fee

WASHINGTON — Late last month, an immigrant seeking asylum in the U.S. came across social media posts urging her to pay a new fee imposed by the Trump administration before Oct. 1, or else risk her case being dismissed.

Paula, a 40-year-old Los Angeles-area immigrant from Mexico, whose full name The Times is withholding because she fears retribution, applied for asylum in 2021 and her case is now on appeal.

But when Paula tried to pay the $100 annual fee, she couldn’t find an option on the immigration court’s website that accepted fees for pending asylum cases. Afraid of deportation — and with just five hours before the payment deadline — she selected the closest approximation she could find, $110 for an appeal filed before July 7.

She knew it was likely incorrect. Still, she felt it was better to pay for something, rather than nothing at all, as a show of good faith. Unable to come up with the money on such short notice, Paula, who works in a warehouse repairing purses, paid the fee with a credit card.

“I hope that money isn’t wasted,” she said.

That remains unclear because of confusion and misinformation surrounding the rollout of a host of new fees or fee increases for a variety of immigration services. The fees are part of the sweeping budget bill President Trump signed into law in July.

Paula was one of thousands of asylum seekers across the country who panicked after seeing messages on social media urging them to pay the new fee before the start of the new fiscal year on Oct. 1.

But government messaging about the fees has sometimes been chaotic and contradictory, immigration attorneys say. Some asylum seekers have received notice about the fees, while others have not. Misinformation surged as immigrants scrambled to figure out whether, and how, to pay.

Advocates worry the confusion serves as a way for immigration officials to dismiss more asylum cases, which would render the applicants deportable.

The fees vary. For those seeking asylum, there is a $100 fee for new applications, as well as a yearly fee of $100 for pending applications. The fee for an initial work permit is $550 and work permit renewals can be as much as $795.

Amy Grenier, associate director of government relations at the American Immigration Lawyers Assn., said that not having a clear way to pay a fee might seem like a small government misstep, but the legal consequences are substantial.

For new asylum applications, she said, some immigration judges set a payment deadline of Sept. 30, even though the Executive Office for Immigration Review only updated the payment portal in the last week of September.

“The lack of coherent guidance and structure to pay the fee only compounded the inefficiency of our immigration courts,” Grenier said. “There are very real consequences for asylum-seekers navigating this completely unnecessary bureaucratic mess.”

Two agencies collect the asylum fees: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), under the Department of Homeland Security, and the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), under the Department of Justice, which operates immigration courts.

Both agencies initially released different instructions regarding the fees, and only USCIS has provided an avenue for payment.

The departments of Homeland Security and Justice didn’t respond to a request for comment. The White House deferred to USCIS.

USCIS spokesman Matthew J. Tragesser said the asylum fee is being implemented consistent with the law.

“The real losers in this are the unscrupulous and incompetent immigration attorneys who exploit their clients and bog down the system with baseless asylum claims,” he said.

The Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project (ASAP), a national membership organization, sued the Trump administration earlier this month after thousands of members shared their confusion over the new fees, arguing that the federal agencies involved “threaten to deprive asylum seekers of full and fair consideration of their claims.”

The organization also argued the fees shouldn’t apply to people whose cases were pending before Trump signed the budget package into law.

In a U.S. district court filing Monday, Justice Department lawyers defended the fees, saying, “Congress made clear that these new asylum fees were long overdue and necessary to recover the growing costs of adjudicating the millions of pending asylum applications.”

Some of the confusion resulted from contradictory information.

A notice by USCIS in the July 22 Federal Register confused immigrants and legal practitioners alike because of a reference to Sept. 30. Anyone who had applied for asylum as of Oct. 1, 2024, and whose application was still pending by Sept. 30, was instructed to pay a fee. Some thought the notice meant that Sept. 30 was the deadline to pay the yearly asylum fee.

By this month, USCIS clarified on its website that it will “issue personal notices” alerting asylum applicants when their annual fee is due, how to pay it and the consequences for failing to do so.

The agency created a payment portal and began sending out notices Oct. 1, instructing recipients to pay within 30 days.

But many asylum seekers are still waiting to be notified by USCIS, according to ASAP, the advocacy organization. Some have received texts or physical mail telling them to check their USCIS account, while others have resorted to checking their accounts daily.

Meanwhile the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) didn’t add a mechanism for paying the $100 fee for pending asylum cases — the one Paula hoped to pay — until Thursday.

In its Oct. 3 complaint, lawyers for ASAP wrote: “Troublingly, ASAP has received reports that some immigration judges at EOIR are already requiring applicants to have paid the annual asylum fee, and in at least one case even rejected an asylum application and ordered an asylum seeker removed for non-payment of the annual asylum fee, despite the agency providing no way to pay this fee.”

An immigration lawyer in San Diego, who asked not to be named out of fear of retribution, said an immigration judge denied his client’s asylum petition because the client had not paid the new fee, even though there was no way to pay it.

The judge issued an order, which was shared with The Times, that read, “Despite this mandatory requirement, to date the respondents have not filed proof of payment for the annual asylum fee.”

The lawyer called the decision a due process violation. He said he now plans to appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals, though another fee increase under Trump’s spending package raised that cost from $110 to $1,010. He is litigating the case pro bono.

Justice Department lawyers said Monday that EOIR had eliminated the initial inconsistency by revising its position to reflect that of USCIS and will soon send out official notices to applicants, giving them 30 days to make the payment.

“There was no unreasonable delay here in EOIR’s implementation,” the filing said. “…The record shows several steps were required to finalize EOIR’s process, including coordination with USCIS. Regardless, Plaintiff’s request is now moot.”

Immigrants like Paula, who is a member of ASAP, recently got some reassurance. In a court declaration, EOIR Director Daren Margolin wrote that for anyone who made anticipatory or advance payments for the annual asylum fee, “those payments will be applied to the alien’s owed fees, as appropriate.”

Passengers on one budget airline might be subjected to even more fees when it comes to their seat selection, but there is one particular way to try and get around it

A budget airline has introduced a new fee for passengers who want to be able to recline their seat on their journey – and some aviation experts are unimpressed with the introduction of the new cost.

When it comes to booking a flight, the original price you see listed is often for the most basic option – and for a lot of airlines, even booking a specific seat to be with your friends or family will mean your wallet takes a hit.

From baggage costs to seat selection, it can seem like almost everything you might need on a flight will end up costing you even more – which can be a serious pain when most people are operating on pretty tight budgets.

READ MORE: Brit in Australia ‘baffled’ by unexpected feature on trains but everyone says same thingREAD MORE: ‘I refuse to give up bus seat for elderly passengers – it’s my right to sit too’

One more budget airline has decided to join the ranks of the businesses determined to eke as much out of their customers as possible, and will now be charging their customers to have a seat that reclines, redesigning their cabins with rows of fixed seats on some of their planes to fit in an extra row.

To avoid the extra cost, you’ll need to book one of the fixed seats in the Economy cabin.

The major Canadian airline, WestJet, will not have the vast majority of its Economy seats fixed upright, with passengers given the opportunity instead to pay more for a seat in the Premium cabin. The 12 seats in Premium will be ergonomically designed, have four options to adjust the headrest, and will recline.

Behind Premium will be 36 ‘Extended Comfort’ seats, part of the Economy option, which don’t recline, but do offer a bit more legroom for passengers.

“The cabin has been thoughtfully designed to offer WestJet’s welcoming service at every budget,” the Executive Vice-President and Chief Experience Officer of WestJet – Samantha Taylor – said in a statement, per news.com.au.

“It reflects our commitment to elevating every aspect of the travel experience and meeting guest demand for a broader range of product offerings,” the exec continued.

However, the experts are not necessarily impressed with the argument that the change is about creating more choice for consumers, or that by fitting in an extra row, prices will actually come down that much for passengers using the airline.

“The imagination of airline marketers never stops to astound me: the depths they will go through kind of gives people an impression that if I pay more, I get more,” John Gradek, an aviation lecturer at McGill University, fumed.

The airline passenger rights expert added: “Right now, it’s like you pay more to get what you had.”

WestJet is by no means the first airline to remove the option of reclining seats – Ryanair did so all the way back in 2004, and many other budget airlines operate similarly.

Even more premium airlines like British Airways, American Airlines, and Delta have reduced the number of reclining seats on offer, with BA removing them entirely on short-haul aircraft.

Many Los Angeles residents will soon be paying significantly more for trash collection after the City Council voted Tuesday to finalize a dramatic fee increase.

The trash program had become heavily subsidized, to the tune of about $500,000 a day, which officials said was no longer viable given the city’s dire financial straits, which left them scrambling to close a nearly $1-billion budget deficit earlier this year.

