Washington: The Trump administration announced a renewed effort to scrutinise billions of dollars in foreign funding flowing into American universities, framing the move as a matter of transparency and national security rather than a restriction on international academic ties.
In a joint appearance, senior officials from the Departments of Education and State unveiled a new public reporting portal designed to make it easier for universities to disclose foreign gifts and contracts — and for the public to examine them.
“Section 117 of the Higher Education Act is a long-standing statutory provision designed to give Americans transparency and afford public accountability regarding foreign influence and foreign funding pouring into our universities,” Sarah Rogers, Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy, told a group of reporters here
The provision, added to the Higher Education Act in 1986, requires institutions receiving federal funds to report foreign gifts and contracts totaling more than $250,000 from a single source in a calendar year. But officials said compliance has been uneven.
“Unfortunately, enforcement of those obligations has not always been consistent,” Rogers said.
According to the Education Department, American colleges and universities reported receiving over $5.2 billion from foreign entities in 2025 alone. Since 1986, foreign entities have contributed nearly $67 billion.
Nicholas Kent, Under Secretary of Education, said the effort was not intended to block foreign investment in higher education.
“This isn’t a ban on foreign money. It is a reporting requirement for foreign money,” Rogers added.
Kent described the initiative as “shining a flashlight” on foreign funding, arguing that lawmakers, researchers, and the public should be able to assess whether such funding carries “influence” or conditions.
For Indian observers — particularly those following the growing academic and research partnerships between India and the United States — the scope of the reporting requirement is notable.
When asked whether funding from foreign corporate entities such as Tata would fall under the statute, Paul Moore, Deputy General Counsel at the Education Department, clarified that reporting applies to “foreign individuals, foreign governments” and funding of $250,000 or more from a single source over a reporting year.
Country-level data discussed at the briefing showed that in 2025, China accounted for approximately $530 million in reported funding, and the United Kingdom for about $630 million. The list is being led by Qatar with a whooping $1.2 billion.
The renewed enforcement drive follows earlier findings by a bipartisan Senate panel that described foreign funding reporting in higher education as “essentially a black hole”, with at least 70 per cent not reported at the time.
Moore said past reviews had found that Yale went four years without filing a report despite having “hundreds of millions in reportable transactions”, and that Harvard’s “institutional compliance structure was found to be very insufficient”.Nineteen civil investigations were launched previously to improve compliance, he said, adding that non-compliance rates had since fallen to about 35 per cent.
The State Department’s involvement, officials said, reflects concerns about research security and intellectual property. Rogers cited the possibility of “foreign governments subsidizing the presence of their students in certain kinds of research with sensitive IP applications” as one reason transparency is necessary.
The initiative comes at a time when global competition in advanced technologies — including artificial intelligence, semiconductors, and biotechnology — has sharpened scrutiny of cross-border academic collaboration.
For India, whose universities and technology firms are deepening partnerships with American institutions, the administration’s emphasis on disclosure signals a policy environment that is wary of foreign influence but stops short, for now, of restricting it outright.
As officials repeatedly emphasised, the administration is not making “a value judgment” about foreign funding. Instead, they argued, it is ensuring that the information is visible — and that universities take the reporting law seriously.
(IANS)
