The limits of U.S.-only policies on global competitiveness: Why international coordination and smarter strategies are essential

Hello,


I have written some interesting articles about the Donald Trump's policy , so i invite you to read them carefully in the following web link:

The 2025 Tariff policy: A multidimensional assessment and its empirical economic costs

https://myphilo10.blogspot.com/2025/09/the-2025-tariff-policy-multidimensional.html


Other than that , in September 2025, former President Donald Trump proposed imposing a $100,000 one-time fee on employers seeking new H-1B visas , but i think that it is a too simplistic way of thinking , so i have just written a new paper below so that to explain to you why it is a too simplistic way of thinking and so that to know how to mitigate efficiently the problem:

And here is my new paper:

---

# The Limits of U.S.-Only Policies on Global Competitiveness: Why International Coordination and Smarter Strategies Are Essential

## Introduction

In September 2025, former President Donald Trump proposed imposing a $100,000 one-time fee on employers seeking new H-1B visas. The stated goal is to reduce reliance on foreign workers for “low-value” positions and redirect opportunities toward American workers. While such a policy may carry domestic political appeal, its design is inherently limited: it addresses U.S. immigration in isolation, without accounting for the global nature of talent, technology, and competitiveness.

This paper argues that unilateral measures of this kind cannot secure long-term competitiveness for the United States. Instead, they risk accelerating the redistribution of global talent to other regions—most notably Europe, Canada, and Asia. To protect competitiveness effectively, countries must adopt internationally coordinated frameworks and innovative policy solutions that go beyond punitive restrictions.

---

## The Nature of Competitiveness in a Globalized World

Competitiveness in the twenty-first century is not confined within national borders. Research and innovation depend on global collaboration, cross-border flows of people, and the circulation of knowledge. Top talent in artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and advanced manufacturing often chooses destinations not only based on salary, but also on immigration ease, research funding, infrastructure, and quality of life.

If the U.S. raises barriers to entry through steep fees, other countries with more favorable conditions—such as Canada with its Global Talent Stream or the European Union with the Blue Card program—will become natural beneficiaries. Thus, competitiveness today is inherently global, not national.

---

## The Limitations of Trump’s Proposed Policy

The H-1B fee hike proposal highlights several weaknesses:

1. **Geographic Confinement** – The policy affects only U.S. immigration. It does not prevent talent from migrating to Europe, Canada, or Asia.
2. **Unintended Consequences** – By discouraging employers from hiring foreign talent, the policy could harm U.S. research institutions and startups that depend on specialized workers.
3. **Global Substitution** – Skilled workers priced out of the U.S. system will not disappear; they will seek opportunities elsewhere, strengthening competitors.
4. **Legal Uncertainty** – Such a sweeping fee faces potential challenges in U.S. courts, since visa policies and fees are typically subject to congressional authority.

This is a reactive measure that fails to address the systemic realities of global competition.

---

## Why International Coordination Matters

A U.S.-only approach risks isolating American competitiveness, while Europe and other regions could act collectively to attract displaced talent. To build resilience and protect innovation leadership, countries must think beyond national boundaries. International coordination could take several forms:

* **Harmonized Talent Visas**: The European Union could expand its Blue Card system into a continent-wide, competitive counterpart to the H-1B.
* **Mobility Agreements**: Multilateral frameworks, similar to the Schengen system, could enable freer movement of researchers between North America, Europe, and Asia.
* **Joint Research Investments**: Coordinated R&D funding would incentivize mobility while ensuring equitable participation across borders.
* **Global Standards**: Agreements on intellectual property, taxation, and labor protections could prevent a “race to the bottom” while encouraging healthy competition.

---

## Smarter Ways to Mitigate the Competitiveness Problem

Instead of blunt measures like exorbitant fees, countries can adopt more efficient strategies:

1. **Targeted Visa Reform** – Prioritize visas by skill level, wage, or industry need, issuing more to fields like AI, biotech, or healthcare while tightening areas prone to abuse.

2. **Domestic Talent Investment** – Strengthen education pipelines by aligning universities with industry needs, expanding STEM programs, and funding apprenticeships. This reduces reliance on foreign talent while preserving competitiveness.

3. **International Collaboration** – Establish talent-sharing agreements that treat skilled migration as a mutual resource rather than a zero-sum contest.

4. **Remote Work and Virtual Mobility** – Adapt immigration and tax frameworks to support cross-border remote work, allowing companies to benefit from global expertise without physical relocation.

5. **Balanced Fee Structures** – If fees are necessary, they should be progressive. Large outsourcing firms could pay higher fees, while startups and research institutions face lower barriers.

6. **Regional Competitiveness Pacts** – The U.S., EU, and allied economies could develop shared standards for visas, research, and worker protections, preventing brain drain from becoming overly concentrated.

7. **Retention of Foreign Students** – Offering automatic work visas for graduates in critical fields would retain talent already educated and integrated into domestic systems.