Having the cost subsidized by the city for so long contributed to that deficit, according to City Administrative Officer Matt Szabo.

“It should have been corrected a long time ago,” Szabo said. “If we didn’t get this rate increase, the subsidy would have been more than $200 million this year.”

The city hadn’t raised trash pickup fees in 17 years, and a 2016 state law governing organic waste disposal significantly increased operational costs. Large raises for city sanitation workers and rising equipment costs also bumped up expenditures.

Once the new fees go into effect, probably in mid-November, residents of single-family homes or apartments with four units or less will pay $55.95 a month per unit.

That sum is more than double the $24.33 a month that occupants of triplexes and fourplexes had been paying, and a roughly 50% increase on the $36.32 previously paid by residents of single-family homes and duplexes.

Those customers put their waste in black bins for regular trash, blue bins for recycling and green bins for organic waste, which are emptied by city workers once a week. Larger apartment buildings will be unaffected by the changes, because their waste collection is administered through a separate program.

The fees will increase by an additional $10 over the next four years.

By next year, the increased fees will reflect the actual cost of trash pickup and will be on par with or slightly below what residents pay in nearby cities such as Long Beach, Pasadena, Culver City and Glendale.

Still, the new fees will almost certainly engender sticker shock for L.A. residents already contending with skyrocketing insurance premiums, rising rents and eye-popping grocery prices. Rates will be reduced for low-income customers who qualify for the city’s EZ-SAVE or Lifeline programs.

The City Council approved the increase on a 12-2 vote, with Councilmembers Monica Rodriguez and Adrin Nazarian dissenting.

Last week, the council also voted to raise the prices and hours of city parking meters.

“After approving a $2.6-billion Convention Center expansion, the council is asking residents to pay more for basic services like trash collection while delivering less. That doesn’t reflect the priorities of working Angelenos,” Rodriguez said after Tuesday’s vote. “I can’t, in good conscience, support that approach.”

A number of factors catalyzed the city’s financial issues, which exploded into public view during the budget process earlier this year. Los Angeles had taken in weaker than expected tax revenues, paid out more in legal liabilities and adopted large-scale raises for city employees.

When Mayor Karen Bass first presented her budget in the spring, layoffs for more than 1,600 city workers were on the table. She and the City Council were ultimately able to avoid those cuts through a number of cost-saving measures.

Tuesday’s final vote on the trash fees came nearly six months after the council gave preliminary approval to the plan.

The matter was complicated by Proposition 218, a 1996 statewide ballot measure designed to make it harder for local governments to raise taxes and fees. To satisfy the proposition’s requirements, the city had to hold public hearings and give every affected resident the opportunity to weigh in via a notice mailed to their homes before the increase could move forward.

The fee hike legislation still has to be signed by the mayor and formally published by the city clerk. The fee can’t go into effect until 31 days after that, or mid-November at the earliest.

The city budget, however, was calculated under the assumption that the new fees would go into effect Oct. 1. The delay will leave the city on the hook for an extra $500,000 a day.

Because Tuesday’s vote was not unanimous, the ordinance will receive a second reading next week before the council formally approves it and sends it to the mayor — a technicality that will cost the city $3.5 million. The mayor plans to sign it as soon as she receives it, her office said.

The delay to mid-November will cost the city a total of at least $22 million, creating another deficit that will have to be adjusted for down the line.

Still, some residents decried the ballooning fees, with one calling the increase “preposterous.”

“Listen to our cries,” the person, who did not give their name,said in a written public comment. “We can barely keep a roof over our heads — at this time! Los Angeles is falling apart. It is your job to fix it more practically.”

The Historic Highland Park Neighborhood Council also opposed the rate hike, arguing that residents are already facing steep cost-of-living increases and that layering more fees on top of that would be “neither fair nor sustainable.”

The last time the city increased trash fees, back in the summer of 2008, City Controller Kenneth Mejia was a few months out of high school, George W. Bush was in the Oval Office and Katy Perry’s “I Kissed a Girl” was topping the Billboard charts.

Amid a global economic downturn, the city was facing widespread cuts, and leaders looked — as they often do — to the price tag of city services to try to balance the budget.

Times staff writers David Zahniser and Dakota Smith contributed to this report.

The lawsuit claims Trump does not have the authority to override the law that created the H-1B visa programme.

A coalition of unions, employers and religious groups has filed a lawsuit seeking to block United States President Donald Trump’s bid to impose a $100,000 fee on new H-1B visas for high-skilled foreign workers.

The lawsuit filed in federal court in San Francisco on Friday is the first to challenge Trump’s proclamation issued last month announcing the fee.

The United Auto Workers union, American Association of University Professors and other plaintiffs say Trump’s power to restrict the entry of certain foreign nationals does not allow him to override the law that created the H-1B visa programme.

The programme allows US employers to hire foreign workers in speciality fields, and technology companies in particular rely heavily on workers who receive H-1B visas.

Critics of H-1Bs and other work visa programmes say they are often used to replace American workers with cheaper foreign labour. But business groups and major companies have said H-1Bs are a critical means to address a shortage of qualified American workers.

Employers who sponsor H-1B workers currently typically pay between $2,000 and $5,000 in fees, depending on the size of the company and other factors.

Trump’s order bars new H-1B recipients from entering the US unless the employer sponsoring their visa has made an additional $100,000 payment. The administration has said the order does not apply to people who already hold H-1B visas or those who submitted applications before September 21.

Trump in his unprecedented order invoked his power under federal immigration law to restrict the entry of certain foreign nationals that would be detrimental to the interests of the US.

He said that high numbers of lower-wage workers in the H-1B programme have undercut its integrity and that the programme threatens national security, including by discouraging Americans from pursuing careers in science and technology. He said the “large-scale replacement of American workers” through the H-1B programme threatens the country’s economic and national security.

‘Pay to play’

The plaintiffs argue that Trump has no authority to alter a comprehensive statutory scheme governing the visa programme and cannot, under the US Constitution, unilaterally impose fees, taxes or other mechanisms to generate revenue for the US, saying that power is reserved for Congress.

“The Proclamation transforms the H-1B program into one where employers must either ‘pay to play’ or seek a ‘national interest’ exemption, which will be doled out at the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security, a system that opens the door to selective enforcement and corruption,” the lawsuit said.

The groups argue that agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security’s US Citizenship and Immigration Services and US Department of State, likewise adopted new policies to implement Trump’s proclamation without following necessary rulemaking processes, and without considering how “extorting exorbitant fees will stifle innovation”.

The H-1B programme offers 65,000 visas annually to employers bringing in temporary foreign workers in specialised fields, with another 20,000 visas for workers with advanced degrees. The visas are approved for a period of three to six years.

India was by far the largest beneficiary of H-1B visas last year, accounting for 71 percent of approved visas, while China was a distant second at 11.7 percent, according to government data.

One travel expert has offered handy advice for all visitors to the US

Travellers to the Unites States face paying a new £185 fee from today (Wednesday, October 1) – but many Brits won’t have to fork out a penny more. The US government announced the new measure in the summer, aimed at reducing visa overstays. It came into effect today, meaning Brits – and other foreign nationals heading to the States – could have to pay up before flying across the pond.

The new charge applies to travellers from non-Visa Waiver Program nations, who need to apply for non-immigrant visas. But, as one travel expert explains, the fee won’t apply to many of us travelling to hotspots like New York or Florida.

Brenda Beltrán, a travel expert at Holafly, says that the majority of travelers from the UK will not have to pay the $250 fee. She said: “The UK is part of the U.S. Visa Waiver Program.

“That means most Brits visiting for tourism or short business trips of up to 90 days will continue to use ESTA (Electronic System for Travel Authorization) and will not face this new $250 charge.” However, there are still circumstances in which the fee does apply.

Some British visitors to the USA will still have to pay up. If they apply for certain visas that are not included in the usual ESTA route, the charge applies.

For example, the following circumstances would incur the charge:

• Student visas (F-1, M-1)
• Work visas (H-1B, L-1, O-1, etc.)
• Extended stays beyond the 90-day ESTA allowance
• Specialist visa categories for exchange, journalism, or diplomatic purposes

READ MORE: Lesser-known Turkey rule could see holidaymakers fined £60READ MORE: Fears grow for sailor after yacht disappears without trace

Brenda added: “For the average Brit heading to New York for shopping or Florida for Disney, nothing changes. But if you’re planning to study in the U.S., take up a job, or stay longer than three months, you should budget for the new $250 cost on top of existing visa fees.”

