PERM Is Limited
Nasscom has pushed back against the notion that the H-1B visa is a broad or automatic route to permanent settlement in the United States, saying only a limited number of workers move on to green cards through the PERM labour certification process. The clarification comes at a time when immigration policy, skilled-worker mobility and the role of Indian technology firms in the US labour market remain under heightened scrutiny.
The industry body's position is significant because it places the H-1B debate in a wider context: the visa is primarily a temporary work authorisation, not a guaranteed bridge to residency. PERM, the first major step in many employer-sponsored green card applications, is a separate and often lengthy process that depends on labour-market tests, employer sponsorship and regulatory approvals. Nasscom's message suggests that public discussion often conflates these distinct pathways, overstating the number of foreign workers who eventually convert temporary status into permanent residence.
For Indian technology companies, the issue is not merely technical. It goes to the heart of how their global delivery models are perceived in the United States, where visa policy has long been a political flashpoint. Nasscom's intervention appears designed to reinforce the argument that Indian firms are users of a regulated system rather than drivers of migration abuse.
Global Compliance Focus
Nasscom also emphasised that Indian IT companies operate across more than 80 countries and have consistently complied with local regulations in each market. That point is aimed at countering a recurring narrative that Indian technology exporters rely excessively on one geography or one visa channel to staff client projects overseas.
The global footprint matters because it demonstrates that Indian IT services firms are not structurally dependent on the US alone. Their business models span consulting, digital engineering, cloud services, application management and enterprise transformation across multiple jurisdictions. In that sense, the H-1B debate, while politically charged, represents only one component of a much larger international operating environment.
Nasscom's emphasis on compliance is also a reputational signal. As governments tighten scrutiny of cross-border labour mobility, tax structures and local hiring obligations, technology companies are under pressure to show that they are not bypassing domestic employment rules. By highlighting operations in more than 80 countries, the body is seeking to position Indian IT firms as mature multinational employers that adapt to local legal frameworks rather than challenge them.
That framing is especially relevant for startups and venture-backed technology companies, which often look to large IT services firms as an indicator of regulatory risk in overseas expansion. Any perception that Indian tech talent is concentrated in a narrow visa pipeline can affect hiring strategies, investor sentiment and client confidence. Nasscom's comments are therefore as much about market optics as they are about immigration mechanics.
Policy Debate Widens
The broader policy debate around H-1B visas has intensified in recent years as US lawmakers, labour groups and employers continue to disagree over the programme's purpose and design. Supporters argue that it helps American companies access specialised skills that are difficult to source domestically. Critics contend that it can be used to suppress wages or displace local workers. Nasscom's latest remarks seek to narrow that debate by distinguishing between temporary work visas and permanent immigration outcomes.
The distinction is important for Indian firms because their US operations often depend on moving experienced employees for client delivery, training and project continuity. At the same time, the companies have increasingly expanded local hiring in the US and other markets, partly to reduce visa dependence and partly to align with client expectations. Nasscom's statement reinforces that trend by underscoring geographic diversification and regulatory compliance.
For the startup and venture capital ecosystem, the implications are broader than one visa category. Immigration policy affects the movement of founders, engineers and specialists, and can influence where companies choose to build teams. A tighter visa environment can raise operating costs and slow execution, while a more predictable framework can support cross-border scaling. Nasscom's comments suggest that Indian technology firms are preparing for a world in which flexibility, compliance and regional diversification matter as much as access to US work permits.
The immediate takeaway is that the H-1B-to-green-card pipeline is narrower than commonly assumed, and that Indian IT companies are keen to separate their global business model from political shorthand around immigration. In doing so, Nasscom is attempting to preserve the credibility of a sector that remains deeply integrated into global enterprise technology, even as the policy environment around it grows more complex.