---

## Policy Recommendations

To move beyond unilateralism, the following steps are recommended:

* **For the U.S.**: Replace flat fees with skill- and wage-based visa reforms, invest in domestic STEM pipelines, and build partnerships with allies to ensure continued access to talent.
* **For Europe**: Expand the EU Blue Card into a unified system, simplify mobility across member states, and proactively position itself as a talent magnet.
* **For the Global Community**: Use multilateral forums such as the G7, G20, and OECD to try to establish fair norms.

---

## Conclusion

Trump’s H-1B fee proposal underscores a common misconception: that competitiveness can be safeguarded by inward-looking, domestic-only policies. In reality, innovation and growth are global in nature. Restricting access to skilled workers in the U.S. may yield short-term political gains, but it risks long-term economic losses by driving talent elsewhere.

A more efficient and forward-looking approach would combine **smart visa reforms, domestic talent investment, international coordination, and new frameworks for remote work and research mobility**. Only by embracing both national responsibility and global collaboration can countries truly protect their competitiveness in an interconnected world.

---

And here is what the AI (Artificial intelligence) from OpenAI called GPT-5 , that is advanced , answered me about my above new paper:

"I’ve gone carefully through your paper. Here’s a detailed analysis of its strengths, contributions, and originality, along with an assessment of whether it’s smart and interesting:

---

### **Strengths**

1. **Clarity and Structure**

* The paper is very well-organized: Introduction -> Analysis of the Problem -> Limitations of Policy -> Proposed Solutions -> Policy Recommendations -> Conclusion.
* Sections are clearly labeled, and the argument flows logically.

2. **Timeliness and Relevance**

* The discussion around H-1B fees is highly topical.
* It addresses global competitiveness, immigration, and talent flows, which are pressing issues in economic and policy circles.

3. **Global Perspective**

* You successfully highlight that competitiveness is not just a domestic issue but a global one.
* The emphasis on Europe, Canada, and Asia as alternative talent destinations adds depth and shows awareness of global dynamics.

4. **Practical Recommendations**

* Your suggestions—like targeted visa reform, international coordination, and supporting remote work—are concrete and actionable.
* You go beyond critique to propose real-world strategies that policymakers could consider.

---

### **Original Contributions / New Insights**

While the general idea that U.S.-only measures are insufficient is somewhat familiar in policy analysis, your paper **adds several original angles**:

1. **Integration of Remote Work into Immigration Policy**

* Discussing cross-border remote work as a way to access global talent is forward-thinking and less commonly highlighted in similar policy papers.

2. **Regional Competitiveness Pacts**

* The concept of multilateral visa and research standards (e.g., U.S., EU, and allied countries agreeing on shared frameworks) is innovative. This moves beyond traditional unilateral reforms toward cooperative competitiveness.

3. **Balanced Fee Structures with Industry Sensitivity**

* Suggesting progressive fees based on company size and type is a nuanced take on visa pricing—more targeted than blanket fees.

4. **Focus on Talent Retention of Foreign Students**

* Emphasizing automatic work visas for graduates in critical fields is an important and pragmatic insight that connects education policy with global competitiveness.

---

### **Areas for Improvement / Strengthening Originality**

1. **Empirical Evidence**

* Including data on how past H-1B fee changes affected U.S. competitiveness, or migration patterns of AI/biotech talent, would make the argument stronger and more persuasive.
* Comparative statistics on EU Blue Card uptake or Canada’s Global Talent Stream could illustrate your points quantitatively.

2. **Case Studies / Examples**

* A few short examples of companies or countries benefiting from international talent cooperation would make your paper more vivid.

3. **Deeper Discussion of Risks**

* While you discuss unintended consequences of unilateral policies, you could elaborate on potential challenges in international coordination (e.g., political friction, enforcement difficulties).

---

### **Overall Assessment**

* **Smartness**: The paper is intellectually sharp—it identifies a common policy misconception and proposes forward-looking solutions.
* **Interesting**: It engages readers because it connects U.S. domestic policy to global trends, with real-world implications for talent, innovation, and competitiveness.
* **New Contributions**: The integration of remote work, regional competitiveness pacts, progressive fees, and student retention policies gives your paper originality. While not a revolutionary theoretical breakthrough, it is **policy-wise innovative and highly relevant**.

---

### **Summary Judgement**

- **Strengths**: Clear, globally-aware, actionable recommendations, novel integration of remote work and regional coordination.
- **Weaknesses**: Could use more data, case studies, and discussion of practical implementation challenges.
- **Contribution**: Provides fresh, practical strategies for international cooperation in talent mobility—a useful addition to policy literature.
- **Takeaway**: It’s smart, interesting, and contributes meaningful, actionable ideas. With empirical examples, it could become a compelling policy brief or publishable commentary.

---"

Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.