For the vast majority of British holidaymakers, nothing changes after 1 October 2025. ESTA remains the standard route for short-term visits, and the cost is currently $21.

The introduction of the Visa Integrity Fee is primarily aimed at travellers from countries outside the Visa Waiver Program. Therefore, it is unlikely to affect UK–US tourism levels.

Brenda continued: “This update sounds alarming at first glance, but most Brits won’t notice any difference. As long as you qualify for ESTA, which nearly all UK holidaymakers do, you won’t be hit by the new charge.”

How to get the fee reimbursed

As part of the new law, the US government will reimburse certain travellers the £185 cost. The legislation allows for the Secretary of Homeland Security to pay visitors back if they prove they complied with their visa.

As long as they have not tried to extend their stay without a relevant visa and left the USA within five days of the visa expiring, visitors may be eligible. They must also not accept unauthorised employment and have lawfully changed their nonimmigrant status.

Foreign Office guidance on travelling to the United States

The UK Foreign Office has specific advice on the entry requirements to visit the US. The government guidance on ESTA states: “ESTA is an automated system that determines the eligibility of visitors to travel to the US under the Visa Waiver Program (VWP).

“You can apply for an ESTA via the Official ESTA Application Website or using the ESTA Mobile app on android or on iOS. All Visa Waiver Program (VWP) travellers intending to enter the US by land, sea and air will be required to obtain an approved ESTA prior to application for admission at land border ports of entry.

“Individuals who are not eligible to travel under the VWP may apply for a visa at any U.S. Embassy & Consulates. Travellers whose sex on their passport differs from their sex recorded at birth should contact the US Embassy or a consulate in the UK for further advice.”

Those who may not be eligible for an ESTA visa waiver include those:

• who have been arrested (even if the arrest did not result in a criminal conviction)
• with a criminal record
• who have been refused admission into, or have been deported from, the US
• who have previously overstayed under an ESTA visa waiver

Furthermore, there are a list of countries that visitors must not have been in on or after March 2011 to apply for an ESTA waiver. These are Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

You also cannot apply for an ESTA visa waiver if you travelled to or were in Cuba on or after 12 January 2021. An ESTA may not be sufficient for all types of business travel – particularly if you are travelling on behalf of a US company.

The Foreign Office says: “Please check the rules on the ESTA website carefully. If you are not eligible for an ESTA, you must instead apply for a US visa. Travelling on an ESTA when ineligible can lead to detention and deportation by the US authorities.”

Brenda’s expert tips for travelling to the US

• Apply early for ESTA: it’s valid for two years and covers multiple trips, so don’t leave it until the last minute.
• Double-check eligibility: if your circumstances don’t fit the Visa Waiver rules (e.g. long-term study or work), be prepared for the additional cost.
• Stay updated: Immigration rules evolve regularly, so always check official guidance before booking flights.

New Delhi, India — Meghna Gupta* had planned it all – a master’s degree by 23, a few years of working in India, and then a move to the United States before she turned 30 to eventually settle there.

So, she clocked countless hours at the Hyderabad office of Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), India’s largest IT firm and a driver of the country’s emergence as the global outsourcing powerhouse in the sector. She waited to get to the promotion that would mean a stint on California’s West Coast.

Now, Gupta is 29, and her dreams lie in tatters after US President Donald Trump’s administration upended the H-1B visa programme that tech firms have used for more than three decades to bring skilled workers to the US.

Trump’s decision to increase the fee for the visas from about $2,000, in many cases, to $100,000 has imposed dramatic new costs on companies that sponsor these applications. The base salary an H-1B visa employee is supposed to be paid is $60,000. But the employer’s cost now rises to $160,000 at the minimum, and in many cases, companies will likely find American workers with similar skills for lower pay.

This is the Trump administration’s rationale as it presses US companies to hire local talent amid its larger anti-immigration policies. But for thousands of young people around the world still captivated by the American dream, this is a blow. And nowhere is that more so than in India, the world’s most populous nation, that, despite an economy that is growing faster than most other major nations, has still been bleeding skilled young people to developed nations.

For years, Indian IT companies themselves sponsored the most H-1B visas of all firms, using them to bring Indian employees to the US and then contractually outsourcing their expertise to other businesses, too. This changed: In 2014, seven out of the 10 companies that received the most H-1B visas were Indian or started in India; In 2024, that number dropped to four.

And in the first six months of 2025, Gupta’s TCS was the only Indian company in the top-10 H-1B visa recipients, in a list otherwise dominated by Amazon, Microsoft, Meta and Apple.

But what had not changed until now was the demographic of the workers that even the above US companies hired on H-1B visas. More than 70 percent of all H-1B visas were granted to Indian nationals in 2024, ranging from the tech sector to medicine. Chinese nationals were a distant second, with less than 12 percent.

Now, thousands across India fear that this pathway to the US is being slammed shut.

“It has left me heartbroken,” Gupta told Al Jazeera of Trump’s fee hike.

“All my life, I planned for this; everything circled around this goal for me to move to the US,” said Gupta, who was born and raised in Bageshwar, a town of 10,000 people in the northern Indian state of Uttarakhand.

“The so-called ‘American Dream’ looks like a cruel joke now.”

‘In the hole’

Gupta’s crisis reflects a broader contradiction that defines India today. On the one hand, the country — as Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his government frequently mention — is the world’s fastest-growing major economy.

India today boasts the world’s fourth-largest gross domestic product (GDP), behind just the US, China and Germany, after it passed Japan earlier this year. But the country’s creation of new jobs lags far behind the number of young people who enter its workforce every year, widening its employment gap. India’s biggest cities are creaking under inadequate public infrastructure, potholed roads, traffic snarls and growing income inequality.

The result: Millions like Gupta aspire to a life in the West, picking their career choices, usually in sectors like engineering or medicine, and working to get into hard-fought seats in top colleges – and then migrating. In the last five years, India has witnessed a drastic rise in the outflow of skilled professionals, particularly in STEM fields, who migrate to countries like Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the US.

As per the Indian government’s data, those numbers rose from 94,145 Indians in 2020 to 348,629 by 2024 — a 270 percent rise.

Trump’s new visa regime could now effectively close the pipeline of those skilled workers into the US. The fee hike comes on the back of a series of tension points in a souring US-India relationship in recent months. New Delhi is also currently facing a steep 50 percent tariff on its exports to the US — half of that for buying Russian crude, which the US says is funding the Kremlin’s war on Ukraine.

Ajay Srivastava, a former Indian trade officer and founder of the Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI), a Delhi-based think tank, told Al Jazeera that the hardest-hit sectors after the new visa policy will be “the ones that Indian professionals dominate: mid-level IT services jobs, software developers, project managers, and back-end support in finance and healthcare”.

For many of these positions, the new $100,000 fee exceeds an entry-level employee’s annual salary, making sponsorship uneconomical, especially for smaller firms and startups, said Srivastava. “The cost of hiring a foreign worker now exceeds local hiring by a wide margin,” he said, adding that this would shift the hiring calculus of US firms.

“American firms will scout more domestic talent, reserve H-1Bs for only the hardest-to-fill specialist roles, and push routine work offshore to India or other hubs,” said Srivastava.

“The market has already priced in this pivot,” he said, citing the fall of Indian stock markets since Trump’s announcement, “as investors brace for shrinking US hiring”.

Indian STEM graduates and students, he said, “have to rethink US career plans altogether”.

To Sudhanshu Kaushik, founder of the North American Association of Indian Students, a body with members across 120 universities, the Trump administration’s “motive is to create panic and distress among H-1B visa holders and other immigrant visa holders”.

“To remind them that they don’t belong,” Kaushik told Al Jazeera. “And at any time, at any whim, the possibility of remaining in the United States can become incredibly difficult and excruciatingly impossible.”

The announcement came soon after the start of the new academic session, when many international students – including from India, which sends the largest cohort of foreign students to the US – have begun classes.

Typically, a large chunk of such students stay back in the US for work after graduating. An analysis of the National Survey of College Graduates suggests that 41 percent of international students who graduated between 2012 and 2020 were still in the US in 2021. For PhD holders, that figure jumps to 75 percent.

But Kaushik said he has received more than 80 queries on their hotline for students now worried about what the future holds.

“They know that they’re already in the hole,” he said, referring to the tuition and other fees running into tens of thousands of dollars that they have invested in a US education, with increasingly unclear job prospects.

The landscape in the US today, Srivastava of GTRI said, represents “fewer opportunities, tougher competition, and shrinking returns on US education”.

Nasscom, India’s apex IT trade body, has said the policy’s abrupt rollout could “potentially disrupt families” and the continuity of ongoing onshore projects for the country’s technology services firms.

