Trump Administration Proposes $70,000 OPT Fee, Raising Risks For US Talent Competitiveness

By Hannah Yemisi

The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on Wednesday proposed charging schools $70,000 for each international student seeking employment through Optional Practical Training (OPT), with an additional $30,000 for each subsequent programme participation. Published in the Federal Register on Thursday, the proposal is open for public comment until November 9. It would replace an application process costing students about $500 and could affect work opportunities lasting up to one year, with extensions available for eligible science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) graduates.

DECISION HIGHLIGHT

The proposal seeks to strengthen oversight and deter alleged fraud, but its scale could discourage international graduates, constrain university finances and weaken the United States’ competition for skilled global talent.

DECISION MEMO

The proposed fee exposes a policy tension between immigration enforcement and economic competitiveness. DHS argues that OPT has become an inadequately controlled employment channel, citing suspicious employers and alleged fraudulent arrangements. In May, the department said it identified more than 10,000 foreign students claiming employment with highly suspect employers, including cases involving allegedly fictitious workplaces and phantom employees.

DHS maintains that the proposed fee would compel schools to exercise greater scrutiny and help fund programme oversight. It also argues that OPT has become a route around the H-1B visa system, which permits US employers to hire foreign workers in specialised occupations.

However, a fee of this magnitude could suppress legitimate participation alongside fraudulent activity. The department reported that 194,554 students received employment authorisation documents in 2024, up from 160,627 in 2023. This growth supports the case for effective oversight, but does not by itself establish that legitimate participation is responsible for the alleged abuses.

Doug Rand, director of the Talent Mobility Fund, challenged the proposal’s legal basis, stating: “Don’t Panic: DHS has no authority to slap a $70k fee on international students.” He argued that the proposal would struggle in court, citing previous restrictions that had been blocked.

Todd Schulte, president of FWD.us, warned that implementation would mean the United States “is intentionally pricing itself out of the global market for top talent, especially in STEM fields.”

Research from the Institute for Progress reinforces that concern. Its survey found that 80 percent fewer international students said they would likely try to remain in the United States if the proposed fees were implemented. Among eligible STEM students, only 15 percent said they would likely try to stay.

Zuzana C. Wootson, deputy director of federal policy at the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, warned that the consequences would extend beyond international students, potentially straining university budgets, increasing tuition pressure on American students and diminishing the educational experience.

The policy therefore carries risks beyond immigration administration. If legitimate applicants redirect their ambitions to competing countries, the United States could lose skilled graduates while universities absorb financial and enrolment pressures.

DATA BOX

• Proposed initial fee: $70,000 per student.
• Subsequent participation: Additional $30,000.
• Current application cost: About $500.
• Employment authorisations: 194,554 in 2024; 160,627 in 2023.
• Survey finding: 80 percent fewer students said they would likely try to stay under the proposed fees.
• Public comment deadline: November 9.
• Fee destination: US Treasury.

WHO WINS / WHO LOSES

Potential winners: US authorities could gain additional funding and stronger institutional oversight if the proposal is implemented effectively.

Potential losers: International students, universities and employers could face higher costs, reduced access to skilled graduates and weaker recruitment prospects.

POLICY SIGNALS

The proposal signals tighter scrutiny of international student employment and closer enforcement against alleged misuse of OPT. Its legal durability remains uncertain, with challenges anticipated.

INVESTOR SIGNAL

Universities, technology companies and other employers reliant on international graduates face potential recruitment and cost pressures. Competing destinations could benefit if the United States becomes less attractive to skilled students.

RISK RADAR

The principal risks are legal challenges, reduced international enrolment, pressure on university finances and declining access to STEM talent. The central policy test is whether stronger oversight can be achieved without undermining the talent pipeline that supports US innovation and competitiveness.

Hannah Yemisi is a reporter of note, governance, state government, healthcare, sustainability, agriculture, reporting on education, and social developments with a focus on accuracy, context and public relevance.