The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has proposed a new fee structure for international students participating in Optional Practical Training (OPT), a program allowing them to work in the US after graduation. Under the proposal, F-1 visa holders would be required to pay $70,000 for initial OPT authorization and $30,000 for any extensions. DHS stated the fees are intended to combat fraud, protect US workers, and prevent the program from being exploited as a source of cheap labor. Currently, OPT participation costs around $500.
The proposed rule comes in response to identified instances of fraud and abuse within the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP), including non-compliant worksites and “pay-to-stay” visa schemes. DHS aims to increase oversight by educational institutions and ensure students are working in fields related to their studies. STEM graduates may qualify for a 24-month extension.
Legal challenges are anticipated. Doug Rand, director of the Talent Mobility Fund, stated on LinkedIn that the rule is unlikely to withstand legal scrutiny, citing previous successful challenges to similar fees for H-1B visas. The proposal will be subject to a 30-day public comment period, followed by a 60-day implementation delay to allow schools, students, and employers to prepare. The Trump administration had previously vowed to make it easier for foreign students to remain in the US, suggesting automatic Green Cards after graduation, a position seemingly reversed by this proposal. The rule change is expected to force educational institutions to exercise “greater oversight and selectivity” before recommending students for the program.
Our reading is that DHS is significantly increasing the financial burden on international students seeking to work in the US post-graduation, ostensibly to address program abuse. The proposed fees represent a substantial increase over current costs and are likely to be contentious, given anticipated legal challenges and differing interpretations of the rule’s motivations, some outlets emphasize fraud prevention while others highlight potential impacts on STEM professionals and prior promises. The contrasting framing in reporting suggests a politically charged issue with multiple layers of interpretation.
Read the original coverage
💬 Comments
📜 Comment Policy