US Green Card Freeze: TCS, Infosys, Wipro and HCLTech Had Just 61 Certified PERM Cases in FY26

Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), Infosys, Wipro and HCLTech recorded a combined 61 certified Permanent Labour Certification (PERM) cases in the first nine months of financial year 2026, according to data reported by The Economic Times. The figure, covering October 1, 2025, to June 30, 2026, shows that the four Indian IT services companies had limited recorded activity through this particular employment-based green-card pathway even before the US government suspended them from the programme.

HCL America’s 59 certified cases accounted for nearly all the total, while TCS recorded two. Infosys and Wipro had no certified cases in the period. The numbers have gained significance after the US Department of Labor suspended eight major technology companies from the PERM programme, restricting new applications and the processing of pending cases involving the affected firms. The suspension creates fresh uncertainty for employees seeking permanent residency, although the low number of recent certifications does not reveal the full number of workers affected.

Key takeaways

• TCS, Infosys, Wipro and HCLTech recorded just 61 certified PERM cases combined from October 2025 to June 2026.
• HCL America accounted for 59 cases and TCS for two, while Infosys and Wipro recorded none.
• The US suspension affects the PERM process for the named companies; it is not a blanket cancellation of all H-1B visas or existing green cards.
• PERM is an important step in many employer-sponsored employment-based green-card applications, but not every green-card category requires it.
• The figures measure certified cases, not the total number of Indian workers employed by these companies in the United States.
• The restrictions could make permanent-residency planning more difficult for affected employees and encourage companies to rely further on local hiring and delivery centres outside the US.

What the 61 Certified PERM Cases Reveal

The data reported by The Economic Times indicate that the four Indian IT services companies had a small number of certified PERM cases during the first nine months of FY26.

Company	Certified PERM cases, October 2025–June 2026
HCL America	59
Tata Consultancy Services (TCS)	2
Infosys	0
Wipro	0
Combined total	61

Source: The Economic Times, October 10, 2026. The period covers the first nine months of FY26, not the full financial year.

The distribution is particularly notable because HCL America accounted for approximately 96.7% of the four companies’ combined total. TCS accounted for the remaining cases, while Infosys and Wipro had no recorded certifications during the period.

These figures should be interpreted carefully. A certified PERM case is not the same as a company filing a new application, an employee receiving a green card or a count of all foreign workers employed by the company. Applications can be filed in one period and certified later, and the number of cases recorded in a given period can be affected by processing timelines.

The figures also do not establish how many workers were already waiting at other stages of the immigration process. Some employees may have completed PERM certification in earlier years and moved on to subsequent steps. Others may be pursuing immigration categories that do not require PERM labour certification.

The data nevertheless provide an important snapshot of how frequently the four companies had recently reached this stage of the employment-based immigration process.

What Is PERM and Why Does It Matter for Green Cards?

PERM stands for Program Electronic Review Management, the US Department of Labor’s permanent labour certification process. It is commonly the first major step when an employer sponsors a foreign worker for certain employment-based green-card categories.

Before filing a PERM application, an employer generally must conduct a recruitment process to test the relevant US labour market. The employer must establish that there are not sufficient available, qualified and willing US workers for the position and that employing the foreign worker will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of similarly employed US workers.

The employer then submits the labour-certification application to the Department of Labor. If it is certified, the employer can generally use that certification to support the next stage of the employment-based immigration process, subject to the relevant requirements.

The process involves several distinct stages:

1. Recruitment and labour-market testing: The employer follows required recruitment procedures for the position.
2. PERM application: The employer submits the labour-certification application to the Department of Labor.
3. Labour certification: If approved, the certification establishes that the employer has met the applicable labour-market requirements.
4. Immigrant petition: The employer generally files Form I-140 with US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), subject to the relevant category’s rules.
5. Green-card application: The worker may proceed to adjustment of status in the US or consular processing when eligible and when an immigrant visa is available.

The process can take considerable time, especially when applications face audits, backlogs or delays at later immigration stages.

Importantly, PERM is not required for every employment-based green-card category. Some categories, including certain EB-1 classifications and EB-2 cases involving a national interest waiver, can follow different routes. As a result, the 61 certified cases cannot be used to calculate the total number of green cards obtained by employees of these companies.

What Has the US Government Suspended?

The US government announced the suspension of eight major technology companies from the PERM programme in October 2026. The affected companies reported in the coverage include TCS, Infosys, Wipro, HCLTech, Cognizant, Capgemini, Microsoft and Adobe.

US officials said the action was intended to address concerns about the use of foreign workers and the effect of employment-based immigration on American workers. The Department of Labor’s stated position focused on preventing the programme from being used in ways that disadvantage eligible US workers.

The reported suspension bars the affected companies from filing new PERM applications or processing pending applications covered by the action. That makes the development more consequential for workers who depend on employer sponsorship through this route.

The scope of the restriction matters. It should not be described as a cancellation of every H-1B visa held by employees of the affected firms. Nor does it automatically revoke green cards already granted to workers. The immediate issue concerns the PERM labour-certification pathway and the cases covered by the government’s action.

The impact on individual workers will depend on their current immigration status, the stage of their application, whether their case falls within the suspension, and the availability of any other lawful route.

Why the Low Filing Numbers Matter

The 61 certified cases suggest that the four Indian IT services companies had already recorded very limited activity at this stage of the green-card process during FY26. This complicates the assumption that the suspension will affect all their US employees in the same way.

For a company with tens of thousands of US-based employees, a small number of recent PERM certifications may indicate that only a limited portion of its workforce was moving through this particular stage during the period. It does not mean that only 61 employees have immigration-related concerns, or that the suspension has no consequences.

