AI Generated Image (not an actual comment filed in the docket)
With the comment window on the OPT fee rule now closed, universities have put their own price tags into the federal record, and the numbers set up the fight DHS will face if it finalizes the $70,000 charge.
Colleges that filed comments on the OPT fee rule told the Department of Homeland Security that the proposed $70,000 charge for a student’s first Optional Practical Training recommendation would cost individual schools tens of millions of dollars a year, and in at least eight cases more than $100 million. The estimates, filed before the comment period closed Nov. 9, matter because they are now part of the administrative record DHS must answer before it can finalize a rule affecting F-1 students, the schools that recommend them and the employers that hire them.
Nothing has changed yet for students. The proposal, published by DHS and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Oct. 8, would reach only recommendations dated on or after a final rule takes effect, 60 days after publication. A school would pay $70,000 per student before entering an initial OPT recommendation in SEVIS and $30,000 for any later one, including a STEM OPT extension, as detailed in earlier coverage of the $70,000 OPT proposal and the Nov. 9 report on the comment deadline.
Nearly 9,000 comments were filed, according to Inside Higher Ed, which reviewed the submissions from members of the Association of American Universities. The outlet found that 22 of those research universities together put their annual cost at about $2.1 billion.
| Institution or group | Estimated annual cost in its comment |
|---|---|
| 22 AAU member universities, combined | About $2.1 billion |
| Arizona State University | More than $100 million (one of eight AAU schools above that mark) |
| Lewis University (about 870 international students) | $46.8 million, about 30% of its operating budget |
| Tulane University | About $13 million, the lowest AAU estimate given |
Why the OPT fee rule cost estimates carry legal weight
Under the Administrative Procedure Act, an agency must respond to significant comments, and a final rule that brushes past hard data from the parties it regulates is exposed to challenge as arbitrary and capricious.
The schools’ figures land next to DHS’s own math. The proposal’s regulatory analysis, as summarized by Inside Higher Ed, projects annualized fee payments of $8.7 billion to $16.9 billion. The 22 AAU schools alone account for about 24 percent of the low end of that range, a calculation based on those two figures. DHS counts 194,554 F-1 students who were granted OPT work authorization and reported employment in 2024, plus 165,524 students on STEM OPT by that year, according to the Federal Register notice.
Several comments turn the cost question into a legal one. University of Michigan officials wrote that the charge is “effectively a tax to be paid by institutions,” Inside Higher Ed reported. That framing tracks the likeliest line of attack in court: DHS relies on its authority under section 214(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to set conditions of admission, rather than the user-fee laws agencies normally use, and the money would go to the Treasury rather than fund the program.
The American Council on Education and 36 other higher education groups asked DHS to withdraw the rule “in its entirety,” arguing in a Nov. 9 letter that it creates a “pay-to-play” structure that does not distinguish responsible institutions and qualified students from fraud. It proposes risk-based audits and employer verification instead, and warns that schools would likely pass the cost to students or employers or stop recommending OPT.
DHS’s position is stated bluntly in the proposal. It says it “cannot operate OPT consistent with its focus on preventing fraud” without the fees and “may shut down the program entirely,” and it argues the fee is needed to protect American workers. That argument has backers in the docket. One commenter quoted by Inside Higher Ed, Jolene Christopherson, wrote that the country needs “to focus on our ability to train and give jobs to citizens of the U.S.,” and the outlet reported that many supporters wanted OPT ended altogether.
What students and schools face next
DHS has set no date for a final rule, and comments on the rule’s information collection remain open until Dec. 7. Timing is the pressure point: a final rule in the first half of 2027 could take effect as schools enter post-completion recommendations for spring graduates, which can be filed up to 90 days before a program ends. Because the fee turns on the date of the school’s recommendation, OPT workers planning a STEM extension are exposed too.
If DHS finalizes the fee largely unchanged, a university lawsuit is the likely next step, and schools would arrive with clear standing and their cost evidence already in the record. Universities are already in court over DHS limits on F-1 internships, and the fee comes as the count of students in SEVIS is already falling.
For those interested to know more, the regulation, titled Establishing a Fixed Time Period of Admission and an Extension of Stay Procedure for Nonimmigrant Academic Students, Exchange Visitors, and Representatives of Foreign Information Media, was proposed on August 28, 2025, submitted to the White House on May 5, 2026, and rapidly finalized on July 17, 2026, to take effect on September 15, 2026. On September 14, 2026—just one day before its effective date—U.S. District Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV issued a nationwide preliminary injunction blocking the rule for likely violating the Administrative Procedure Act. A primary reason for the block was that DHS failed to give due consideration to nearly 22,000 public comments, providing only a barely legal 32-day comment window before finalizing the rule virtually unchanged. Judge Saylor also ruled that the agency acted arbitrarily and capriciously by relying on anecdotes rather than concrete data to claim a four-year cap would improve national security. Furthermore, the court found that DHS ignored tens of billions of dollars in potential economic losses to U.S. higher education and failed to evaluate less disruptive alternatives.
As a result of these procedural failures, the longstanding Duration of Status policy remains fully in effect while the lawsuit continues.
Going by what happened to the rule ending F-1 Duration of Status, we can say this rule will also most likely meet the similar fate unless the agency learnt a lesson and try to go through all the comments and give due consideration to them and don’t rush to publish this in the original form. Even if it ends up publishing in whatever form, courts are most likely to stall it saying DHS ignored tens of billions of dollars in losses and did not evaluate less disruptive alternatives.
This article is for general information and is not legal advice.
Sources
- Federal Register: Optional Practical Training Fees, proposed rule, 91 FR 64566 (Oct. 8, 2026)
- Regulations.gov: DHS docket ICEB-2026-0100
- Inside Higher Ed: Colleges Say OPT Fee Would Cost Tens of Millions (Nov. 11, 2026)
- American Council on Education: comment letter on the OPT fee rule (Nov. 9, 2026)
About the Author
