": "source_profile",
      "baseline_conversion": "1-exp(-annual_rate)",
      "phases": [
        {
          "phase": "displacement",
          "start_offset": 0,
          "duration_years": 1,
          "first_follow_up_year": 1
        },
        {
          "phase": "offset_1",
          "start_offset": 1,
          "duration_years": 1,
          "first_follow_up_year": 2
        },
        {
          "phase": "offsets_2_3",
          "start_offset": 2,
          "duration_years": 2,
          "first_follow_up_year": 3
        },
        {
          "phase": "offsets_4_5",
          "start_offset": 4,
          "duration_years": 2,
          "first_follow_up_year": 5
        },
        {
          "phase": "offset_6_plus",
          "start_offset": 6,
          "duration_years": null,
          "first_follow_up_year": 7
        }
      ],
      "description": "Source-offset profile: displacement, +1, +2–3, +4–5, and +6+; displacement is follow-up year 1, so offset +6 begins in follow-up year 7. Annual baseline rates use a constant-hazard rate-to-risk conversion; odds ratios modify annual risk, and survival compounds across phases. The selected baseline age rate is held fixed over the follow-up horizon."
    },
    "place_application": "initial_only",
    "place_counterfactual": "national child-dollar result is the reference"
  },
  "exposure_provenance": {
    "source": "one-worker normalized reference input",
    "method": "scale by the stored warehouse worker-equivalent exposure at read time"
  },
  "place": null,
  "place_mix": [],
  "input_content_sha256": "65625244b6014b6429cf6d6fd7f3f525fdafb6dce287e996ad1a82b5db273d17",
  "engine_version": "0.4.0",
  "engine_sha256": "99173fbf23e75037da3fb9b4a9017a1e56909260ccb112f9902bc5ac86242153",
  "adapter_sha256": "605700852536cef19bdae955f055979ab182f352c107882e7b46fb6cccd3e68e",
  "outcomes": {
    "excess_deaths": {
      "point": 8444.57255351448,
      "low": 3307.002502514171,
      "high": 14709.82852653313,
      "unit": "deaths",
      "baseline": {
        "value": 0.004944,
        "annual_probability": 0.004931798548274205,
        "unit": "deaths_per_person_year",
        "citation": "cdc_wonder D76 (Underlying Cause of Death, 1999-2020), Male 45-54 years, pooled 2015-2019: 514314 deaths / 104024440 person-years = 494.4 per 100k; pulled 2026-09-06 via scraper.cli wonder-mortality into warehouse wonder_mortality",
        "population": "US prime-age men (45-54)",
        "notes": "Pre-pandemic window: excludes 2020 (COVID-distorted; 2020 crude rate 601.5/100k). Single-year 2019 = 490.0/100k. Ages 45-54 match the Sullivan & von Wachter prime-age counterfactual population",
        "sex": "Male",
        "age": "45-54 years",
        "years": "2015-2019",
        "cause": "All causes",
        "geography": "US"
      },
      "steps": [
        {
          "link": "earnings_shock->mortality_peak",
          "phase": "displacement",
          "point": 2.6698,
          "low": 2.1144,
          "high": 3.3711,
          "citation": "sullivan2009",
          "tier": "canonical",
          "population_scope": "US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959",
          "evidence_role": "conditional"
        },
        {
          "link": "earnings_shock->mortality_offset_1",
          "phase": "offset_1",
          "point": 1.9838,
          "low": 1.3697,
          "high": 2.8732,
          "citation": "sullivan2009",
          "tier": "canonical",
          "population_scope": "US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959",
          "evidence_role": "conditional"
        },
        {
          "link": "earnings_shock->mortality_offsets_2_3",
          "phase": "offsets_2_3",
          "point": 1.7315,
          "low": 1.3238,
          "high": 2.2649,
          "citation": "sullivan2009",
          "tier": "canonical",
          "population_scope": "US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959",
          "evidence_role": "conditional"
        },
        {
          "link": "earnings_shock->mortality_offsets_4_5",
          "phase": "offsets_4_5",
          "point": 1.2712,
          "low": 0.97,
          "high": 1.6661,
          "citation": "sullivan2009",
          "tier": "canonical",
          "population_scope": "US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959",
          "evidence_role": "conditional"
        },
        {
          "link": "earnings_shock->mortality_sustained",
          "phase": "offset_6_plus",
          "point": 1.1354,
          "low": 1.0335,
          "high": 1.2474,
          "citation": "sullivan2009",
          "tier": "canonical",
          "population_scope": "US high-seniority displaced men born 1930-1959",
          "evidence_role": "conditional"
        }
      ],
      "components": {
        "follow_up_years": 20,
        "method": "odds_survival",
        "timing": "source_profile"
      },
      "applicability": {
        "status": "illustrative_reference_calculation",
        "eligible_for_public_headline": false,
        "target_population": null,
        "decision": null,
        "transport_assumptions": [
          "high-tenure male mass-layoff cohort, ages 45–54",