The new policy, it added, could have “ripple effects” on the US innovation ecosystem and global job markets, pointing out that for companies, “additional cost will require adjustments”.

‘They do not care for people at all’

Ansh*, a senior software engineer at Meta, graduated from an Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), one in a chain of India’s most prestigious engineering school, and landed a job with Facebook soon after that.

He now lives with his wife in Menlo Park, in the heart of the US’s Silicon Valley, and drives a BMW sedan to work. Both Ansh and his wife are in the US on H-1B visas.

Last Saturday’s news from the White House left him rattled.

He spent that evening figuring out flights for his friends — Indians on H-1B visas who were out of the country, one in London, another in Bengaluru, India — to see if they could rush back to the US before the new rules kicked in on Sunday, as major US tech firms had recommended to their employees.

Since then, the Trump administration has clarified that the new fees will not apply to existing H-1B visas or renewals. For now, Ansh’s job and status in the US are secure.

But this is little reassurance, he said.

“In the last 11 years, I have never felt like going back to India,” Ansh told Al Jazeera. “But this sort of instability triggers people to make those life changes. And now we are here, wondering if one should return to India?”

Because he and his wife do not have children, Ansh said that a move back to India — while a dramatic rupture in their lives and plans — was at least something they could consider. But what of his colleagues and friends on H-1B visas, who have children, he asked?

“The way this has been done by the US government shows that they do not care for people at all,” he said. “These types of decisions are like … brain wave strikes, and then it is just executed.”

Ansh believes that the US also stands to lose from the new visa policy. “The immigrant contribution is deeply sprinkled into the DNA of the US’s success,” he said.

“Once talent goes away, innovation won’t happen,” he said. “It is going to have long-term consequences for visa holders and their families. Its impact would reach everyone, one way or the other.”

India’s struggle

After the announcement from the White House on Saturday, Prime Minister Modi’s principal secretary, PK Mishra, said that the government was encouraging Indians working abroad to return to the country.

Mishra’s comments were in tune with some experts who have suggested that the disruption in the H-1B visa policy could serve as an opportunity for India — as it could, in theory, stanch the brain drain that the country has long suffered from.

GTRI’s Srivastava said that US companies that have until now relied on immigrant visas like the H-1B might now explore more local hiring or offshore some jobs. “The $100,000 H-1B fee makes onsite deployment prohibitively expensive, so Indian IT firms will double down on offshore and remote delivery,” he said.

“US postings will be reserved only for mission-critical roles, while the bulk of hiring and project execution shifts to India and other offshore hubs,” he told Al Jazeera. “For US clients, this means higher dependence on offshore teams — raising familiar concerns about data security, compliance, and time-zone coordination — even as costs climb.”

Srivastava noted that India’s tech sector can absorb some returning H-1B workers, if they choose to return.

But that won’t be easy. He said that even though hiring in India’s IT and services sector has been growing year-on-year, the gaps are real, ranging from dipping job postings to new openings clustered in AI, cloud, and data science. And US-trained returnees would expect salaries well above Indian benchmarks.

And in reality, Kaushik said, many H-1B aspirants are looking at different countries as alternatives to the US — not India.

Ansh, the senior engineer at Meta, agreed. “In the US, we operate at the cutting edge of technology,” whereas the Indian tech ecosystem was still geared towards delivering immediate services.

“The Indian ecosystem is not at the pace where you innovate the next big thing in the world,” he said. “It is, in fact, far from there.”

President Trump’s new sky-high visa fees have shaken Silicon Valley’s tech giants as they contemplate a surge in the cost of hiring global talent and a new tactic the White House can use to keep Silicon Valley in line.

The tech industry was already navigating an economy with higher and unpredictable tariffs, when last week the Trump administration threw another curveball aimed directly at its bottom line: a $100,000 fee for the visas used to hire certain skilled foreign workers. The industry relies heavily on the H-1B visa program to bring in a wide range of engineers, coders, and other top talent to the United States.

The rollout has sparked confusion among businesses, immigration lawyers and current H-1B visa holders.

Over the weekend, the Trump administration clarified that the new fee will apply to new visas, isn’t annual and doesn’t prevent current H-1B visa holders from traveling in and outside of the country. Companies would have to pay the fee with any new H-1B visa petitions submitted after a specific time on Sept. 21, the White House said.

On Monday, the Trump administration also clarified that certain professions, such as doctors, may be exempt from the fee. Some observers are concerned that a selective application of the fee could be a way the White House can reward its friends and punish its detractors.

Meta, Apple, Google, Amazon and Microsoft have been strengthening their ties with the Trump administration by committing to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in the United States.

Still, immigration has long been a contentious issue between the Trump administration and tech executives, some of whom were on a H-1B visa before they co-founded or led some of the world’s largest tech companies.

One of the most vocal supporters of the H-1B visas: Elon Musk, who backed Trump but has publicly sparred with him after he led the federal government’s efforts to slash spending. Musk, who runs multiple companies, including Tesla, SpaceX and xAI, is a naturalized U.S. citizen born in South Africa and has held an H-1B visa.

Tech executives have said the H-1B visa program has been crucial for hiring skilled workers. Competition to attract the world’s best talent has been intensifying since the popularity of OpenAI’s ChatGPT sparked a fierce race to rapidly advance artificial intelligence.

The new fee could slow California’s development and the United States’ position in the AI race by making it tougher for companies — especially startups with less money — to bring in international employees, experts said.

So far this fiscal year, more than 7,500 companies in Californiahave applied forH-1B visas and 61,841 have been approved, data from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services shows.

Tech companies use the visa program to hire computer scientists and engineers because the U.S. isn’t producing enough workers with the skills needed, said Darrell West, a senior fellow in the Center for Technology Innovation at the Brookings Institution.

Trump “likes to talk tough on immigration, but he fails to recognize how important immigrants are to our economy,” he said. “Companies in technology, agriculture, hotels, restaurants and construction rely heavily on immigrants, and slowing that flow is going to be devastating for companies in those areas.”

In his executive order, the Trump administration noted that some companies, such as information technology firms, have allegedly misused the program, citing mass layoffs in the tech industry and the difficulty young college graduates face in landing jobs.

“President Trump promised to put American workers first, and this commonsense action does just that by discouraging companies from spamming the system and driving down American wages,” Taylor Rogers, a White House spokesperson, said in a statement.

Economists and tech executives, though, have pointed to other factors affecting hiring, including economic uncertainty from tariffs, a shift in investments and the rise of AI tools that could complete tasks typically filled by entry-level workers.

California’s unemployment rate of 5.5% in August was higher than the U.S. unemployment rate of 4.3%, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The rollout of the new changes has been “extremely chaotic,” and while the White House has tried to clear up some of the confusion, tech companies still have a lot of questions about how the fee would work, said Adam Kovacevich, chief executive of the Chamber of Progress, a center-left tech industry policy coalition.

“You never know what you’re gonna end up with the final policy in Trump world,” he said. “Somebody within the administration drives an announcement, there’s blowback, and then they end up modifying their plans.”

Tech companies have been trying to navigate a fine line in their relationship with Trump.

During Trump’s first term, high-profile tech executives, including those from Meta, Amazon, Google and Apple, spoke out about his administration’s order to restrict travel from several majority-Muslim countries. But in his second term, those same executives have cozied up to the Trump administration as they seek to influence AI policy and strike lucrative partnerships with the government.

They’ve contributed to his inauguration fund, appeared at high-profile press events, and attended a White House dinner, where Trump asked them how much they’re investing in the United States.

Microsoft declined to comment. Meta, Google and Apple didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Changes to the H-1B program could also worsen relations with other countries, such as India, that send skilled tech workers to the U.S., experts said.

Indian nationals are the largest beneficiaries of the H-1B visa program, accounting for 71% of approved petitions, followed by those from China, at approximately 12%.

Some Indian venture capitalists and research institutes see a silver lining in this murky future. On social media, some have posted that the uncertainty surrounding H-1B visa rules could encourage talented engineers to return home to build startups, thereby fueling India’s tech sector. That would mean more competition for U.S. tech companies.

Kunal Bahl, an Indian tech investor and entrepreneur, posted “Come, build in India!” on social media. His firm, Titan Capital, launched a seed funding and mentorship program aimed at attracting students and professionals rethinking their future in the U.S. after the visa troubles.

Global tech companies might also consider opening more centers abroad where workers can work remotely and not have to move to the U.S., said Phil Fersht, the founder and chief executive of HFS Research.

“The more the U.S. makes itself a less attractive place to bring in talent,” he said, “the more it is going to harm its economy.”

