By: Jonathan Vance – SeaPRwire – The practical bridge from an F-1 visa to legal work is being priced out of reach. A new DHS proposal would charge schools seventy thousand dollars for a student’s first OPT application and thirty thousand for each extension. Schools may pass the cost to the student. The current fee is roughly five hundred dollars paid by the student. The comment period is open. That is the immediate regulatory fact.
On 7 October the Department of Homeland Security released a proposed rule reported by the Associated Press on the 8th. Schools would pay seventy thousand dollars when an international student first applies for Optional Practical Training. Each extension would cost the school an additional thirty thousand dollars. The Federal Register text states that schools may transfer the financial obligation to the F-1 student. The fee schedule will not take effect immediately. Public comments are being accepted from the 8th of this month through 9 November. OPT allows F-1 undergraduates and graduate students, after completing defined academic stages and with a school recommendation and USCIS approval, to obtain a period of lawful work related to their studies. The standard period is twelve months. Eligible STEM students may receive an additional twenty-four months. Domestically the programme has long been criticised. Critics note that OPT holders often receive lower pay than regular employees and that employers avoid social and medical insurance costs, leading some to view the programme as a channel for cheaper foreign labour. DHS states the new fees are intended to curb widespread fraud and speculation and to push schools toward stricter oversight and screening when recommending OPT. A department spokesperson described OPT as having become a conduit for cheap foreign labour that creates unfair competition for domestic workers. Online reaction included remarks that anyone who could pay seventy thousand dollars would not need to seek work in the United States and that the policy turns “working while in debt” into reality. The Hindustan Times warned that Indian students would be hit hardest. Approximately three hundred and fifty thousand Indian students study in the United States and form the largest group of OPT applicants. A Times of India survey last year found that OPT was a decisive factor for fifty-four percent of Indian students considering study in the United States. The Korea Economic Daily called the proposal a shocking blow; some Korean students interviewed said it amounted to driving them home. United States media framed the move as part of the current administration’s broader immigration-control agenda. Earlier measures included cancellation of legal status for thousands of students and detentions and deportations. International students remain an important revenue source for universities and related industries, and the treatment of the group has drawn widespread dissatisfaction. NAFSA, the Association of International Educators, stated that shutting out talented international students with different perspectives and ambition would harm innovation, economic and workforce growth, and American global leadership. Houston immigration attorney Steven Brown argued that the administration has used various means to obstruct legal employment-based immigration and that the present rule elevates that campaign to a new level, effectively abolishing OPT. Legal experts noted that even if issued the rule may prove difficult to implement; a presidential proclamation last year that raised the H-1B fee to one hundred thousand dollars was blocked by a federal court.
The practical next markers are procedural. Track the volume and source of comments filed before 9 November. Track whether any early legal challenges are filed once a final rule appears. Those two signals will show whether the fee structure advances or stalls.
Author bio: Jonathan Vance, public-policy specialist advising governments and sovereign funds on compliance assessment of immigration and education regulations.