New limits on international students draw warnings of economic, innovation losses

A new Trump administration rule capping how long international students may remain in the United States has drawn sharp criticism from higher education leaders and advocates, who warn that it could damage the country's economy and weaken its capacity to innovate.

The rule, issued in July and due to take effect on Sept 15, overturns the long-standing policy known as "duration of status", under which student visas remained valid until students completed their course of study, including a short period of employment after graduation.

Under the new framework, most international students will be admitted for a fixed period of up to four years. Those who need more time to finish their degrees, or who wish to stay for post-graduation work, will have to apply for an extension.

Richard Dasher, director of the US-Asia Technology Management Center at Stanford University, said the shift has added to an atmosphere of uncertainty on campuses that were already dealing with tighter visa processing.

"It's difficult for students now, and it's harder to get a visa," Dasher told China Daily. "I talk to students a lot, and of course they're worried. It's more uncertain than it used to be, and I think that it's an unfortunate situation, especially at the university level, where universities should be open."

"They (universities) should really be an international forum for exchanging the newest ideas. The only way a university can be world-class is to engage with the world," he added.

Higher education groups have opposed the change. The Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE) released a report on Monday, saying that the rule could cut US economic output by as much as $400 billion a year, erode the country's innovation pipeline and push prospective students toward universities elsewhere.

A sustained loss of one-third of the annual inflow of international students, which the report described as a conservative estimate, would cost the United States roughly $200 billion to $400 billion each year. That is equivalent to between 0.7 and 1.3 percent of GDP, or the entire economy of a state such as Utah or South Carolina, the report said.

The immediate effect would be a wider trade deficit, since educating foreign students counts as an export and accounts for about 5 percent of all US services exports, according to the report.

The duration of status policy dates to 1978 and allows foreign students and scholars to stay in the country as long as they are making progress toward completing their studies.

The administration contends that the arrangement invites abuse. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said in a news release that the new rule is needed to stop "forever students" who remain in the country "by perpetually enrolling in courses".

Advocates reject that claim, saying the population in question is already among the most heavily supervised in the immigration system.

"This action is unnecessary and duplicative," said Zuzana Wootson, deputy director of federal policy at the Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, a nonprofit organization. "International students are already among the most closely monitored nonimmigrant populations in the US and are subject to rigorous oversight by DHS and academic institutions."

The PIIE report also questioned the evidentiary basis for the change. It noted that the policy cited 11 anonymous and unverifiable accounts of international students who allegedly abused their visas to stay in the US since 2008, a period in which 7.1 million student visas were issued.

Since the Sept 11 attacks, the report added, the government has operated a sophisticated system for tracking everyone in the country on a student visa, which would allow officials to identify anyone staying for decades, or committing fraud, in real time.

The rule further refers to what it calls 10,000 cases of potential fraud in Optional Practical Training, a program that lets some international students take jobs related to their field of study. The only supporting evidence cited is a link to a Politico article in which a Department of Homeland Security official asserts that such fraud occurs, according to the report.

"A more likely reason is that the administration hopes to block international students from staying as part of an across-the-board policy of excluding lawful immigrants. In fact, the administration has explicitly and repeatedly said it will use this authority for that purpose," the report said.

Dasher said the consequences would be felt acutely in Silicon Valley, where the technology industry "depends on having the best people in the world come here".

The PIIE report pointed to science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields as particularly exposed. Foreign STEM workers who stay in the United States after graduation patent new inventions at four times the rate of typical college graduates and account for roughly 10 percent of all new inventions patented in the country, it said. They also found high-growth startups at six times the rate of graduates born in the United States, according to the report.

The rule is the latest in a series of measures aimed at international students. Last year, sweeping terminations of students' legal status prompted many to go into hiding or leave the country, fearing detention for being in the United States unlawfully.

The government has also required visa applicants to hand over their social media handles, exposing them to closer scrutiny.

Survey data suggest the cumulative effect may already be shaping decisions about where to study. A poll of more than 1,000 students and postdoctoral researchers conducted last year by NAFSA: Association of International Educators found that nearly half would not have come to the United States under a fixed period of admission.

In the same survey, 67 percent of prospective students said they would be likely to enroll in US programs if duration of status remained in place, compared with 57 percent if there were no guarantee they could stay beyond four years.

"At a time when global competition for talent is intensifying, this policy sends exactly the wrong message," Fanta Aw, CEO of NAFSA, said in a statement responding to the new rule. "It tells the world's brightest students and scholars that the United States is becoming less welcoming, less predictable and less committed."