          "Pennsylvania early-1980s response transported to target place and calendar time",
          "fixed baseline age rate over follow-up; cohort aging is not modeled"
        ],
        "reason": "Target cohort applicability and transport have not been established for this outcome; display as an illustrative reference calculation."
      },
      "interpretation": "Conditional modeled expected difference; parameter bands are support envelopes, not a confidence interval.",
      "persistence_sensitivity": {
        "available": true,
        "status": "declared_structural_sensitivity",
        "eligible_for_public_headline": false,
        "unit": "deaths",
        "variants": {
          "source_profile": {
            "point": 8444.57255351448,
            "low": 3307.002502514171,
            "high": 14709.82852653313,
            "evidence_status": "source_profile_with_transport_assumptions",
            "citations": [
              "sullivan2009"
            ]
          },
          "no_sustained_excess": {
            "point": 6026.37662893451,
            "low": 2698.7607722807247,
            "high": 10383.312115829634,
            "evidence_status": "structural_assumption",
            "motivating_citations": [
              "eliasonstorrie2009"
            ],
            "assumption": "Retain source odds through offset +5; set offset +6 onward OR=1.",
            "first_changed_follow_up_year": 7,
            "fixed_late_odds_ratio": 1
          }
        },
        "source_minus_no_sustained_point": 2418.1959245799685,
        "structural_point_range": {
          "low": 6026.37662893451,
          "high": 8444.57255351448,
          "interpretation": "Range of point estimates across these two assumptions; not a confidence interval or a bound on the true effect."
        },
        "shared_inputs": [
          "exposure",
          "resolved mortality baseline",
          "follow-up horizon",
          "source odds through offset +5"
        ],
        "limitations": [
          "No probabilities or model-average weights are assigned to the structures.",
          "A nonsignificant long-run estimate does not establish an exactly zero effect.",
          "The Swedish study differs in population, design, effect scale and follow-up; this hybrid does not reproduce its estimates or substitute its hazard ratios for odds ratios.",
          "The cutoff follows the source profile's offset +6 phase, not the Swedish study's windows; persistence beyond its 12-year follow-up is an assumption in either direction.",
          "Baseline aging and target-population transport remain unresolved in both structures."
        ]
      }
    },
    "child_lifetime_earnings_lost_usd": {
      "point": 140620106471.9032,
      "low": 36524702979.71513,
      "high": 237410569368.1482,
      "steps": [
        {
          "link": "displacement->child_earnings",
          "kind": "direct",
          "citation": "oreopoulos2008",
          "tier": "EXACT",
          "param_point": 0.9076,
          "param_low": 0.844,
          "param_high": 0.976,
          "value_point": 0.9076,
          "value_low": 0.844,
          "value_high": 0.976,
          "causal_role": "direct_displacement_estimate",
          "population_scope": "Canada 39k father-son pairs firm closures",
          "evidence_role": "conditional"
        }
      ],
      "unit": "usd_2024",
      "baseline": {
        "value": 2591418,
        "unit": "usd_2024",
        "citation": "SSA Annual Statistical Supplement 2025, Table 4.B6 (CWHS/Master Earnings File, 1 percent sample): male median earnings by age, 2023 (preliminary) — synthetic career ages 20-64 = 5x(24218+42561+52485+60423+64962+67506+68160+64854)+2x60666+3x56666 = 2517175 usd_2023; CPI-U annual averages 304.702->313.689 (BLS series CUUR0000SA0, pulled 2026-09-06) -> 2591418 usd_2024; warehouse ssa_median_earnings (pulled via ssa-earnings-download)",
        "population": "US male median lifetime earnings",
        "notes": "Derivation declared: the cross-sectional age profile summed over a 45-year working life (ages 20-64) is a synthetic cohort — the sum of age-band medians approximates rather than equals the median of individual lifetime sums; median-of-workers semantics excludes non-working years; 2023 medians are preliminary (SSA replaces them with final data in a later edition)"
      },
      "applicability": {
        "status": "illustrative_reference_calculation",
        "eligible_for_public_headline": false,
        "target_population": null,
        "decision": null,
        "transport_assumptions": [
          "Canadian father-son firm-closure estimate transported to the target families",
          "US male synthetic career earnings convert a relative adult earnings effect to dollars",
          "lifetime dollars are undiscounted; this is not an annual loss"
        ],
        "reason": "Target cohort applicability and transport have not been established for this outcome; display as an illustrative reference calculation."
      },
      "interpretation": "Conditional modeled expected difference; parameter bands are support envelopes, not a confidence interval."
    }
  }
}