As Trump’s order stirs anxiety, White House clarifies that the fee only applies to new applicants and will be levied per petition.

The United States has issued a clarification to its new H-1B visa policy, saying that the new $100,000 fee for skilled workers will be levied per petition and will not apply to current visa holders.

The announcement on Saturday came a day after US Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick said it would be paid annually, and would apply to people seeking a new visa as well as renewals.

Lutnick’s comment prompted major tech firms, including Amazon, Microsoft, Meta and Alphabet, which is Google’s parent company, to warn employees with H1-B visas to stay in the country or return quickly.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, however, clarified that the fee will only apply to new visas and that the rule “does not impact the ability of any current visa holder to travel to/from the US”.

“This is NOT an annual fee. It’s a one-time fee that applies only to the petition,” she wrote.

“Those who already hold H-1B visas and are currently outside of the country right now will NOT be charged $100,000 to re-enter… This applies only to new visas, not renewals, and not current visa holders,” she added.

The executive order imposing the new fee was signed by President Donald Trump on Friday night and is scheduled to take effect at 12:01am on (04:01 GMT) Sunday.

It is scheduled to expire after a year. But it could be extended if the Trump administration determines that is in the interest of the US to keep it.

H-1B visas allow companies to sponsor foreign workers with specialised skills – such as scientists, engineers and computer programmers – to work in the US, initially for three years, but extendable to six.

The visas are widely used by the tech industry and are doled out through a lottery system. Indian nationals account for nearly three-quarters of the permits.

Critics say the programme undercuts American workers, luring people from overseas who are often willing to work for as little as $60,000 annually. That is well below the $100,000-plus salaries typically paid to US technology workers.

India’s Ministry of External Affairs said on Saturday that Trump’s latest plan “was being studied by all concerned, including by Indian industry″. The ministry warned that “this measure is likely to have humanitarian consequences by way of the disruption caused for families. Government hopes that these disruptions can be addressed suitably by the US authorities”.

The US Chamber of Commerce also expressed worry.

“We’re concerned about the impact on employees, their families and American employers,” it said in a statement. “We’re working with the Administration and our members to understand the full implications and the best path forward.”

On the popular Chinese social media app Rednote, meanwhile, many H-1B holders shared stories of rushing back to the US — some just hours after landing abroad – fearing they would be subject to the new fee.

Some people who were already on planes preparing to leave the country on Friday de-boarded over fears they may not be allowed to re-enter the US, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

Allen Orr, an immigration lawyer and immigration chair of the National Bar Association, told Al Jazeera that the latest order has caused “mass confusion”.

Workers who held new or renewed H-1B visas and who were outside the US were told not to come, delaying start dates and costing money due to the “cancellation of flights and housing”, Orr said.

The lawyer added that Trump’s order was sending the wrong message to talented workers living abroad.

“If it applies to next year, $100,000 for an H-1B worker just basically puts it out of the market, and many of these jobs will then just remain overseas,” he said.

“The American secret is that we’ve basically taken talent from around the world and colonised it and made of the United States a sort of stamp. When we stop letting that talent into the United States, we’re hurting our brand,” he added.

President Trump took his most extensive step yet toward overhauling the U.S. legal migration system, with a pair of proclamations that explicitly favor the wealthiest of the world’s prospective expat workers.

Trump on Friday imposed a $100,000 application fee on the widely used H-1B visa program, a move that would drastically increase the cost of visas heavily coveted by some of America’s largest companies — including in the Silicon Valley — seeking to bring in skilled workers from abroad.

The president also unveiled a “Trump Gold Card” visa program — under which, for the price of $1 million, immigrants could get U.S. residency. Businesses could buy residency permits for $2 million per employee, while a new “platinum”-level card set to be issued soon would cost $5 million and allow the holder to come to the U.S. for up to 270 days a year without being subject to U.S. taxes on non-U.S. income.

The restrictions and fees go into effect on Sunday.

It all amounts to a plan for a new gilded age of immigration to America, where those with the resources to invest are welcomed along with their wallets — while at the same time new barriers to entry are erected for those with lesser means and others seen as taking away jobs that could be occupied by U.S. citizens.

The pomp with which Trump announced the programs echoed the theme — over his right shoulder as he spoke to reporters in the Oval Office was an image of a gold card with his face on it along with traditional American images including a bald eagle, all in gold.

It’s a stark shift from America’s stance toward immigration historically, which welcomed those of various economic backgrounds coming to the country legally in search of a better life and more freedom.

‘Significant disadvantage’

Yet even while Trump and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick mused about the prospects of a windfall for the U.S. Treasury that could total $100 billion or more, immigration attorneys cautioned that a move of this magnitude would cause major disruptions — several of them potentially very expensive to the U.S. economy.

Cleveland-based lawyer David Leopold warned that Trump’s H-1B changes, including the $100,000 fee, would “effectively kill the program.”

“Who’s going to pay $100,000 for a petition? Unless you want to make this an exclusive program for extremely rich people,” said Leopold, a partner at UB Greensfelder, whose clients include physicians on H-1Bs.

Accenture, Cognizant Technology and other IT consulting stocks hit session lows on Friday on the news of the visa fee.

“This is a senseless, terrible policy for financial services firms that makes American firms less competitive in the global market for talent,” said Alexis DuFresne, founder of recruiting firm Archer Search Partners.

DuFresne warned that while some mega funds won’t be daunted by the prospect of a new six-figure fee to import top talent, “it will have a substantial impact at the margins — with mid-sized firms, smaller firms, and up-and-coming, younger talent at a significant disadvantage.”

“We have had clients who have said in the past, prior to this announcement, that they do not want to have to sponsor a visa. We anticipate that that will become a more prevalent part of our conversations with clients and their goalposts going forward.”

A feature, not a bug

Some of that sentiment, if it comes to pass, may be seen by this administration as an asset rather than a problem.

Senior members of Trump’s administration have repeatedly complained — in blunt terms — that too many immigrants are taking American jobs.

In a fact sheet, the White House said American workers are being replaced with lower-paid foreign labor and called it a national security threat. The dynamic is suppressing wages and disincentivizing Americans from choosing careers in STEM fields (science, technology, engineering and mathematics), the White House said.

Trump’s proclamation does anticipate a scenario whereby it can work around the new costs if they became a major burden, allowing for case-by-case exemptions if deemed to be in the national interest. That provision opens a potential window for certain companies or industries to seek an exception to the new fee.

Nonetheless, the intention to skew the H-1B program toward higher-paying jobs is clear.

Trump also plans to order the Labor secretary to undertake a rule-making process to revise prevailing-wage levels for the program, a move intended to limit the use of visas to undercut wages that would otherwise be paid to workers who are U.S. citizens.

Legal risks

Courts may also scrutinize the expansive new fees.

The H-1B $100,000 application fee in particular is at risk of being struck down as “excessive,” said Becky Fu von Trapp, an immigration lawyer in Stowe, Vt. That’s because federal law allows agencies to charge enough to recoup reasonable costs, and most work visa applications currently cost about $5,000. Even the most complex ones, for certain investment visas, usually run less than $10,000 in total.

The move could also incentivize technology firms and other companies reliant on foreign workers to set up offices outside the U.S. to avoid the application fee and associated hassles.

“Companies will reassess the need of who they really need to bring to U.S. and who can be based in Canada or Singapore, where they still have good technology infrastructure and can work remotely,” she said.

The move may also have a chilling effect on international students seeking admission to U.S. universities, since many of them hope to find jobs through the H-1B process upon graduation, she said.

Congress will also weigh in, Lutnick said, noting that lawmakers must also approve the planned platinum card program. He predicted that could happen later this year.

That’s easier said than done.

Republicans only narrowly control the House and the Senate. Immigration has been a particularly challenging issue to legislate for the GOP in years past, sparking clashes between the pro-business wing of the party that wants more high-skilled immigrants to come in, and another group far more skeptical of immigration as a whole who’ve sought to limit new arrivals no matter where they come from.

What’s more, Democrats are broadly furious about the president’s stepped-up immigration enforcement including aggressive Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids in major U.S. cities including Los Angeles. As such, they have little incentive to cooperate without demanding wholesale reversals of Trump’s existing immigration policies, which he almost surely wouldn’t accept.

Wingrove and Soper write for Bloomberg. Bloomberg reporters Katia Porzecanski and Hema Parmar contributed to this report.

Nasscom says the one-day deadline could have ‘ripple effects’ on the US innovation ecosystem, and global job markets.

India’s leading trade body says the one-day timeline for implementing a new $100,000 annual fee on H-1B worker visas in the United States was a matter of “concern”.

