America’s Competitive Advantage Depends on Retaining Scientific Talent

Scientists are among the most important drivers of a nation’s economic competitiveness. They conduct the research that leads to new technologies, higher productivity, and the creation of entirely new industries. From semiconductors and artificial intelligence to biotechnology and advanced manufacturing, scientific discovery underpins the innovations that enable economies to grow faster than their competitors. Yet recent changes to U.S. science and immigration policy are making many scientists reconsider whether to build their careers in the United States. For example, a National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) survey conducted shortly after changes to federal science funding began in early 2025 found a 21 percentage point decrease in the share of early-career biomedical scientists who said they were likely to remain in the United States.

Meanwhile, America’s competitors are aggressively recruiting this talent. If this trend continues, the United States risks weakening one of its greatest competitive advantages while bolstering rival nations, particularly China. Policymakers should reverse policies that discourage scientific talent from choosing the United States by ensuring stable funding for federal science agencies and preventing H-1B visa costs from rising unnecessarily.

Over the past two years, changes to both science and immigration policy have made the United States a less attractive place for scientists to build their careers. Most recently, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) proposed a new rule that would give “senior appointees” at federal science agencies greater authority to choose which research grants receive funding, rather than relying primarily on the long-standing practice of peer review by experts in the relevant scientific fields. The proposal drew more than 340,000 public comments, with an analysis of nearly 168,000 of those comments finding that 96 percent opposed the rule. ITIF and Nobel laureates were among those arguing that the proposal is misguided and that political considerations should not replace scientific merit in determining research funding.

At the same time, federal funding reductions at major science agencies have eroded confidence in the U.S. research environment by limiting grant opportunities and increasing uncertainty about long-term research careers. Immigration policy has also made it harder for scientists to remain in the United States. For instance, last year, President Trump issued a proclamation imposing a $100,000 fee on certain new H-1B visa applications. A federal judge struck down that fee this June, but just yesterday, DHS proposed a new $103,265 fee for all cap-subject H-1B petitions. While the original proclamation applied to new hires by universities, hospitals, and research-based institutions, DHS’s new proposed rule would generally exempt those employers from the fee.

Evidence suggests that growing uncertainty surrounding U.S. science policy is already influencing scientists’ intentions about whether to remain in the United States. As noted, NBER surveyed 916 young biomedical scientists about their career expectations soon after changes to federal science funding began in early 2025. The study found a dramatic decline in respondents’ intentions to stay in the country. When asked to recall their views six months earlier, 93 percent of respondents reported that they were likely or very likely to remain in the United States. By March 2025, that figure had fallen to just 72 percent, a decline of 21 percentage points.

The decline was even more pronounced among foreign scientists. Their reported likelihood of remaining in the United States dropped by 30.8 percentage points, suggesting that many were considering research opportunities elsewhere. Although the decline among U.S. scientists was smaller, at 15.8 percentage points, roughly one in six domestic researchers who previously planned to build their careers in the United States expressed a willingness to pursue a career abroad. Among international respondents, European scientists showed the largest decline in their intention to remain in the United States, followed by scientists from India and Latin America.

These findings are consistent with earlier evidence showing growing dissatisfaction across the broader research community. A Nature poll answered by over 1,600 researchers in early 2025 found that three-quarters of respondents—more than 1,200 scientists—were considering leaving the United States because of concerns over research funding and the future direction of science policy. Additionally, a nationwide STAT survey of nearly 1,000 researchers supported by the National Institutes of Health found that 13 percent of respondents said their lab had lost researchers to institutions in other countries as a result of federal funding disruptions in the past year. Together, these surveys suggest that declining interest in remaining in the United States is not limited to one discipline but reflects a broader shift in how scientists view the country’s research environment.

This growing loss of scientific talent is especially distressing because other countries are actively working to recruit the very researchers the United States risks losing. Canada launched a C$1.7 billion initiative to attract foreign scientists while also encouraging Canadian researchers working abroad to return home. Europe is pursuing a similar strategy. In May 2025, the European Commission announced a €500 million initiative aimed at making Europe a global “magnet for researchers.” And in January 2026, to enable top-level researchers to “work in France under optimal conditions,” France launched its €100 million Choose France for Science program. ITIF has written extensively about European countries’ efforts to attract life-sciences innovation talent from the United States to the region. Finally, China has intensified its efforts to recruit global scientific talent. The country introduced a new “K visa” to make it easier for young foreign science and technology talent to relocate to China for education, research, and employment.

Considering scientific talent is a critical source of long-term national competitiveness, these recruitment efforts are concerning. Indeed, scientists develop the foundational technologies that allow countries to increase productivity, create new high-value products, and lead in advanced industries. China already leads the world in output across 7 of 10 advanced industries—computers and electronics, chemicals, machinery and equipment, basic metals, motor vehicles, fabricated metals, and electrical equipment—and attracting additional scientific talent would likely accelerate that progress. Conversely, if the United States loses researchers while its competitors gain them, America’s innovation capacity and technological leadership will gradually erode.

To maintain its position as the world’s leading destination for scientific research, policymakers should strengthen the environment for scientific discovery. First, Congress and the administration should provide stable, predictable funding for federal research agencies so scientists can pursue long-term research careers in the United States with confidence. Second, the federal government should preserve merit-based peer review as the primary mechanism for allocating scientific research grants, ensuring that funding decisions are guided by scientific excellence rather than political considerations.

Finally, policymakers should modernize high-skill immigration policy by reducing unnecessary barriers and uncertainty that discourage talented scientists from building their careers in the United States. This includes making it easier for skilled H-1B visa holders to change employers, addressing employment-based green-card caps, and providing greater certainty so that immigrants and their families can make long-term plans. Policymakers should also reduce barriers facing spouses and children, including restrictions that can prevent spouses from working and make it more difficult for families to establish stable lives in the United States.

For decades, America’s ability to attract the world’s brightest scientists has been one of its greatest competitive advantages. As other nations intensify their efforts to recruit this talent, the United States cannot afford policies that encourage researchers to leave. Scientific leadership is not guaranteed. If policymakers want the United States to remain the world’s innovation leader, they must once again make it the best place for scientists to conduct research, build careers, and make groundbreaking discoveries.