Parameter set v1.52 · model v1.52+engine0.4.0+99173fbf23e75037da3fb9b4a9017a1e56909260ccb112f9902bc5ac86242153+national-reference1

Employers & filings

Who files here, and the filings behind every number above.

Top employers (11,609)

EmployerFilings
1

Infosys Limited ⚠ Dep

9,482
2

Intel Corporation

4,605
3

Cognizant Technology Solutions US Corp. ⚠ Dep

4,574
4

Tata Consultancy Services Limited ⚠ Dep

4,335
5

American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc.

4,260
6

INTRAEDGE, Inc. ⚠ Dep

2,669
7

Arizona State University

2,217
8

The University of Arizona ⚠ Dep

2,205

5 largest employers account for 20% of the 133,004 filings attributed to 11,609 employers here (the records). See the ranking

Context & calculation notes how the share is built

Share = filings by the top 5 employers ÷ all filings in this geography with a resolved employer. Filings whose employer is not yet linked sit outside both numbers, so the denominator can be smaller than the geography's headline filing count.

The share describes this one geography. A high share is a concentration signal for inspection, not a finding about any employer.

Labor condition applications (139,576)

DOL filings BLS occupationsRecordAll recorded outcomes and visa classes. Open a case number for the source record.
Title · Worksite

A negative % sits below the BLS market median; a positive % sits above.

What the filing rows show One application per row

Each row links to the disclosure record. The wage badge compares an offer with available benchmarks; it is a screening calculation, not a finding of a wage violation.

Wages & occupations

What wages are being offered, against which benchmarks.

Wages

DOL wage offers BLS occupationsSignalEmployer-reported offers in disclosure records, not observed earnings.
Avg offered wageAvg prevailing wageBLS market median
$0$26,646$53,291$79,937$106,583$92,514Avg offered wage$80,663Avg prevailingwage$106,583BLS marketmedianannual wage

0.02% of the 125,088 filings with a wage on record offer below the employer's own prevailing wage. The prevailing wage is the floor the employer attested to, not a market benchmark.

Offered-wage distribution

Percentiles across 124,677 positive year-unit LCA offers, all outcomes and visa classes.

p10p25Medianp75p90
$57,720$67,538$84,000$106,000$135,000
Context & calculation notes wage sources and averages

Offered wages are employer-reported on the DOL record, annualized to year rates. Averages mix occupations and years: a geography-level average is a screening comparison, not a matched-role finding.

The BLS market median is the OES national median for the filing's occupation (latest available year). The prevailing wage is the employer's own attested floor. The two answer different questions and are not interchangeable.