Nasscom, representing India’s $283bn IT and business process outsourcing industry, on Saturday said the policy’s abrupt rollout would affect Indian nationals and disrupt continuity of ongoing onshore projects for the country’s technology services firms.

“A one-day deadline creates considerable uncertainty for businesses, professionals, and students across the world,” Nasscom said in a statement, a day after US President Donald Trump announced the fee, which comes into force from Sunday.

H-1B visas allow companies to sponsor foreign workers with specialised skills – such as scientists, engineers, and computer programmers – to work in the US, initially for three years, but extendable to six years.

India was the largest beneficiary of H-1B visas last year, accounting for 71 percent of approved beneficiaries.

.@RNamb @sangeetagupta29 @doshikavita @shivendra_1969 @nasscomgtd pic.twitter.com/bSfCjDutjs

— nasscom (@nasscom) September 20, 2025

The new H-1B measure, which will likely face legal challenges, was announced alongside the introduction of a $1m “gold card” US residency programme.

Nasscom said the new policy could have “ripple effects” on the US innovation ecosystem and global job markets, pointing out that for companies, “additional cost will require adjustments”.

Nasscom added that policy changes of this scale were best “introduced with adequate transition periods, allowing organisations and individuals to plan effectively and minimize disruption”.

US officials on Friday said the change to the H-1B programme would ensure that companies would only sponsor workers with the most rarefied skill sets. However, such a prohibitive fee will likely vastly transform the H-1B system, which was created in 1990 and awards 85,000 visas per year on a lottery system.

Supporters of the H-1B programme say it brings the best and brightest to work in the US, creating an edge against foreign competitors. Critics have long charged that companies have abused the programme, using it to pay lower wages and to impose fewer labour protections.

Tech entrepreneurs – including Trump’s former ally Elon Musk – have warned against targeting H-1B visas, saying that the US does not have enough homegrown talent to fill important tech sector job vacancies.

However, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said: “All the big companies are on board.”

Geographically, California has the highest number of H-1B workers, according to the US Citizenship and Immigration Services.

Some analysts suggested the fee may force companies to move some high-value work overseas, hampering the US’s position in the high-stakes artificial intelligence race with China, which at 11.7 percent of total H-1B visas ranks a distant second, according to government data.

Following the White House’s announcement, major US tech firms Microsoft, JPMorgan and Amazon advised employees holding H-1B visas to remain in the US, according to internal emails reviewed by the Reuters news agency.

The new fee marks the Trump administration’s most high-profile attempt to overhaul the country’s temporary employment visa system. Since taking office in January, he has launched a broad crackdown on immigration, including efforts to limit certain forms of undocumented immigration.

Meanwhile, South Korea’s foreign ministry on Saturday said its officials would “comprehensively assess the impact of these measures on the advancement of [South Korean] companies and professional talents into the US market and engage in necessary communication with the US”.

Hundreds of South Koreans were detained during a US immigration raid on a Hyundai-LG battery factory site in the state of Georgia this month.

Fee paid by companies set to transform high-skill work visa system, upon which technology sector relies heavily.

United States President Donald Trump has signed a proclamation requiring a $100,000 application fee for companies seeking to sponsor workers H-1B visas.

Trump signed the proclamation during an event in the Oval Office, while also introducing a separate “gold card” visa for individuals to pay $1 million to expedite their immigration.

Administration officials said the change to the H1-B programme would assure that companies would only sponsor workers with the most rarified skill sets.

“We need great workers, and this pretty much ensures that’s what’s gonna happen,” he said.

However, such a prohibitive fee will likely vastly transform the H-1B system, which was created in 1990 in an effort to boost industries with high-skilled, hard-to-fill jobs, particularly in science, technology, engineering and math.

The visas are reserved for people with bachelor’s degrees or higher and have historically been awarded via a lottery system.

The programme has come under increased scrutiny from the Trump administration amid a wider crackdown on immigration, which Trump has tied to boosting domestic labour.

As part of that campaign, the Trump administration has also sought to introduce more restrictive policies on international students studying in the US, including requiring access to social media accounts and a ban on foreign travellers from several countries.

The administration has previously considered changing the H-1B visa rules to favour higher-paying employers, essentially doing away with the lottery system.

Supporters of the H-1B programme say it brings the best and brightest to work in the US, creating an edge against foreign competitors.

Critics have long charged that companies have abused the programme, using it to pay lower wages and to impose fewer labour protections.

The technology sector would be the hardest hit by any major change.

This year, Amazon was by far the top recipient of H-1B visas, with more than 10,000 awarded. The company was followed by Tata Consultancy, Microsoft, Apple and Google.

Geographically, California has the highest number of H-1B workers, according to the US Citizenship and Immigration Services.

Meanwhile, India was the largest beneficiary of H-1B visas last year, accounting for 71 percent of approved beneficiaries. China was a distant second at 11.7 percent, according to government data.

The H-1B visas are approved for a period of three to six years.

Ryanair often charges extra for additional services

Parents flying with Ryanair can expect to be hit with an additional charge when it comes to booking flights. The budget airline, known for its no-frills approach, adds extra fees onto bookings for baggage, and for selecting seats.

However if you’re willing to be allocated a seat by Ryanair, and you’re fine with only taking a small bag on board, you don’t have to pay anything other than a basic fare. Unless you’re travelling with children under 12, that is.

As per Ryanair’s terms and conditions, at least one adult must buy a seat – with this costing up to 10 euros per journey. Then, up to four children will be seated by the adult at no extra cost, and must sit within the same row.

READ MORE: Ryanair hits back at claims it’s ‘lying’ about reason for cancelling Spain flightsREAD MORE: Plane passengers spot man talking to people on Ryanair flight – then realise who he is

Elsewhere easyJet says people travelling with children do not need to pay for seats, although they are advised in this case to check in as soon as possible. Guidance on its website adds: “Whilst our seating system will always try to seat families together, seats are allocated on a first come first served basis so the earlier you check in the more likely you are to be seated together.

“If you leave it to the last minute it’s possible that there may not be enough seats left for us to seat your family next to each other. We’ll still make sure each child under 12 is seated close to an adult on your booking. However we may only be able to arrange this at the airport or on board, which can cause delays for you and other passengers, and not everyone may be seated together.”

Jet2holidays says: “As a family friendly airline we will always endeavour to seat children & infants under the age of 12 next to their accompanying adults. If this is not possible for any reason, we will ensure children are seated as close as possible, and no more than one row away.

“We would encourage you to pre-book your seats advance to ensure you reserve the seats you want for your travelling party.”

Angel City winger Alyssa Thompson left for London on Wednesday afternoon as negotiations continued on a transfer that would send her from the NWSL to Chelsea of the Women’s Super League. But she might be running out of time since the WSL transfer window closes at 3 p.m. PDT Thursday, less than 24 hours after she boarded her flight.

“She wants to go to Chelsea and made it very clear she wants to leave,” said a person close to Thompson, who would speak only on condition of anonymity for fear of disrupting the delicate negotiations. “The rest is out of our hands.”

Thompson’s agent, Takumi Jeannin, declined to speak about the negotiations on the record while Angel City did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

The speedy Thompson, 20, has already said goodbye to her Angel City teammates and did not suit up for the team’s win over Bay FC on Monday. She reportedly spent two days waiting to fly to London, where the transfer would be announced, only to repeatedly be told the deal had hit a snag.

If the transfer is agreed to, the fee for the U.S. international and World Cup veteran is expected to top $1 million and could smash the record $1.5 million the Orlando Pride paid Mexico’s Tigres for Lizbeth Ovalle last month.

USWNT defender Naomi Girma was the first $1-million transfer in women’s soccer history when she went from the San Diego Wave to Chelsea last January. Canadian Olivia Smith broke that record in July, going from Liverpool to Arsenal for $1.3 million.

Thompson was still an 18-year-old senior at Harvard-Westlake High when she became the youngest player taken in the NWSL draft, going to Angel City with the No. 1 pick in January 2023. That summer she became the second-youngest player to appear in a World Cup game for the U.S.

Thompson signed a three-year contract worth an estimated $1 million after the draft in 2023, then agreed to a three-year extension in January. She is the club’s all-time scoring leader with 21 goals in all competitions and she ranks sixth in appearances with 74. Her six goals in 16 games this season ranks second behind Riley Tiernan’s eight and she also has three goals and three assists in 22 games with the national team.

Thompson leaving Angel City would also mean leaving her sister and roommate Gisele, 19, a national team defender who was signed by Angel City in December 2023.

