Latest news with #NFAP
Time of India
19 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
Without international students, many US colleges may vanish: How it happens and who's most at risk
Without international students, US colleges face major closures, says new report Many US colleges and universities could be forced to shut down if they are unable to maintain enrolment of immigrants and international students, according to a report released by the National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP). The report finds that international students, immigrants, and the US-born children of immigrants make up a significant share of the higher education population. A sharp decline in their numbers could reduce the undergraduate student population by almost five million and the graduate student population by at least 1.1 million between 2022 and 2037. Falling enrolment and financial stress across institutions The study, authored by Madeline Zavodny, an economics professor at the University of North Florida, warns of a "looming demographic cliff" in the US due to the drop in birth rates after 2007. As a result, the number of traditional college-age US-born students is expected to begin falling from 2025. According to the analysis, the total enrolment at US higher education institutions peaked in the 2010-11 academic year and has since declined. The share of young adults enrolled in college is also dropping. Zavodny stated that "losing up to one-third of undergraduate enrolment and almost two-fifths of graduate enrolment would be catastrophic," as reported by Forbes. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Use an AI Writing Tool That Actually Understands Your Voice Grammarly Install Now Undo Smaller and regional institutions face the highest risk The NFAP report indicates that smaller regional universities and private liberal arts colleges, particularly those in rural areas, are at the greatest risk of closure. These institutions are likely to struggle to attract students as more applicants aim for better-resourced and more prominent universities. "Regional universities will find it particularly hard to recruit international graduate students if those students can attend larger universities that have more resources for research and lead to better job opportunities," Zavodny said, as quoted by Forbes. Policy changes and immigration restrictions intensify challenges The Trump administration has implemented restrictive immigration policies affecting international students. This includes compelling Columbia University to reduce its "dependence" on international students and ordering mass deportations, as reported by Forbes. In 2025, the US State Department ordered international students to leave the country for minor infractions, without offering the chance to respond. Lawsuits later blocked these deportations. According to Forbes, NAFSA: Association of International Educators anticipates a 30% to 40% decline in new international student enrolment in autumn 2025 due to travel bans, visa interview suspensions, and limited availability. Impact on local economies and student populations Many US universities are already facing budget shortfalls. The Washington Times reported that in 2023, public colleges experienced the steepest annual tuition revenue decline since 1980. West Virginia University, for instance, closed 28 academic programmes and eliminated 143 faculty positions. The NFAP study highlights that about one in four undergraduates and one in seven graduate students in the US are US-born children of immigrants. Zavodny stated that universities rely not only on international students but also on immigrants and their families remaining in the country, as quoted by Forbes. Work opportunities and future pathways restricted The report underscores the importance of programmes like Optional Practical Training (OPT) and STEM OPT that allow international students to gain work experience after graduation. However, the Trump administration plans to eliminate OPT and tighten rules for H-1B visa eligibility. New regulations would also require international students to apply for extensions beyond fixed admission periods. Zavodny concluded that policies restricting international student access could significantly affect university enrolment, reduce employment opportunities in university towns, and limit the supply of college-educated workers in the US, as reported by Forbes. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here . Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Time of India
28-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
How the Trump administration uses a flawed DHS report to justify sweeping US education visa restrictions
The Trump administration has used a report by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to implement new restrictions on immigration and international student visas. The DHS overstay report, which is published annually, has been cited as justification for a travel ban issued on June 4, 2025, and is expected to support further proposed restrictions targeting student visa holders. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now According to a National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP) analysis, the DHS overstay report does not contain actual overstay rates, but rather upper-bound estimates of individuals whose departures from the US could not be verified. Despite this, the administration has relied on the report to enforce bans on immigration and student entries from 19 countries. Overstay figures include inaccurate and outdated records The DHS report includes individuals who have overstayed their visas as well as those whose departures were not recorded. Demographer Robert Warren explained that the figures include "both actual overstays and unrecorded departures," as quoted by Forbes. The DHS itself acknowledges that some individuals listed as overstays may have departed the country or changed their legal status but are still classified as overstays in the report. In some cases, the report lists people as overstays due to data matching issues. As time passes, DHS systems often update and correctly identify these individuals as having lawfully remained in or departed from the US. For instance, the "suspected in-country overstay" rate for student and exchange visitors at the start of FY 2023 was 3.5%. Fifteen months later, this figure dropped by 42%, to 2.03%, as reported by Forbes. International students misclassified and misrepresented The DHS report also overstates figures due to individuals changing immigration status within the US. These include people who married US citizens, applied for asylum, received Temporary Protected Status, or obtained lawful permanent residence. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now In one example, cited by Forbes, a protest leader named Mahmoud Khalil was arrested under the assumption that he was on a student visa, though he had already become a lawful permanent resident through marriage. In the FY 2023 report, overstay rates for students from several countries were based on small numbers. Cuba and Burundi had only 24 alleged overstays, and Laos had just 12. Despite the minimal figures, these countries were included in the travel ban. Fluctuating data cited to justify proposed visa rule changes The Trump administration is expected to use the DHS report to support a proposed rule to eliminate the "duration of status" policy for students and exchange visitors, replacing it with a fixed time period. A similar rule was proposed in 2020. According to Forbes, the 2020 proposal would limit stays to two years for students from countries with a student overstay rate above 10%. However, NFAP notes that these overstay rates vary significantly from year to year. For example, Kenya's overstay rate dropped by 40% between FY 2022 and FY 2023, while Rwanda's rate fell by 44% over the same period. This inconsistency makes it difficult to use the figures for long-term policy decisions, according to data cited by Forbes. Travel ban based on inconsistent and inflated data The June 4, 2025 travel ban applies to 19 countries. Twelve are fully restricted from obtaining US immigrant and temporary visas, while seven face partial restrictions. As reported by Forbes, the proclamation cited overstay rates as a reason for the ban, even though many of the individuals listed had either left the country or changed their status lawfully. NFAP found that more than 70 countries not included in the travel ban had higher student overstay rates than some of the banned countries, including Iran and Venezuela. Liberia and Djibouti, for example, had higher B1/B2 visa overstay rates than several nations included in the proclamation. As quoted by Forbes, the NFAP concluded that "the overstay report allowed for a veneer of data to justify predetermined policy decisions." TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us .
Time of India
25-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
America's colleges face a looming crisis: The vital role of international students
This is an AI-generated image, used for representational purposes only. American higher education is heading for a significant challenge, facing a 'demographic cliff' that could drastically shrink student populations, warns a new policy brief from the National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP). Without the crucial contributions of immigrants and their children, as well as international students, both undergraduate and graduate student numbers could plummet in the coming years, potentially leading to widespread college closures and fewer opportunities for all students. The report, authored by Madeline Zavodny, a Research Fellow at NFAP and Professor of Economics, highlights that the number of US-born traditional college-age young adults is expected to drop sharply starting in 2025 due to declining birth rates after 2007. Projections show a potential 15% fall in this demographic between 2025 and 2029 alone. A shrinking student body? The NFAP analysis projects that by 2037, without immigrant-origin students, the undergraduate population in the US could be nearly 5 million smaller than in 2022, shrinking to about two-thirds of its current size. Graduate student numbers could face an even steeper decline, becoming at least 1.1 million smaller, or only about 60% of their current size. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch vàng với sàn môi giới tin cậy IC Markets Đăng ký Undo Such dramatic drops would be 'catastrophic' for many institutions, especially those in regions already experiencing population declines. "Losing up to one-third of undergraduate enrolment and almost two-fifths of graduate enrolment would be catastrophic for many colleges and universities," states the analysis. This could result in fewer educational opportunities for US students, a reduction in higher education-related jobs, and a smaller pool of college-educated workers in the nation. International students: A financial lifeline and innovation driver International students play a vital role, not just in filling seats but also in providing substantial financial support to universities. In 2023-24 alone, international students contributed almost $44 billion to the US economy and supported over 378,000 jobs. Many public universities, facing cuts in state funding, have increasingly relied on international students' higher out-of-state tuition fees to maintain their programs and even reduce tuition for in-state students. The report also dispels the myth that international students 'crowd out' American students. In fact, research suggests the opposite: higher tuition paid by international students allows public universities to expand their offerings, potentially increasing the number of US students they can enrol. For example, for every additional international undergraduate student at a public university, in-state freshman enrollment increases by two, on average. Furthermore, international students are crucial for innovation and entrepreneurship. Master's programs with more foreign students tend to lead to more businesses being created by graduates. They also boost US innovation through patents and publications, especially in STEM fields. Immigrants who attended a U.S. college or university account for 75% of those who founded US companies receiving venture capital funding. Changing demographics and future outlook The share of immigrant-origin students (first and second-generation immigrants) in US higher education has been steadily rising. In 2022, first-generation immigrants made up 11% of undergraduate students, and second-generation immigrants accounted for 24%. This growth in immigrant-origin students has been critical in offsetting declines in the number of third-plus generation US-born students. While international student enrolment rebounded after a dip during the first Trump administration and the pandemic, it remains slightly below its 2016-17 peak. The report warns that another reduction in international students could severely impact many US higher education institutions, jeopardising academic programs and employment in local economies. With some other English-speaking countries now looking to reduce their international student numbers, the US has a "strategic opening" to attract more. This, combined with post-graduation work opportunities like Optional Practical Training (OPT), could ensure a stronger US-educated workforce, particularly in critical STEM fields that drive economic growth and innovation. The message is clear: the future health and vitality of American higher education, and by extension, the U.S. economy and workforce, are increasingly tied to the continued presence and contributions of immigrants and international students, concludes the NFAP analysis.