The distribution covers positive offers with wage unit Year, across all outcomes and visa classes. It differs from the certified H-1B summary cohort. Hourly and other wage units are outside this distribution.

Definitions & methodology ↗

Wage gap by job category: H-1B vs BLS

17-2072 Electronics Engineers, Except ComputerH-1B $99,369 vs BLS $130,220-24%

3,503 filings · $309.2M certified gap (est.)

15-1252 Software DevelopersH-1B $121,085 vs BLS $135,980-11%

10,504 filings · $299.2M certified gap (est.)

11-3021 Computer and Information Systems ManagersH-1B $142,006 vs BLS $175,140-19%

2,133 filings · $285.1M certified gap (est.)

15-1299 Computer Occupations, All OtherH-1B $103,756 vs BLS $116,580-11%

3,836 filings · $140.0M certified gap (est.)

13-1111 Management AnalystsH-1B $83,834 vs BLS $101,860-18%

1,034 filings · $74.7M certified gap (est.)

13-2011 Accountants and AuditorsH-1B $67,153 vs BLS $83,680-20%

896 filings · $50.4M certified gap (est.)

15-2031 Operations Research AnalystsH-1B $82,836 vs BLS $88,940-7%

1,161 filings · $49.6M certified gap (est.)

15-2051 Data ScientistsH-1B $105,914 vs BLS $120,230-12%

1,083 filings · $47.4M certified gap (est.)

Programs & time

What kinds of foreign-labor activity happen here, and how the volume moved.

Program mix

DOL OFLCRecordEach program counts a different record type. Rows are not additive.
DOL foreign-labor program filings in Arizona
ProgramRecordsShare of rows
H-1BLabor condition applications, certified slice133,00498.7%
H-1B1 (Chile)LCA sibling class, all recorded outcomes2340.2%
H-1B1 (Singapore)LCA sibling class, all recorded outcomes940.1%
E-3 (Australia)LCA sibling class, all recorded outcomes1,3591%
Compare on a chart share of rows shown above
  • H-1B133,004 · 98.7%
  • H-1B1 (Chile)234 · 0.2%
  • H-1B1 (Singapore)94 · 0.1%
  • E-3 (Australia)1,359 · 1.0%

A filing, certification, or determination is a DOL record, not a visa issuance and not observed employment. Prevailing-wage determinations carry no county or ZIP on the source record.

Activity over time

DOL filingsRecordCalendar submission years 2007–2026. One row per filing.
02K4K6K8K10K12K14K16K18KGreat recession: Employ American Workers Act (TARP recipients restricted): https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/1Great recession: Employ Ame…Infosys pays record $34M visa-fraud settlement (ICE/DOJ): https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/indian-corporation-pays-record-34-million-fine-settle-allegations-systemic-visa-fraudInfosys pays record $34M vi…$4,000 H-1B "9/11 fee" on 50+ / >50% H-1B employers: https://www.uscis.gov/archive/new-law-increases-h-1b-and-l-1-petition-fees$4,000 H-1B "9/11 fee" on 5…Buy American, Hire American EO: https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-executive-order-buy-american-hire-american/Buy American, Hire American…USCIS suspends premium processing; site visits expand: https://www.uscis.gov/USCIS suspends premium proc…USCIS third-party worksite memo: denials spike: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/policymanual/updates/20180222.pdfUSCIS third-party worksite …June 2020 H-1B entry ban + Oct 2020 DOL prevailing-wage IFR: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/10/08/2020-22381/requirements-including-labor-certification-programs-for-permanent-employment-in-the-united-statesJune 2020 H-1B entry ban + …Biden revokes entry ban; denials normalize: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/02/05/2021-02469/revocation-of-presidential-proclamations-10014-and-10149Biden revokes entry ban; de…Trump introduces $100,000 payment for certain new H-1B petitions (Sept. 21): https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/09/restriction-on-entry-of-certain-nonimmigrant-workers/Trump introduces $100,000 p…Trump extends the $100,000 H-1B payment requirement through Sept. 21, 2027: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/09/restriction-on-entry-of-certain-nonimmigrant-workers-faad/Trump extends the $100,000 …peak 11K (2019)2007: 683 filings (911 workers)2008: 4,641 filings (13,704 workers)2009: 2,493 filings (4,920 workers)2010: 1,019 filings (2,614 workers)2011: 4,658 filings (10,948 workers)2012: 4,970 filings (12,696 workers)2013: 6,195 filings (13,471 workers)2014: 7,097 filings (15,952 workers)2015: 8,658 filings (19,094 workers)2016: 9,298 filings (16,835 workers)2017: 8,716 filings (15,382 workers)2018: 9,953 filings (15,446 workers)2019: 11,378 filings (15,025 workers)2020: 9,320 filings (13,656 workers)2021: 10,095 filings (18,644 workers)2022: 9,518 filings (16,728 workers)2023: 8,446 filings (12,823 workers)2024: 9,566 filings (12,137 workers)2025: 9,258 filings (11,458 workers)2026: 1,900 filings (3,161 workers)200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024202520262007: 911 workers2008: 13,704 workers2009: 4,920 workers2010: 2,614 workers2011: 10,948 workers2012: 12,696 workers2013: 13,471 workers2014: 15,952 workers2015: 19,094 workers2016: 16,835 workers2017: 15,382 workers2018: 15,446 workers2019: 15,025 workers2020: 13,656 workers2021: 18,644 workers2022: 16,728 workers2023: 12,823 workers2024: 12,137 workers2025: 11,458 workers2026: 3,161 workersfilings
filingsworkers (scaled)

