The $100K OPT(Optional Practical Training) Fee Debate

My OPT Years, Ten Years Ago

I once completed an LLM program at a U.S. law school. I still remember, quite clearly, the process of preparing for my visa interview — obtaining a bank statement to prove I could cover tuition and living expenses. Between the one-year LLM program and the year of Optional Practical Training (OPT) that followed graduation, I spent a total of two years in the United States before returning to Korea.

As it happened, I finished my LLM and started my OPT period right around 2016, when Donald Trump first took office. News that the new administration was tightening immigration enforcement spread quickly through the international student community, and many of us worried that leaving the country — even briefly — might mean we wouldn't be allowed back in. Around that same time, I was injured in an accident. I badly wanted to go home to Korea, where I could rely on a healthcare system I knew and trusted, but I was afraid that re-entry might be denied if I left. So I stayed, enduring the pain, and delayed my return. I even took the bar exam in that condition — and, fortunately, passed.

The real trouble started afterward. Because I never got timely treatment, that injury still causes me pain a decade later. So when people ask about my time studying in the U.S., I can't simply say it was all good memories. The injury, and the months I spent gritting my teeth through pain just to make full use of my OPT period, are still part of me.

Still, Here's My Take on the OPT Fee Proposal

Even so, I find myself looking at the second Trump administration's reported plans — tougher enforcement against undocumented immigrants and a new fee on OPT — from a somewhat different angle. To cut to the point: if the fee amount is significantly reduced from what's currently being discussed, this could actually turn out to be a reasonably sound policy.

Here's what has been reported recently.

The Wall Street Journal reported on July 30 (local time), citing multiple sources familiar with the matter, that the Department of Homeland Security is discussing a plan to impose a $100,000 fee on OPT — the program that allows international graduates on student visas to work in the U.S. for one to three years. As of 2024, roughly 419,000 foreign nationals were reportedly working under OPT.

— Newspim, “Trump Administration Reviewing $100,000 Fee for International Students' OPT,” July 31, 2026.

A DHS spokesperson stated that “no policy should be considered final until it is officially announced,” adding that “DHS is always discussing how to use every tool available to protect the integrity of the legal immigration system.”

— Newspim, same article.

My reason for having some sympathy for this policy is fairly simple. A student with enough financial means to pay a reasonable fee is unlikely to have much incentive to overstay illegally. In other words, if the fee is set at a reasonable level — rather than the extraordinarily high figure currently being discussed — it could serve as a middle-ground solution: discouraging unlawful overstays without shutting down legitimate pathways to study and work in the U.S.




How Korea Faces a Similar Challenge

This isn't just an American problem. In Korea, too, we've seen a string of cases involving international students that go beyond simple overstaying — cases involving the leaking of state secrets or core technologies — and it has become a serious social issue. Some recently reported cases show just how serious this can get.

Student A, a Chinese national who had been working at a university research lab in Daejeon, abruptly quit the lab last year and left the country. Suspicious, the professor and researchers discovered that A had copied the source code of a program the lab had co-developed onto an external hard drive and taken it out of the country. The professor persuaded A to return to Korea by mentioning unpaid research funding that needed to be settled, then filed a complaint against A upon arrival. A is currently under police investigation.

Student B, a Vietnamese national researching electric vehicle battery technology at a graduate school lab in Seoul, suddenly dropped out of school in 2023. B then went to Taiwan and joined a local research institute working on similar technology. When B later re-entered Korea, police investigated and found that B had smuggled out research data through a cloud service. B was referred to prosecutors on charges of violating Korea's Act on Prevention of Divulgence and Protection of Industrial Technology.

— JoongAng Ilbo, “Foreign Students Who Suddenly Dropped Out… Left Korea With Confidential Data on External Hard Drives,” July 28, 2026.

The number of international students enrolled in graduate programs in Korea is also rising fast.

Last year, the number of international students in Korea reached approximately 253,000. Graduate-level international students in particular more than doubled over the past decade, rising from 24,160 in 2016 to 59,040 last year.

— JoongAng Ilbo, same article.

Experts, too, are pointing to gaps in the system.

Professor Jang Hang-bae of Chung-Ang University's Department of Industrial Security noted that “while preserving universities' research autonomy, we urgently need common research security standards and guidelines that apply across all university labs, along with government-wide support.”

— JoongAng Ilbo, same article.

Korea currently finds itself in a position where it has little choice but to bring in foreign workers, largely because younger generations tend to avoid low-wage jobs. That structural reality makes it difficult for Korea to crack down on undocumented workers as aggressively as the U.S. does. Still, I believe that as Korea's international standing and appeal continue to grow, enforcement against undocumented foreign nationals should gradually become stricter. This isn't simply about protecting jobs for Korean workers — it's about the fact that national technology and industrial secrets are now being leaked overseas. Because this issue is directly tied to national competitiveness, I don't think it's something we can afford to leave unaddressed any longer.

Closing Thoughts

The pain and hardship I went through ten years ago were real. But that experience hasn't made me view immigration policy in purely negative terms. If anything, it's given me a more nuanced understanding of why reasonable controls and institutional safeguards actually matter. I believe Korea, too, has reached a point where it needs to seriously think about striking the right balance between openness and security as it welcomes international students and workers.

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post