The Hill
11-04-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Does Trump's birthright citizenship order create a ‘birth tax'?
Some U.S. couples could face a minimum of $3,000 in a 'birth tax' under President Trump's executive order that seeks to end birthright citizenship, according to a cost analysis conducted by a non-partisan think tank. The National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP) used current government fee structures for proving U.S. citizenship to calculate the 'tax.' Nearly half of the costs ($1,385) would go toward completing the required 14-page Application for Certificate of Citizenship through U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the group estimated. At least another $1,500 would go for legal fees associated with completing the government form — or one like it — if Trump's executive order were to go into effect for children born in the U.S. to parents who are not Americans or legal permanent residents. The fees compiled by NFAP are contingent on Trump's executive action clearing legal hurdles. The birthright citizenship executive order is currently under a temporary nationwide ban, but the Trump administration has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to lift the ban. The nation's highest court has not yet ruled on the matter. Margaret Stock, an immigration and citizenship attorney with Cascadia Cross Border Law Group who worked with NFAP on the study, told NewsNation that the $3,000 estimate is 'very conservative'. She said families could pay much more depending on how complicated the immigration status of the child's parents is considered by government officials and other unforeseen costs. To determine estimated costs, Stock said NFAP used the fees associated with the N-600 citizenship form that is used by parents in the U.S. whose children are born overseas but are seeking American citizenship and are required to file paperwork with USCIS. However, she predicts that paving a road where a 'birth tax' becomes a reality for immigrant parents is far from completion due to the unsettled nature of the legality of Trump's order. 'There's no existing process in place to do what the president wants to do,' Stock said. What Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship does The order prevents U.S. government agencies from issuing citizenship to anyone when the person's mother is not in the country legally or was temporarily legal at the time of the child's birth and if the person's father is not a U.S. citizen or a legal resident at the time of the child's birth. In the executive order, Trump wrote that the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which affords U.S. citizenship to anyone born in the country, has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the nation's borders. The order was immediately met with legal challenges filed by attorneys general in 22 states and by immigrant advocacy groups, which sued the Trump administration over his sweeping immigration actions since returning to the White House. Federal judges in Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Washington state, have blocked the order while the matter is being considered by the courts. The American Civil Liberties Union called the order 'unconstitutional' and 'reckless.' Attorneys for the Trump administration argued the order should only be blocked in states where judges have ruled against the order's legality and constitutionality. How costly would ending birthright citizenship be to expecting parents? Stock first calculated the costs to prospective parents affected by birthright citizenship in 2012, when she was debating the topic and first collaborated with NFAP on the cost analysis, which estimated the 'birth tax' at the time would be around $1,600. Now, in addition to fees nearly doubled from the initial study, NFAP believes biometrics would have to be submitted to USCIS or another agency to confirm the baby's identity, a test which currently costs $85 per person, Stuart Anderson, NFAP's executive director wrote for Forbes. Anderson told NewsNation that the Trump administration has not provided details about how it plans to verify whether a child is a U.S. citizen. He said the administration will likely not allow for an honor system in which the parents are taken at their word about their own citizenship status. The Trump administration and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) did not immediately respond to requests for comment from NewsNation about the NFAP cost estimates. Even more costs could be added if the parents and newborn babies were required to appear in person at the Social Security Administration or if DNA tests are needed to determine the baby's father, Stock said. The Alaska-based immigration attorney said she has been involved in some citizenship cases in which parents paid upwards of $50,000 in fees to settle their child's citizenship, making the $3,000 figure a bare minimum parents could pay. 'I don't think (the Trump administration) is paying any attention to the economic costs at all,' Stock told NewsNation. 'We're talking about a wholesale change to the entire system for acknowledging people's citizenship in America and there's no bureaucracy in place to do any of this.'
