Who would pay DHS’s proposed $70,000 fee for international students to work?

Students are generally eligible for 12 months of OPT after graduation. Eligible graduates in science, technology, engineering and mathematics fields may receive an additional 24 months, for as much as three years of post-completion OPT.

The program can also serve as a bridge between a U.S. degree and later employment. The proposed fee would put a new financial decision at the school recommendation stage, before the student begins the training.

Which OPT recommendations would trigger the proposed fees?

A school certified by the Student and Exchange Visitor Program would have to pay $70,000 before making an F-1 student’s first OPT recommendation. Each subsequent recommendation for that student would carry a proposed $30,000 charge, including a recommendation for a STEM extension.

The fee would apply to OPT before or after degree completion. It would not be charged each time a student changed employers: changing jobs alone would not trigger a payment.

A later recommendation could still bring the $30,000 fee if the student stayed with the same employer. The charge is tied to the school’s recommendation, not to a particular employer or job.

That distinction matters for students seeking work tied to their studies. A school’s decision to recommend them could become a key factor in whether they can use OPT, even if an employer is ready to hire them.

Who would pay the fee, and who could bear its cost?

The school—not the student or employer—would pay DHS under the proposal, and it would need to pay before recommending the student. DHS says schools could pass the expense to students or employers; the proposal leaves them flexibility over how to cover it. Collected fees would go to the U.S. Treasury.

That means the person formally responsible for the payment might not be the person who ultimately bears its cost. A school could absorb the charge, seek payment from a student or employer, or decide the expense is too high to recommend a student. Those are possible responses, not requirements.

Immigration lawyer Steven Brown told The Associated Press that he did not expect many schools to want to pay $70,000 for one student’s OPT. His assessment points to the proposal’s practical pressure point: a school would face a large expense before a student could begin the authorized training.

If schools pass costs along, students could face a new financial obstacle to work connected to their degrees, while employers could be asked to help cover the charge. If schools absorb the fee, their own budgets would carry it. The proposal does not prescribe which approach institutions must take.

Why does DHS say it wants the fee?

DHS says the fees would encourage schools to scrutinize OPT recommendations more closely, deter fraud, protect U.S. workers and reduce the department’s investigative workload. It also says it wants to prevent OPT from being used to bypass H-1B visa caps and fees. OPT and H-1B are separate programs.

The department cites investigations involving suspected sham employers and false claims of employment. Those are the fraud concerns DHS gives as its rationale; the proposal is not a finding that OPT participants generally commit fraud.

A DHS spokesperson said in the announcement of the proposed fee that “American workers should not have to compete against a program that has been turned into a pipeline for cheap foreign labor,” TIME reported. The department’s approach is to make schools bear a substantial financial cost and, in its view, have them screen recommendations more carefully.

DHS predicts participation will shrink and acknowledges the fee would significantly raise the cost of OPT. The department says it cannot confidently forecast how much participation would fall, while also saying it may be unable to operate the program in line with its anti-fraud priorities without the fees.

Higher-education and immigration advocates dispute the balance DHS is striking. Fanta Aw, CEO of NAFSA: Association of International Educators, issued a written statement that “Driving away the talents, perspectives, and aspirations of international students will only hurt American innovation, economic growth, workforce development, and global leadership,” the Associated Press reported. Sarah Spreitzer, vice president of the American Council on Education, has said OPT is one reason international students choose U.S. colleges and that the proposal would not help address falling enrollment.

How could the fee change students’ plans, and what happens next?

A survey by the Institute for Progress, reported by TIME, found that 80% fewer respondents said they would likely try to stay in the United States if the proposed fees took effect. Among STEM students eligible for OPT, 15% said they would likely try to stay. Those figures measure stated intentions, not what students will do if a rule takes effect.

The debate reaches beyond individual students. Colleges receive tuition revenue from international students, and employers hire some graduates for technical work. Advocates warn that reduced access to OPT could make the United States less attractive to prospective students and workers; DHS argues that stronger screening would protect U.S. workers and address abuse.

The public comment period is scheduled to close Nov. 9. If DHS adopts a final rule, it proposes that the fees take effect 60 days after publication; an F-1 student’s later OPT request made on or after that effective date would be subject to the rule.