The Trump administration has called for deep cuts to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) budget and large-scale cancellations of existing research grants. Consequently, many US scientists are starting to seriously think about moving overseas. By doing so, researchers are putting the future of scientific inquiry in the United States at risk. The NIH is looking at a potential 40% budget cut in 2026, and almost 700 grants totaling $1.8 billion have been terminated in the last few months. International institutions are understandably eager to attract displaced talent in anticipation of this trend. If adopted by the U.S., this effort would result in a significant brain gain for all other countries.
In an early March survey of the scientific community, the journal Nature found something shocking. Three-quarters of U.S. scientists have considered leaving their jobs due to the administration’s policies. When Brazilian neuroscientist Danielle Beckman, now at UC San Diego, tweeted earlier this fall that she was finally making plans to leave the U.S. Her decision follows $2.5 million in cuts to her lab’s grant funding. There’s a lot of people in the scientific community that feel as passionately as she does. This exemplifies a growing anxiety of the precariousness of research opportunities in the nation.
The U.S. government has consistently grown its R&D outlay through the decades. In fact, when inflation-adjusted, it shrank from $58 billion in 1961 to less than $160 billion in 2024. These most recent cuts would be a major break from this trend. The importance of these decisions is underscored by the contentious debates between university administrators and researchers themselves.
Responses from International Institutions
Countries from all corners of the globe have started recruiting aggressively to lure U.S.-based researchers. Canada’s largest health research organization—CIHR—has pledged 30 million Canadian dollars (~$21.8 million). They plan to use this funding to recruit 100 early-career scientists from within the U.S. and around the world. This new investment is further indicative of a growing trend where international institutions see the value and advantage of accessing American talent.
Wong further noted that this trend reflects a “complete reset of this collaborative relationship between the federal government and leading research institutions.” International universities—in particular those in Asia and Europe—are increasingly recognizing these U.S. researchers as “superstars” and poaching them with urgent offers.
“I see this as the most significant crisis that universities are facing since World War Two.”
Well, at a recent higher education summit, Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University made a bold move. He implored attendees not to dawdle in recruiting America’s best and brightest scientific talent. Hong Kong University of Science and Technology is prepared to accept any displaced Harvard students who wish to transfer. They are available to prospective students who have received offers from Harvard.
These most recent cuts have sent shockwaves through the legal community. Sixteen states have brought suit against the Trump administration, and again, this is an unprecedented attack on NSF funding. The states argue that such cuts will impede “groundbreaking scientific research” and could jeopardize “national security, the economy and public health.” These claims point to a deep and abiding fear about the short-term and long-term impact of a continued decrease in federal science and technology investment.
Legal Challenges and Funding Cuts
Anna-Maria Arabia, representing a scientific body, expressed her belief that it is “vitally important that science can continue without ideological interference.” She emphasized that “we know these individuals are highly trained, talented, and have much to offer,” further indicating that the loss of American researchers could have ramifications beyond just talent drain.
Community colleges, four-year universities, and immersion programs are all doing important outreach work to retain scientific talent in the industry. Their goal is to help these people thrive abroad, and be received in countries that need, respect and recognize their talents.
These are incredibly hard times for American universities. They’re doing so on the heels of their global competitors fighting tooth and nail to unseat them as the world’s strongest research leaders. The United States has a terrific intellectual heritage, with over 400 Nobel Laureates. That’s twice the amount of winners from the United Kingdom, the second most winning country. International competition is getting intense. Now, in 2023, China is investing more than $780 billion in R&D, leading many to fear that America’s long-held lead is in jeopardy.
The Future of Research in America
Her experience reflects a broader sentiment among academics who have dedicated their careers to research in an environment that is increasingly less supportive. Most of all, they fear that they are losing not just the loss of funding, but a collegial ecosystem conducive to continued innovation.
Culturally-confident institutions elsewhere are already preparing to capitalize on the expected talent exodus. At the same time, U.S. policymakers need to be much more cognizant of how their policy decisions impact funding streams for scientific research. With significant investments being made globally, both governments and universities must actively engage in dialogues about how to sustain a vibrant research environment domestically.
“It’s the first time since I moved here that I don’t feel so welcome anymore.”
Her experience reflects a broader sentiment among academics who have dedicated their careers to research in an environment that is increasingly less supportive. Many fear that they may be losing not only funding but also a collaborative community necessary for innovation.
As institutions worldwide position themselves to capitalize on this potential exodus of talent, it remains crucial for U.S. policymakers to consider the implications of their decisions on scientific research funding. With significant investments being made globally, both governments and universities must actively engage in dialogues about how to sustain a vibrant research environment domestically.
