Job in America, Green Card on Hold: What Trump’s Tech Crackdown Means for Indians

On October 8, Donald Trump honoured Satya Nadella with the National Medal of Technology and Innovation. The same day, his administration suspended Microsoft from a programme that helps foreign employees secure permanent residency in the United States.

For Indian professionals at Microsoft and seven other technology companies, the immediate question is how far that action reaches. Can they continue working? What happens to an application already submitted? And could a delayed green card eventually threaten their ability to stay?

Microsoft has challenged the administration’s account of its hiring. Nasscom has argued that the action affects a specific immigration pathway and that Indian technology companies have reduced their dependence on H-1B visas. Meanwhile, a separate proposal for steep student-work fees has widened the uncertainty.

Here is what the announcements mean, and the questions that will determine their impact.

I WORK FOR ONE OF THESE COMPANIES. DO I HAVE TO LEAVE AMERICA?

The PERM suspension does not itself require employees to leave or automatically invalidate their existing permission to work. In an October 8 explainer, immigration law firm Reddy Neumann Brown distinguishes the suspension from a blanket H-1B ban. An employee’s valid H-1B status or other work authorisation is not automatically cancelled because their employer appears on the list. That distinction matters: permission to work temporarily and the process of obtaining permanent residency are separate. Workers still need to meet the conditions of their existing status and any renewal requirements.

SO WHAT EXACTLY HAS BEEN FROZEN?

The eight companies named are Microsoft, Adobe, Cognizant, Infosys, Tata Consultancy Services, Wipro, HCL Technologies and Capgemini.

US Labour Secretary Keith Sonderling said the department would neither accept new permanent labour-certification applications nor process pending applications involving these companies, citing active federal investigations.

PERM is a labour-market check used in many employer-sponsored green-card cases. The employer must establish that sufficient qualified, willing and available US workers cannot be found for the position, and that employing the foreign worker will not adversely affect comparable US workers’ wages and conditions. Certification allows the employer to proceed to the next immigration stage; it does not itself grant a green card.

The freeze therefore catches employees whose applications are already waiting as well as those whose employers were preparing to file.

WHO HAS THE MOST TO LOSE FROM A LONG DELAY?

Workers waiting for PERM certification face an immediate blockage in their permanent-residency process. Those whose employers have yet to file face uncertainty over when that process can begin.

Time becomes particularly important for employees approaching the usual six-year H-1B limit. US rules provide exceptions allowing some workers to obtain extensions beyond that limit, including provisions linked to how long a labour-certification application or immigrant petition has been on file. The State Department’s guidance describes one-year extensions where at least 365 days have elapsed since the relevant filing, subject to eligibility requirements.

A prolonged inability to file can therefore affect more than a hoped-for green-card date. It can complicate the timing of a worker’s future extension options. Employees further along are in a different position. Reddy Neumann Brown notes that the announcement did not automatically revoke previously certified PERMs or approved I-140 immigrant petitions. Its advice is to assess each employee’s immigration stage and deadlines before making career decisions.

DO VANCE’S NUMBERS PROVE MICROSOFT REPLACED AMERICAN WORKERS?

The figures cited do not, on their own, establish that claim.

Vice President JD Vance alleged that Microsoft laid off 6,000 American workers while benefiting from 6,300 H-1B visas and nearly 3,000 green cards. He used those numbers to accuse the company of replacing Americans with foreign workers.

Microsoft’s response challenges the comparison. It says approximately 80% of its roughly 6,000 H-1B filings in the last fiscal year involved extensions or changes of status for existing employees.

“These were not to hire new people,” the company said.

Microsoft says the remaining filings for new employees involved people already legally present in the US, and that those employees represented about 1% of its US workforce. It also disputes claims that it pays H-1B workers less than employees doing comparable work.

Layoffs, visa filings and green-card approvals are different measures. Renewing an existing employee’s status does not establish a new hire; obtaining permanent residency does not necessarily mean joining a company. The figures need evidence connecting the people and jobs involved before they can demonstrate replacement hiring. The government’s allegations remain under investigation.

WHY DOES NASSCOM SAY THE EXPOSURE IS LIMITED?

Nasscom says Indian technology companies have expanded local hiring in the US and significantly reduced their reliance on H-1B visas. It also describes the number of employees moving from H-1B status to permanent residency through PERM as relatively limited.

That is the industry body’s assessment. Its statement does not provide a count of workers whose pending applications are caught by this suspension.

Nor can the administration’s historical totals answer that question. Figures covering visa approvals and labour certifications since 2009 measure activity over many years. They do not tell us how many employees face a blocked application today.

The number to watch is the current affected caseload, alongside the suspension’s duration. For an individual employee, even a comparatively small company-wide exposure can carry substantial consequences.

IS THE $70,000 STUDENT-WORK FEE ALREADY IN FORCE?

No. It is a separate proposal concerning Optional Practical Training, or OPT, which allows eligible international students to work in a field related to their studies.

The proposed charges are $70,000 for initial OPT and $30,000 for subsequent OPT, including a STEM extension. Under the proposal described by DHS, participating schools would pay before recommending students for OPT.

That makes the eventual distribution of the cost a major unanswered question. A proposed obligation on schools should not be presented as a bill already payable by every student.

The University of Southern California’s Office of International Services said on October 7 that the fees were not final and that existing OPT eligibility requirements, procedures and filing fees remained unchanged. ois.usc.edu Public comments on the proposed rule are scheduled to close on November 9.

ARE RESEARCHERS AT THE NINE UNIVERSITIES LOSING THEIR VISAS TOO?

The announcement establishes an investigation, not a blanket cancellation of researchers’ visas.

The universities named are Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Brown, the University of Pittsburgh, UC Davis, Caltech, Arizona State and MIT. Labour Department Inspector General Anthony P D’Esposito said subpoenas had been served in investigations into alleged misuse of J-1 exchange-visitor visas.

The administration alleges that the programme has been used to undercut American researchers’ wages. Those allegations require investigation and should not be treated as findings against every institution or individual.

WHAT SHOULD WORKERS AND STUDENTS WATCH NEXT?

For employees, the consequential details are the suspension’s duration, the conditions for lifting it and how their employers will handle affected cases. Existing immigration approvals, filing dates and remaining authorised stay will determine how much room each person has.

Changing jobs also requires care. Reddy Neumann Brown says employees should review their status and immigration case before making a move; changing employers is not an automatic solution to every problem created by the freeze. Reddy Neumann Brown PC

For students, the next developments are the OPT rulemaking process and universities’ responses to the proposed charges.

The central uncertainty is how long these restrictions will last. A worker can retain permission to do today’s job while losing certainty about the process intended to secure a longer-term future. That is the question the next round of government guidance and company responses must answer.

With inputs from ANI & agencies