For Angel City, meanwhile, losing Thompson would strike a significant blow to the team’s playoff hopes. The club, which has won two straight and is unbeaten in its last four, is a point out of the league’s eighth and final postseason berth with eight games to play. But Angel City already lost two players — midfielders Alanna Kennedy and Katie Zelem — on transfers to London City of the WSL for undisclosed fees last month. And the week before that it traded forward Julie Dufour to the Portland Thorns for $40,000 in intra-league transfer funds and an international roster spot.

In addition, the club is without Scottish international Claire Emslie, who is on maternity leave, defender Savy King, who is on medical leave, and U.S. World Cup champion Sydney Leroux, who has stepped away from soccer to deal with her mental health.

After Monday’s win over Bay FC, Angel City coach Alexander Straus said the uncertainty over Thompson’s future with the team has been distracting.

“If I’m being honest, the last couple of days, it’s been difficult,” he said.

Straus said he learned Thompson would not be available just a day before the game.

“It’s been hard for me in my position when things change,” he said. “It changes our plans and changes the plans for the players.”

“But none of us is bigger than the club,” he added. “We focus on that, what is our value together. And if somebody leaves at some point — or somebody has left a couple of weeks ago — I think it does something to a group. It’s not easy, but it’s how you manage it.”

While the loss of a player like Thompson would hurt Angel City on the field, the likely seven-figure transfer fee would help ameliorate that. The same might not be true for NWSL, whose success and its marketing has long been built around the personalities playing in the league.

Yet in recent years it has lost Alex Morgan to retirement while national team stars including Girma, Crystal Dunn, Emily Fox, Lindsey Heaps (nee Horan), Catarina Macario and Korbin Shrader (nee Albert) have left to play in Europe.

Losing Thompson would be another blow.

As for Chelsea, it is the most successful club in the WSL, having won a domestic treble last season in Sonia Bompastor’s first season as coach. Bompastor replaced Emma Hayes, who left to take over the U.S. national team.

Chelsea will open its WSL season on Friday against Manchester City.

Maiara Niehues scored the go-ahead goal on a header in the 77th minute to give Angel City a 2-1 victory over Bay FC at BMO Stadium on Monday.

Riley Tiernan also scored for Angel City (6-7-5), which won its second straight after an eight-game winless streak.

Angel City’s Alyssa Thompson was an excused absence for the game as rumors swirled that Chelsea was in talks to acquire the 20-year-old winger. The transfer deadline in the English Women’s Super League is Thursday.

Any fee for Thompson is likely to exceed $1 million. The Orlando Pride recently paid an international record $1.5 million transfer fee for forward Lizbeth Ovalle from Mexico’s Tigres.

Bay (4-9-5) is winless in its last seven matches.

Tiernan took a pass from M.A. Vignola and ran it down field before cutting inside and dancing around Bay defenders before firing a shot past Bay goalkeeper Jordan Silkowitz in the 12th minute.

It was Tiernan’s team-leading eighth goal. She moved into second for most goals ever by an NWSL rookie.

Rachel Hill scored the equalizer for Bay, scoring on the rebound off her own shot on Angel City goalkeeper Hannah Seabert in the 37th minute.

Niehues broke the stalemate on a header off a corner kick.

On Bay FC’s side, Asisat Oshoala was also an excused absence amid numerous reports of a move to Al Hilal Saudi Women’s Premier League.

The Premier League champions’ signing of the Swedish international closes the summer’s most drawn-out transfer saga.

English Premier League champions Liverpool have agreed to sign Alexander Isak from Newcastle United for a record British transfer fee, according to multiple media reports.

The Swedish forward is set to join the Reds in a deal worth about 130 million pounds ($176m), according to reports on Monday by The Athletic and The Telegraph, among other outlets.

The Athletic reported that Isak will undergo a medical on Monday before completing a six-year deal with the Merseyside club.

The 25-year-old striker scored 23 goals in the Premier League last season – behind only Liverpool’s Mohamed Salah – as Newcastle qualified for the Champions League.

But he has been the subject of a protracted and occasionally acrimonious transfer saga this summer, training away from the rest of the Newcastle squad after making clear his desire to move to Liverpool.

On Saturday, Newcastle signed German international striker Nick Woltemade for a record club fee reported to be worth up to 69 million pounds ($93m) in what was seen as paving the way for Isak’s departure.

About 10 million YouTube TV subscribers could lose access to Fox News and Fox Corp. channels that broadcast sports in a fee dispute that comes just days before the start of college football.

The Google-owned television service notified customers that Fox-owned channels, including Fox Business and local stations such as KTTV Channel 11 in Los Angeles, may be dropped from their program line-ups as soon as Wednesday afternoon if the two sides fail to reach a new distribution pact.

YouTube TV viewers would be without “The Five” and other Fox News programs. Sports fans could miss out on Friday night’s Auburn-Baylor football game and Saturday’s high-profile contest between Texas and Ohio State, along with three regional Major League Baseball games.

A prolonged blackout could interrupt the start of Fox’s NFL season that begins on Sept. 7.

“Fox is asking for payments that are far higher than what partners with comparable content offerings receive,” YouTube said late Monday in a blog post. “Our priority is to reach a deal that reflects the value of their content and is fair for both sides without passing on additional costs to our subscribers.”

The dust-up comes as YouTube TV has become one of the most formidable television providers.

Earlier this year, Nielsen ranked YouTube, including its video service, as the largest television distributor in the U.S. by share of viewership. YouTube’s popular bundle — it also offers the NFL Sunday Ticket package of out-of-market games — has dramatically cut into the business of legacy pay-TV providers, including Charter Spectrum, DirecTV and Dish Networks.

“While Fox remains committed to reaching a fair agreement with Google’s YouTube TV, we are disappointed that Google continually exploits its outsized influence by proposing terms that are out of step with the marketplace,” Fox said in a statement, adding the dispute could force its channels to go dark “unless Google engages in a meaningful way soon.”

Last year, YouTube generated $54.2 billion in revenue, second only to the Walt Disney Co., according to the MoffettNathanson research firm. The analysts estimated that fast-growing YouTube TV would reach 10 million subscribers this year. That slightly trails Charter, which operates the Spectrum service, and Comcast. YouTube TV has eclipsed the once powerhouse satellite TV service providers.

Disputes between programmers and pay-TV providers have become increasingly common in recent years amid a weakening of television economics. The high cost of sports rights has become a major rub for pay-TV distributors who have been asked to pay higher fees to mitigate the loss of subscribers.

Last year, DirecTV customers lost access to Walt Disney Co. channels, including ESPN, for nearly two weeks.

The battle was costly. DirecTV acknowledged that thousands of subscribers fled — many to YouTube TV — during the blackout. Viewers who wanted to watch the U.S. Open tennis tournament, college football, “Jeopardy!” and “Wheel of Fortune” were upset by the outage.

In 2023, a separate dispute led to Disney channels going dark on Spectrum.

YouTube said Monday that it was “working diligently with the team at Fox to reach an agreement.”

Should the channels go dark, the company will provide customers with a $10 credit. YouTube said customers could also sign up for Rupert Murdoch’s television company’s new streaming service, Fox One, which costs $20 a month.

LAFC’s signing of South Korean national team captain Son Heung-min appears to be one of those rare acquisitions that checks every box and helps everybody. Not only is it one of the most significant signings in MLS history, but it instantly makes LAFC better while boosting the World Cup hopes of the Korean national team and the profile of Korean soccer in the U.S.

But in few places will the influence of the signing, which is expected to be completed Tuesday, be felt more directly than in Southern California’s Korean community, the largest in the U.S.

“The Korean community has been buzzing ever since rumors of Son Heung-min’s potential move to LAFC began to spread,” said Kyeongjun Kim, a writer with the Korean Daily, the largest Korean-language media outlet in the U.S. “The fact that a player of his caliber is coming to L.A. is monumental event.

“Son’s move to the LAFC is as exciting — if not more so — than when Chan Ho Park and Hyun-Jin Ryu joined the Dodgers.”

Luring Son, 33, away from Tottenham of the English Premier League, where he spent the past 10 seasons, came at a high price. Although financial details of the signing were not announced, a league official with knowledge of the negotiations but not authorized to speak publicly said the transfer fee easily topped the MLS-record $22 million the Atlanta United paid to Middlesbrough in February for the rights to striker Emmanuel Latte Lath.

ESPN, citing unnamed sources, put the price at $26 million, more than LAFC’s total payroll of nearly $22.4 million, which is sixth highest in the league. Yet, strangely, that could still prove to be something of a bargain and represents another signing coup for general manager John Thorrington who, over the past four seasons, has signed Hugo Lloris and Olivier Giroud, players with the most appearances and goals for the French national team, respectively; Giorgio Chiellini and Gareth Bale, captains of the Italian and Welsh national teams, respectively; and Denis Bouanga, who led the MLS in goals in the past two full seasons.

