The PERM Proposal Isn't Law Yet. Here's What EB-2 and EB-3 Applicants Should Track

Two rules, one headline, and a lot of confusion

If you have spent any time on green card forums this week, you have probably seen the same claim in three different wordings: the administration is overhauling PERM, employers are about to stop sponsoring, and the EB-2 and EB-3 lines are about to change. Some of that is true. Most of it runs ahead of what has actually been made official.

The first thing to understand is that the Labor Department has at least two separate rules in motion that touch PERM, and people keep merging them. One is a wage rule that was proposed in March 2026. The other is a broader PERM modernization proposal that is further along in federal review but, as far as I could find, has not been published yet. Same agency, same workers, but not the same document.

A quick reminder of why PERM matters at all. For most EB-2 and EB-3 cases, the employer first has to get a labor certification from the Department of Labor, which is the department's way of checking that no qualified, willing and available U.S. worker can fill the job. For most of these cases, your priority date comes from the day that PERM application was filed. Anything that changes how PERM works touches the start of the clock for future filers, and that is the part people feel most.

Is the Trump administration's PERM green card proposal already law?

No, not in any form I could confirm. A proposal is a draft the agency publishes so the public can comment on it. It becomes a final rule only after the agency reads those comments and publishes a final version. Nothing about your current PERM filing or your current priority date changes because a draft exists.

The wage proposal is the one with a clear paper trail. The Labor Department published it in the Federal Register on March 27, 2026, and comments were due by May 26, 2026. Several immigration firms describe it the same way. One source said a final rule could come as early as summer 2026 and that litigation was expected. I did not find confirmation that a final rule has been issued, so check the Federal Register before you assume it has.

The modernization proposal is the one behind the latest round of headlines. Law firm alerts report that the White House regulatory review office cleared it on October 23, 2026. That is the step before publication. Clearance means the review is finished. It does not mean the text is public. In the sources I could reach, the full text had not been released, and the comment period was expected to run either 30 or 60 days from the day it appears in the Federal Register.

What the wage proposal would change

The March proposal goes after how prevailing wages are set. A prevailing wage is the minimum pay the Labor Department expects an employer to offer for a job in a given area. Under the proposal, those wage levels would be built from the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics survey, and the levels would go up. The programs it covers include PERM, H-1B, H-1B1 and E-3.

Why does a wage rule touch a green card? Because PERM requires the employer to offer at least the prevailing wage for the job. A higher wage level makes that offer more expensive to set and harder to meet. For an EB-2 or EB-3 candidate, the practical question becomes whether the job that cleared the old wage bar still clears the new one, and whether the employer still wants to pay for the filing.

The timing language is the part that calms things down a little. Duane Morris reported that the change would not apply retroactively, which means prevailing wage determinations, LCAs and PERM applications already issued or filed are not supposed to be reopened because of the new numbers. Another summary made the same point. Read that carefully, though. It protects cases already in the system. It does not protect a job offer that has not been filed yet.

The rule also has a history. Duane Morris noted that it revives a 2020 initiative that was vacated after the Biden administration did not pursue it. That is worth knowing when someone tells you this is brand new. The agency has been trying to move these wage levels for years, and each attempt has run into a different legal fight.

What the modernization rule might touch, and what nobody outside the government has read yet

The broader PERM proposal is what most people mean when they say PERM overhaul, and it is the one where the most important details are still unknown outside the government. According to a Fragomen alert, the proposal would revise the minimum standards for PERM recruitment, strengthen the rules tied to layoffs of U.S. workers, and expand employer non-discrimination rules. Those are the parts of the process that drive recruitment steps and paperwork, so any change there would show up in the documents first.

Outlook Business described it as the biggest overhaul of the PERM process since 2004. Business Today called it the most consequential change to the employment-based certification process since the current system came into force. Those are strong claims from news outlets, and they describe a rule most people have not read. Treat the adjectives as commentary until the Federal Register text is out.

Here is the part that gets lost. Several summaries say the text stays confidential until it is published, which means the specifics people argue about on forums, such as exact recruitment steps, exact layoff triggers and exact dollar figures, are either secondhand or guesses. If someone quotes a number from this proposal, ask where they saw it. If the answer is a headline or a forum post, wait for the document.

Does this change your priority date or your place in line?

Not directly. Business Standard reported that the proposal does not directly change green card eligibility, and that the current PERM process stays as it is until any final regulation is formally adopted. Your priority date is set when your PERM was filed, and a draft rule does not move it.

What it could change is the pipeline. A South Asian Herald piece argues that higher sponsorship costs could lead employers to file fewer new PERM applications. That would be a real effect, but it works on future demand, not on the cutoff dates you read in the Visa Bulletin. The same piece says the rule would not change quotas or country caps. Quotas are set by statute, and a labor certification rule does not rewrite them.

The Visa Bulletin still answers the question of when your date becomes current. Movement in the bulletin depends on how many earlier cases are still waiting and how many visas are available. A proposal that is still waiting for publication changes neither of those things this month.

What to do this month if your case depends on PERM

Start with your own paperwork, not the forums. Pull the PERM filing date from the labor certification and your receipt notices, then compare it against the priority date printed on your I-140 record. Those two dates are not always the same thing, and wrong inputs cause more mistakes than any new rule does.

Keep your employer's records in order. If your company is considering a layoff, a change in sponsorship or a job restructuring, ask its immigration counsel how any pending proposal would affect those plans, and get the answer in writing if it matters to a decision you are making.

Then watch the right place. The Federal Register is where a proposal becomes a public document with comment dates, and it is where a final rule will appear. Headlines and forum posts usually move faster than the document, and sometimes they get the details wrong.

If your job or your case depends on how one of these rules ends, a conversation with an immigration attorney who has read the actual text will do more for you than any summary. A proposal can change between draft and final, and the final version can differ in ways that matter to your file.

Why the forums get this wrong so often

Part of the problem is that PERM is a long chain of steps, and a proposal arrives as a single headline. People compress the sentence the agency proposed a rule into PERM is ending, and the shorter version gets reposted until it sounds like established fact. The second problem is that the wage rule and the modernization rule get the same nickname in conversation, so a claim about one gets attached to the other.

The honest answer right now is less exciting. Two proposals are in play. One has a comment window that has already closed. The other has cleared federal review but, based on the reporting I could reach, has not been published. Neither is law. Both could change before they become final, and both could take effect later than the loudest voices suggest.

When the primary text appears, read it yourself. Check the dates on the document, not the date on the headline. And be wary of any source that tells you your specific case is affected before it has told you what the rule actually says.

The short version

The wage proposal is public, has a closed comment window, and does not reach back to cases already filed. The modernization proposal has cleared federal review and is waiting for publication. Your priority date does not move because of either of them. The best thing you can do this month is confirm your own dates and watch the Federal Register instead of the forums.

This article is informational only. It is not legal advice, and it does not replace a conversation with an immigration attorney about your own case.