Forbes
02-04-2025
- Politics
- Forbes
Trump Immigration Order Could Cost Americans $3,000 Per Baby
Donald Trump signs executive orders in the Oval Office of the White House on January 20, 2025. ... More Ending birthright citizenship would be chaotic and costly for many Americans due to new fees, paperwork requirements and other issues. (Photo by) Ending birthright citizenship would be chaotic and costly for many Americans due to new fees, paperwork requirements and other issues. So far, the constitutionality of Donald Trump's executive order, which would no longer guarantee a child born on U.S. soil is an American citizen, has dominated the discussion. While critics and supporters of birthright citizenship have highlighted the legal issues, few people have examined the practical effects. Implementing the policy would create significant financial burdens for U.S.-born and immigrant parents. If the Trump administration succeeds in ending birthright citizenship, it will turn each birth in America into a federal event. A National Foundation for American Policy analysis finds the Trump administration would impose a $3,000 or higher 'birth tax' for each baby born in the United States to carry out the executive order ending birthright citizenship. The cost includes Form N-600, the 14-page Application for Certificate of Citizenship, which has a $1,385 government filing fee, and the attorney fees related to the form that range from $1,500 to $10,000. Parents also would need to submit biometrics to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (or another agency), and the parents and baby would likely need to appear in person at a Social Security Administration office. Those actions could entail additional expenses. Costs could differ based on a parent's details. NFAP developed the updated estimates with Margaret Stock, an attorney at Cascadia Cross Border Law Group, who has helped many military families with the time-consuming process of documenting that a child born abroad is a U.S. citizen at birth. Stock authored a 2012 NFAP report that explained why changing the Citizenship Clause would be expensive and burdensome for individuals. Unless the Trump administration intends their new birthright citizenship policy to operate on the 'honor system,' which is unlikely, U.S.-born and foreign-born parents will spend considerable time and money if they want the federal government to certify their newborn is a U.S. citizen. On January 20, 2025, the Trump administration published its executive order ending birthright citizenship in the United States. In effect, a baby born to an undocumented immigrant mother or even a female temporary visa holder would no longer be a U.S. citizen at birth unless the father was a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident. Attorneys succeeded in blocking the implementation of the executive order in several cases. 'Judges in lawsuits joined by 22 states and D.C. have issued nationwide orders blocking Trump's executive order, which civil rights groups and Democratic-led states say is at odds with the nation's history and the Constitution,' reported Ann E. Marimow and David Nakamura of the Washington Post. The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to block the nationwide injunctions. Attorneys have warned it would result in children born in some places being considered citizens at birth and others becoming stateless and undocumented. Trump officials have not explained the new burdens the executive order would create for Americans or the process they intend to impose on new parents if judges ruled the administration's new birthright citizenship policy constitutional. Receiving a birth certificate after a child is born would no longer suffice to prove a baby is a U.S. citizen at birth. At a minimum, new parents would need to endure a process like when starting a new job: 'Use Form I-9 to verify the identity and employment authorization of individuals hired for employment in the United States,' according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. 'All U.S. employers must properly complete Form I-9 for every individual they hire for employment in the United States. On the form, an employee must attest to their employment authorization. The employee must also present their employer with acceptable documents as evidence of identity and employment authorization.' Margaret Stock believes the process for parents would be more complicated than the current I-9 process companies use to document employment eligibility. 'It will have to be much more extensive than the I-9 process,' she said. 'Birth certificates showing birth in the United States will no longer prove U.S. citizenship. Someone at the Social Security Administration will need to collect several documents before issuing a Social Security number.' She said SSA would demand to see a birth certificate with a time stamp on it that shows the time, date and location of birth. The government would also ask for the birth and immigration records of the biological mother and potentially DNA tests to establish the biological father. Officials would also need to see the birth and immigration records of the biological father. 'Only an immigration law expert can do the legal analysis because people's statuses are a moving target,' according to Stock. 'Here's an example: What if USCIS approves a green card at a Service Center for a pregnant mother a few minutes before (or after) she gives birth? That's the difference between the baby being a U.S. citizen under the executive order or the baby being an undocumented immigrant.' The Social Security Administration would need an army of expert immigration law adjudicators. Stock notes that Alaska and Hawaii have federal statutes that do not include the phrase 'subject to the jurisdiction.' She believes the executive order may not apply to births in those states. A Social Security Administration office in suburban Detroit. (Photo by: Jim West/UCG/Universal ... More Images Group via Getty Images) Today, states, not the federal government, issue birth certificates. SSA relies on state records to issue Social Security numbers to U.S.-born citizens, and the State Department uses those records to issue passports. 'If the fact of someone's birth within the U.S. is no longer sufficient to prove the person's claim to U.S. citizenship, all of these bureaucratic systems must be re-tooled,' wrote Stock in the NFAP analysis. 'At a minimum, it will require each state to establish a system for verifying claims to U.S. citizenship. More logically, a change to the Citizenship Clause will lead to the creation of a central and authoritative Federal citizenship records system that will register all U.S. citizens—and ultimately, this would likely, in turn, lead to a National Identification card.' The Trump administration's effort to end birthright citizenship would add deadweight costs to the economy and financially harm people least likely to possess spare resources. It would also likely create a two-tier caste society with a child's success in life determined by whether they were born a U.S. citizen at birth. Margaret Stock said changing birthright citizenship should only appeal to individuals who have not considered the cost and implications of verifying the immigration and citizenship status of every parent of every child born in America.