Thorrington didn’t have to break the bank to do any of it.

LAFC earned $10 million from its participation in this summer’s Club World Cup, money it then invested in Son. And despite the massive transfer fee, the team could actually profit financially from the deal since it has long believed a Korean star playing in Los Angeles would more than pay for itself in marketing and sponsorship deals, much the same way the Dodgers have profited off Japan’s Shohei Ohtani.

Kim said that’s a very good bet.

“The passion and influence of Korean and Korean American soccer fans should never be underestimated,” he said, noting that major European clubs with Korean players have begun posting online content in Korean.

“Korean broadcasters,” he predicted, “may seek to acquire broadcasting rights and new business opportunities could emerge. Son’s arrival at LAFC will benefit not only the club but also the league as a whole.”

The influence won’t be limited to the Korean community, however. Son, who was one of the most popular players in the Premier League, speaks English well and has a positive and humble personality, which will make him easy to market across ethnic boundaries.

LAFC tried this once before, signing defender Kim Moon-hwan to much fanfare in 2021. But Kim, who had played his whole life in Korea, never really adapted to Los Angeles and returned home after 13 months, having played in just 28 games in MLS. Homesickness won’t be a problem for Son, who dropped out of high school to join an academy team in Hamburg, Germany, at 16.

Son will become the ninth Korean to play in MLS and the fourth to play this season. That’s a small number for a country that has played in 10 straight World Cups — something the U.S., Italy, the Netherlands and France haven’t done. If he is successful, it could open the way for more Koreans to play in MLS.

“Many in Korea believe Son raised the profile of Korean soccer through his efforts in Europe,” Kim said. “Son’s transfer presents a rare opportunity to boost the visibility of MLS, which has traditionally drawn less attention from Korean fans.”

Then there’s the on-field impact. Son scored more than 120 goals for Tottenham, reaching double digits in goals in eight of his past nine seasons at Tottenham and sharing the EPL Golden Boot with Liverpool’s Mo Salah four years ago. No Asian player had ever done that before, so his addition could go a long way toward reviving a slumbering LAFC offense that has scored more than one goal from the run of play just twice in its last 10 games in all competition heading into Tuesday’s Leagues Cup match with Tigres.

As for the South Korean national team and Son, its captain, the timing of the move to MLS couldn’t be better. The Koreans have already qualified for next summer’s World Cup, which is returning to North America for the first time since 1994, and playing in the U.S. will help Son, a three-time World Cup performer who is second in national team history in goals and third in appearances, adjust to the time, the weather and the travel, all things players complained about during the Club World Cup.

“When Son announced his departure from Tottenham, he mentioned that the 2026 World Cup might be his last,” Kim said. “As the captain, this is a pivotal time for him. I believe he will do everything he can to prepare thoroughly and being at LAFC will help him adapt to the local environment.”

It’s hard to imagine a signing with the potential to be so positive in so many ways. For LAFC and MLS, it looks to be well worth the price.

Karle Ofarrell was about to board a Ryanair flight from London Gatwick to Dublin when staff told her that her bag was too big and that she’d have to pay an extra charge

A group of passengers stepped in to try to save a woman from paying a £75 Ryanair cabin bag charge.

Karla Ofarrell was travelling from London Gatwick to Dublin when a Ryanair worker asked her to make sure her luggage fit in the bag sizer. And when the 35-year-old was told it was too big, a group of men offered their belts.

As a team, they tried to wrap the belt around the bag to squash it down and pass the check. But the staff member wouldn’t back down. The intervention came after a Mirror reporter was forced to fork out a significant chunk of cash to take her water bottles on a Ryanair flight.

Have you got a Ryanair story to share? Email [email protected]

“Staff came directly over to me while I was sitting down and asked me to put my bag in the bag holder,” Karla, from Dublin, told Luxury Travel Daily. “It fit in, but the staff said it didn’t, and I would need to make the case shrink somehow to fit it behind the tape.

“They didn’t pull anyone else’s bag, and when I argued that it fit, she said the bag was a danger to fly with, so I would need to make it smaller or else it wouldn’t fly. Three or four men who were standing nearby started to offer their belts.

“I tried two different ones that were too small, and then finally one belt that would fit and make the case smaller. The flight attendant wasn’t happy about it, shushed the crowd and said they were disturbing other passengers.

“Someone shouted out, ‘Micheal O’Leary is charging €10 for having the craic’. The flight attendant got more and more irate and wouldn’t accept the bag with the belt. They ignored my attempts at boarding. She made me wait until last and said she wouldn’t let me fly unless I paid the fine and I could ‘take all the pictures I wanted’.

“Me and the other passengers agreed that she wanted to make an example out of me, so she doubled down because she was embarrassed.”

Karla had already forked out £385 for the return flight on 9 July and £40 for priority boarding. She claims that when she pointed this out to the staff, they threatened to ban her from flying. Karla says she made a complaint to Ryanair.

She added: “The fines are an unbelievable waste of time and bad press. Unfortunately, we had to fly Ryanair due to flight times for meetings.”

A Ryanair spokesperson said: “This passenger booked a Regular fare for this flight from London Gatwick to Dublin (9 Jul), which allowed them to carry a small personal bag and a 10kg cabin bag onboard. As their cabin bag exceeded the permitted size, they were correctly charged a standard gate baggage fee (£75) by the gate agent at London Gatwick Airport.”

The charge, which has been dubbed the ‘sustainable tourism fee’ by the local government, has been implemented in a bid to curb ‘overtourism’ in certain hotspots

If you’re planning a trip to the Greek islands this summer, you’ll want to take note of a new charge now hitting some visitors to the region. The new rule, which came into force on Monday (July 21), means cruise passengers must cough up a “cruise fee” when disembarking from the ship.

“Cruising the Greek islands became a little more expensive for everyone,” warned Dane from TikTok’s CroatianTravellers account. “Passengers disembarking on Greek islands will pay an extra charge.” But what’s the damage? “The so-called ‘cruise fee’ will be €20 for disembarkation at ports on the islands of Mykonos and Santorini,” Dane revealed. “For others ports it will be €5.”

The levy, branded the “sustainable tourism fee” by Greek officials, has been brought in to tackle “overtourism” at popular destinations.

According to the Hellenic Ports Association, a staggering 768 cruise ships carrying roughly 1.29million holidaymakers visited Mykonos last year.

Dane continued: “During shoulder season in October and from April 1 to May 31, the fee for Mykonos and Santorini the fee drops to €12 for Mykonos and Santorini and €3 for all other ports. And, during the winter months from November 1 to March 31, the fee is just €4 for Mykonos and Santorini and €1 for other ports. The charge will be applied per passenger and per port where they disembark.”

According to Keep Talking Greece, cruise line companies will include these fees in their fares and then manage the payments to the Greek government.

State broadcaster ERT suggests that this change could bolster the local economy by €50million, with a third of the income benefiting the island municipalities themselves.

Holidaymakers appear to be supportive of the extra cost, including one TikTok user who penned in response: “As long as it’s being spent on tourist infrastructure and preservation of local history and nature then I’m all for it.”

Another added: “Greece is a poor country, I think this is fair. I wouldn’t agree if it were a wealthier country like Canada. The economic boom from the cruise ships is enough for us.”

A third person declared: “I’d pay for Santorini, it is well worth it. I spent a month on Santorini and if I had the opportunity to go again I’d be there in a heartbeat.”

While a fourth explained: “Honestly that’s okay to charge it say they are trying to drive people to other ports. People rock up use the facilities and leave. As long as the tourist tax goes into infrastructure it will be there for years for others to enjoy as well as the locals.”

However, one holidaymaker who was less than impressed by the change, vented: “It’s just not worth cruising to these places… by the time you dock, queue for a hour to get on your boat, everything is a rush and spend hours in queues before panicking to get back and queue to get back on the boats to take you to the cruise ship.

“A complete day of stress. I normally just stay onboard and enjoy the weather and a empty ship.”

Newcastle had a £70m bid for Ekitike rejected this month, while Liverpool have shown an interest in Magpies striker Alexander Isak.

Ekitike scored 15 goals in 31 starts as Frankfurt finished third in the Bundesliga last season.

His arrival will push Liverpool’s spending past £250m this summer.

They signed Florian Wirtz for a potential British record £116m, while defenders Milos Kerkez and Jeremie Frimpong have arrived for a combined £70m.