Outcome breakdown (all years)

  • Certified133,004 · 96.5%
  • Denied1,652 · 1.2%
  • Withdrawn3,206 · 2.3%

Certified, denied, and withdrawn are application decisions. They do not count visas issued or workers hired.

Context

Enforcement, community health, and money linked to this state's record.

WARN notices (1,365)

Federal WARN requires 60 days' advance notice; statutory exceptions can shorten or excuse notice. This site publishes notices as filed and does not judge compliance.

Arizona layoffs and WARN notices
Employer · Site
Chronicle Heritage

Phoenix · Notice date: 2026-10-05

--
James River

Richmond · Notice date: 2026-10-02

--
Grunt Style

Chandler · Notice date: 2026-10-02

--
AssistRX

Tempe · Notice date: 2026-09-30

--
Restoration Forest Products, LLC

Bellemont · Notice date: 2026-09-24

--
Farmers Investment Co.

Sahuarita · Notice date: 2026-09-15

--
Regional Acceptance Corporation

Tempe · Notice date: 2026-09-15

--
Becton Dickson and Company (BD)

Tempe · Notice date: 2026-09-08

--

A negative % sits below the BLS market median; a positive % sits above.

Immigration law firms (2,248)

Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy, LLP
-11%$98.8M3,779
Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen and Loewy, LLP
-9%$79.6M245
FRAGOMEN, del REY, Bernsen & Loewy LLP
-33%$27.3M741
LAW Offices of Kevin M. Wilhelmi
-28%$20.0M1,931
Graham Adair, Inc.
-17%$16.7M861
Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy LLP
-8%$15.8M1,042
FRAGOMEN, del REY, Bernsen & LOEWY, LLP
-6%$14.7M940
Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C.
-2%$13.5M1,641

Federal contracts (27,637)

Fisher Sand & Gravel Co.

Department of Homeland Security · 2026-06-02

$2.6B

The Boeing Company

Department of Defense · 2025-11-25

$2.3B

Fisher Sand & Gravel Co.

Department of Homeland Security · 2026-01-06

$1.7B

Fisher Sand & Gravel Co.

Department of Homeland Security · 2025-12-23

$1.6B

Fisher Sand & Gravel Co.

Department of Homeland Security · 2025-12-17

$1.5B

Fisher Sand & Gravel Co.

Department of Homeland Security · 2026-06-12

$1.2B

Fisher Sand & Gravel Co.

