Indian students' American dream hits a $70,000 toll

What is Optional Practical Training (OPT), and how does it let an international student work in the United States after studying?

Optional Practical Training, or OPT, is temporary work authorization for eligible F-1 international students. It lets them work in the United States after completing studies. For many graduates, OPT is their first practical connection to the American labor market. The article describes it as a common bridge from university to employment.

A graduate receives authorization through the immigration system, while the proposed fee would be paid by the school. Students normally use OPT to gain experience related to their studies. STEM graduates may qualify for a 24-month extension after the initial period. That creates a possible total of 36 months of work authorization.

OPT often comes before an H-1B specialty-occupation visa. The article names Microsoft’s Satya Nadella and Google’s Sundar Pichai as examples of foreign graduates who followed this general path. In 2024, roughly 418,000 students held OPT authorization, showing its major role in US graduate employment.

How much would the proposed OPT fees cost a school over the full 36-month period available to eligible STEM graduates?

The proposal would make a school pay $70,000 when an F-1 student first participates in OPT. A later authorization would cost another $30,000. Eligible STEM graduates can use OPT for up to 36 months, including a 24-month extension. The full potential charge is therefore $100,000 per student.

The calculation is straightforward: $70,000 for the initial authorization plus $30,000 for the subsequent authorization equals $100,000. The later charge would include the STEM extension. The fee would apply when USCIS approves the student’s work authorization, although the proposal is not yet active.

This amount could change school decisions about international enrollment. Universities already facing financial pressure may decide that supporting a student’s OPT is too expensive. The article warns that students seeking costly STEM graduate programs partly for US work experience could instead consider Canada, Britain, Australia, or other destinations.

Who would legally pay the proposed fee, and how could the cost ultimately reach the student?

Under the proposal, the legal responsibility would fall on the university or other SEVP-certified school. USCIS would not approve the student’s work authorization unless the payment was made. This structure makes the school the formal payer, even though the student is the person seeking employment authorization.

DHS also says schools could recover the money from students, employers, or other sources. A university might therefore add the cost to a student’s charges, seek reimbursement from a hiring company, or use another funding arrangement. The proposal does not guarantee that the school would permanently absorb the expense.

That distinction matters because a nominally school-paid fee could still discourage students. A $70,000 recovery charge may be impossible for many graduates or employers. It could also make schools less willing to support OPT applications, especially when they are already under financial strain and international admissions are weakening.

What could happen to international student enrollment and US access to foreign STEM talent if universities decide the fee is too expensive?

If universities judge $70,000 per student to be unaffordable, they may stop supporting OPT or limit admissions in affected programs. Students who choose expensive STEM graduate degrees partly to gain US work experience could then select Canada, Britain, Australia, or other destinations. The proposal therefore reaches beyond immigration fees.

The mechanism is financial risk. A school may have to pay before a graduate can work, while recovering the money is uncertain. Passing the charge to students could make US study unreachable. Passing it to employers could reduce hiring. Either choice could weaken the value of an American degree for international applicants.

The United States would still attract students who plan to return home after graduation, and OPT is not required to study. But the article warns that access to foreign STEM talent could shrink. That matters because foreign-born workers made up 22% of the nation’s 36 million STEM workers in 2023.

Why would Indian students be especially affected by this proposal?

Indian students would face especially large effects because India is the biggest source of international students in the United States. It sent 363,019 students in 2024–25, about 31% of all international students. Indian participation in OPT reached 143,740, rising 47% in one year.

The academic profile makes the proposal even more significant. Almost half of Indian students were graduate students, and many study computer science, mathematics, and engineering. Those STEM graduates can remain in OPT for as long as three years. They are therefore especially likely to seek the work experience that the fee could threaten.

A high cost could push some Indian applicants toward other countries or discourage US graduate study. The effect would not eliminate Indian enrollment, since some students return home after graduating. But it could reduce the US pipeline of Indian-trained technology workers, including people who might later seek H-1B visas.

How does OPT usually connect a foreign graduate’s studies to later employment through the H-1B visa system?

OPT commonly connects an international student’s education to longer-term US employment. After studying on an F-1 visa, the graduate can obtain temporary work authorization and gain experience in the American labor market. The article calls OPT routinely the first step before seeking an H-1B specialty-occupation visa.

The mechanism is sequential. OPT provides an initial period of authorized work after graduation. A student may use that period to join an employer, demonstrate skills, and build relevant experience. The employer and graduate can then pursue H-1B status if the job and visa process meet the required conditions. OPT does not guarantee H-1B approval.

This pathway helps explain why the proposed fee could have effects beyond one work authorization. If schools or students cannot manage the fee, fewer graduates may enter the US workforce in the first place. The article identifies Nadella and Pichai as prominent examples of foreign graduates who used this broader study-to-work pathway.

Why does the United States rely on foreign-born workers in science and engineering, and what does this reveal about how advanced economies build their workforce?

The United States relies on foreign-born science and engineering workers because its universities, research institutions, and technology industries consume more advanced talent than the country produces alone. In 2023, foreign-born people made up 22% of America’s 36 million STEM workers. Their share was even higher in science and engineering roles requiring advanced degrees.

The article gives striking evidence from education. Temporary-visa holders earned 38% of US science-and-engineering master’s degrees and 39% of doctorates in 2023. Indian-born workers alone accounted for more than 727,000 members of the foreign-born science-and-engineering workforce. International students therefore become part of the talent pipeline.

This does not prove every foreign worker is indispensable or that every shortage is genuine. But it shows the US does not currently produce all the advanced STEM talent its economy uses. More broadly, advanced economies build workforces through both domestic training and international recruitment. Restricting the pipeline could affect research, innovation, and technology hiring.

Key Facts:

📌 OPT provides temporary US work authorization for eligible F-1 international students.

📌 STEM graduates can receive a 24-month extension.

📌 About 418,000 students had OPT authorization in 2024.

📌 The initial proposed OPT fee is $70,000.

📌 A later authorization would cost another $30,000.

📌 The maximum 36-month STEM OPT cost is $100,000.

📌 Schools would legally pay the proposed OPT fee.