Department of Homeland Security · 2026-03-05

$1.2B

Triwest Healthcare Alliance Corp.

Department of Defense · 2026-03-25

$1.2B

Medical workforce: licensed vs H-1B

NCSBN licenses BLS OES DOL filingsRecordThe two counts measure different things: NCSBN counts active state licenses (one nurse can hold several), BLS counts employed RNs. The difference between them is a gap between source counts, not a count of nurses not working. Timing overlap with H-1B filings does not establish replacement.
Full medical breakdown for Arizona

Community well-being

Food insecurity, SNAP receipt, mental distress, smoking, and overdose mortality in this area. CDC models these from survey data: treat them as local estimates, not headcounts. Bars compare each estimate against population-weighted averages of all reporting areas for the same data year.

Food insecurity

2023

15.8%: 0.7 points above U.S.

Households on SNAP

2023

11.1%: 0.7 points below U.S.

Frequent mental distress

2023

15.4%: 0.7 points below U.S.

Adult smoking

2023

11.4%: 0.6 points below U.S.

Drug overdose deaths

2021

38.8: 6.7 above U.S.

Source: CDC PLACES 2025 release (BRFSS survey year 2023) and NCHS drug poisoning mortality. PLACES values are model-based small-area estimates, not survey counts. Benchmarks are population-weighted averages across all reporting areas.

Evidence & sources

Scope, methods, and source coverage for this state record.

Public source records and site analysis. We do not attest to accuracy. Read the full disclaimer.

Dataset guides and site methods

  1. [1] Dataset documentation · DOL OFLC. LCA public disclosure record layout (FY2026 Q3). Pages 1–4: application, DOL outcome and dates, requested positions, employer, representatives, worksites and pay unitsThis layout covers determinations issued October 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026. It documents employer-provided application fields and DOL decisions, not USCIS decisions, payroll verification, legal bills or worker-linked moves. Older layouts can differ.Checked 2026-10-17.
  2. [2] Dataset documentation · BLS. OEWS technical notes (May 2025). Scope of the survey; occupational coding; concepts and estimation methodologyDocuments occupation and geographic wage estimates, not an individual worker’s pay. Use the estimate year and geography stated by the site; older releases can differ.Checked 2026-10-17.
  3. [3] XH1B method or registry · XH1B. WARN Notices (mass layoffs): source registry; Calculation and Matching Methods; Reading Public Records and Derived Indicators. Source registry entry: warn; Filing units, annualization, weighting, wage comparisons, and inference limits; Reading records: units, source coverage, wage gaps, entity links, and inference limitsXH1B dataset description: One row per source_notice_id. The definition of a mass layoff and the layoff threshold vary by state. The threshold is typically 50 or more employees.; These are the site's review methods, not validated predictions of wrongdoing. Inspect underlying records and alternative explanations.
  4. [4] Dataset documentation · USAspending / U.S. Treasury. Federal Spending Guide: contract transactions. Pages 3, 5, 9 and 17: transactions, amount fields and recipient identifiersContract downloads contain prime award transactions. XH1B’s use of recipient identifiers for employer links is its own processing step.Checked 2026-10-18.
  5. [5] XH1B method or registry · XH1B. Displacement Model and Assumptions. Eligibility, requested-position weighting, scopes, WARN matching, and counting limitsModel outputs are estimates. A matched layoff notice does not prove that an H-1B worker replaced a laid-off worker.
  6. [6] XH1B method or registry · XH1B. Downstream Research and Methods. Study populations, parameter bounds, baselines, and expected outcomes; linked model card
  7. [7] Dataset documentation · National Council of State Boards of Nursing. Active RN Licenses. RN licensure statistics by jurisdiction; linked table header; licensure data compiled through NursysCounts active licenses, not jobs. Check the source year. License and employment figures have different units and do not identify nurses who are not working.Checked 2026-10-18.
  8. [8] Dataset documentation · DOL OFLC. PERM public disclosure record layout (FY2026 Q3). Pages 1–7: ETA-9089 application, DOL outcome and dates, employer, wages and recruitment fieldsThis layout covers determinations issued October 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026, on the form introduced June 1, 2023. A DOL certification is not I-140 approval or permanent residence. Older layouts can differ.Checked 2026-10-17.
  9. [9] Dataset documentation · DOL OFLC. Prevailing Wage disclosure record layout, FY2026 Q3. Page 1: CASE_NUMBER, CASE_STATUS, VISA_CLASS; pages 5–6: PWD_WAGE_RATE, PWD_UNIT_OF_PAY, wage source and validityApplication-level prevailing-wage requests and determinations. Wage units and case status must be read; a determination is not evidence of pay received.Checked 2026-10-18.
  10. [10] Dataset documentation · DOL OFLC. H-2A disclosure record layout, FY2026 Q3. Page 1: application case number and decision; page 5: separate job-order number, requested and certified H-2A workersEmployer application and labor-certification records, not a worker roster or arrival record. A case number differs from a job-order number.Checked 2026-10-18.
  11. [11] Dataset documentation · DOL OFLC. H-2B disclosure record layout, FY2026 Q3. Pages 1–2: case number, requested and certified workers, cap estimates and temporary-need categoriesCap-subject and cap-exempt counts are estimated requested workers. Temporary need includes seasonal, peakload, one-time and intermittent work.Checked 2026-10-18.
  12. [12] Dataset documentation · DOL OFLC. CW-1 disclosure record layout, FY2026 Q3. Page 1: application case number, status and cap-exempt flag; job information: requested and certified workersEmployer applications and labor-certification determinations. A certification is separate from a visa-petition decision or an admission.Checked 2026-10-18.
Questions about the data & methods

How many H-1B filings are in Arizona?

133,004 H-1B labor condition applications requesting 238,699 workers have been filed in Arizona, per Department of Labor disclosure records.

How many employers have H-1B filings in Arizona?

11,609 distinct employers have filed H-1B labor condition applications in Arizona. The employer list on this page is ranked by filings and wage impact.

What worker-equivalent exposure does the displacement model estimate for Arizona?

The model estimates 293,635 worker-equivalents of displacement exposure in Arizona: one per requested worker on a certified H-1B filing, raised where the offered wage sits below the occupation's BLS median, plus government-reported WARN layoffs matched to filings. This is a modeled exposure estimate, not a count of documented job losses; the formula is on the About page.

What is the median H-1B wage in Arizona?

$84,000 per year is the median wage offered on H-1B labor condition applications filed for work in Arizona. The wage-distribution chart on this page shows the spread around that median.

Who files the most H-1B filings in Arizona?

INFOSYS LIMITED leads with 9,482 filings, about 7% of all Arizona filings. Its dossier page carries the full filing, wage, and layoff history.

What share of Arizona H-1B filings does DOL deny?

DOL disclosure records show 133,004 certified, 1,652 denied, 3,206 withdrawn of 137,862 labor condition applications with reported outcomes in Arizona. The denial share is 1% across the reported outcomes.

How many WARN layoff notices has Arizona recorded?

1,365 Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) notices. Where a layoff employer then filed H-1B labor condition applications in the same window, the pair is recorded as a displacement event with an evidence score.

When did H-1B use peak in Arizona?

Filings peaked in 2019 at 11,378 labor condition applications. The filings-by-year chart on this page shows the full trend since records began.

Which immigration law firms file the most H-1B filings in Arizona?

2,248 distinct law firms and agents have filed H-1B applications for employers in Arizona. The law-firm table on this page ranks them by filings and by the wage gap their filings carry.

Do Arizona H-1B employers hold federal contracts?

27,637 federal contract actions in Arizona name employers that also file H-1B labor condition applications. The contracts table links each award to the employer dossier. A shared employer name does not show how award funds were spent.

Where does the Arizona H-1B data come from?

Every figure on this page traces to a public government record: DOL OFLC disclosure files (LCA filings, wages, outcomes), BLS OES wage data (occupation medians), state WARN notices, and federal contract awards. The archive is read-only evidence; nothing is crowdsourced or anonymous.