There are several reasons for this distinction.

First, certification figures reflect cases reaching a particular administrative milestone, not necessarily all applications submitted. Cases filed earlier may be certified later, while applications filed during the period may remain pending.

Second, employees may be at different stages of the process. A worker whose PERM certification was approved previously may be waiting for an immigrant petition decision or for an immigrant visa to become available. A new PERM filing and an already approved certification are not equivalent situations.

Third, companies use different immigration strategies for different employees. Some workers may be eligible for categories that do not require PERM, while others may not be pursuing permanent residency at all.

Finally, the data do not capture all employment-based immigration activity across a company. H-1B approvals, PERM certifications, immigrant petitions and green-card approvals are separate measures.

The most defensible conclusion is that the four firms had only 61 certified PERM cases recorded in the nine-month period. The number is useful context, but it is not a comprehensive measure of the suspension’s impact.

TCS, Infosys, Wipro and HCLTech: What Could Change?

TCS

TCS recorded two certified PERM cases in the period. The company has previously said its use of the PERM route to transition H-1B workers to permanent residency has been limited in recent years.

A small number of recent certifications may reduce the immediate operational significance of the programme for some parts of its workforce. However, affected employees may still face uncertainty if they were relying on new applications or pending cases covered by the suspension.

TCS’s US operations also depend on more than immigration sponsorship. The company serves American clients through a combination of locally based staff, delivery centres and international teams. Its response may therefore involve workforce planning and adjustments to staffing arrangements rather than a wholesale change to its business model.

Infosys

Infosys had no certified PERM cases recorded in the first nine months of FY26, according to the reported data. That does not establish that the company has no employees pursuing permanent residency or that no cases were pending.

For employees seeking a green card through a new PERM application, the suspension may delay progress or require a review of available alternatives. The company’s ability to manage these situations will depend on individual circumstances and the scope of the government’s restrictions.

Wipro

Wipro also had no certified PERM cases recorded in the period. As with Infosys, the figure describes certifications in the specified window, not the company’s entire immigration caseload.

The suspension could complicate long-term planning for affected employees, particularly those whose residency strategy depends on employer sponsorship through PERM. Employees will need to distinguish between their current work authorisation and their longer-term route to permanent residency.

HCLTech

HCL America recorded 59 certified cases, the largest number among the four firms. This means HCL America accounted for nearly all the certifications in the combined total.

Even so, the figure is not a count of HCLTech’s entire US workforce or the number of employees who will be directly affected. The consequences will depend on pending applications, previously certified cases and the immigration categories being used by individual workers.

The Broader Impact on Indian IT Workers in the US

The suspension creates uncertainty for employees who expected employer-sponsored permanent residency to provide a long-term basis for living and working in the United States.

H-1B status and permanent residency serve different purposes. H-1B is a temporary work status for eligible specialty-occupation workers, subject to statutory and regulatory requirements. A green card provides lawful permanent-resident status. An employee can hold valid H-1B status without having a pending PERM application, and the suspension does not by itself mean that the employee must immediately leave the US.

However, long-term planning can become more difficult when a worker cannot progress through the expected immigration route. Employees may need to review the timing of their existing status, whether a green-card case is already at a later stage, and whether another category is available.

Workers should not assume that an alternative route exists in every case. Eligibility depends on the individual’s qualifications, employer, job, immigration history and the rules applicable to the specific category. Anyone directly affected should seek advice from a qualified US immigration attorney rather than relying on general news coverage.

For Indian professionals, the issue also highlights the importance of understanding the difference between work authorisation, an employer’s sponsorship process and permanent-residency eligibility.

Could the Suspension Accelerate Local Hiring in the US?

Indian IT companies have expanded their US-based workforces over time to serve clients closer to their operations and reduce dependence on moving employees across borders for every project.

A larger local workforce can help companies manage immigration uncertainty, improve client access and maintain continuity when international staffing becomes more difficult. The companies also operate delivery centres in India and other countries, giving them options for distributing work across locations.

The suspension could encourage further examination of staffing models, especially for roles that can be performed by employees already authorised to work in the US. It could also make employers more cautious about promising permanent-residency timelines to prospective hires.

However, local hiring is not a universal replacement for international mobility. Companies may still need specialised expertise, client-facing personnel and employees with experience in particular systems or projects. Recruiting locally can also involve higher costs, competition for talent and longer hiring timelines.

The effect on delivery models will depend on how long the restrictions remain in place, whether they are modified or challenged, and how companies adapt their staffing strategies.

What the Figures Do Not Tell Us

The 61-case figure has attracted attention because it is small relative to the scale of the four companies’ US operations. But several important questions remain unanswered by the data alone.

The number does not identify every employee with a pending PERM application. It does not show how many workers had already received labour certification and were waiting for later immigration steps. Nor does it reveal how many employees qualify for green-card categories that do not require PERM.

It also cannot establish the number of workers who will leave the US, change employers, relocate to another country or continue working under existing status. Those outcomes depend on individual immigration circumstances and decisions by employees and employers.

A full assessment of the suspension would require information about the companies’ pending cases, the legal scope of the order, any exemptions or subsequent changes, and the status of affected workers. The reported certification count provides a starting point, not a complete impact assessment.

The Bigger Picture

The suspension of major technology companies from the PERM programme comes as the US continues to scrutinise employment-based immigration and the role of overseas workers in its labour market. For Indian IT services companies, the immediate challenge is to understand how the restrictions apply to their employees while maintaining client delivery and workforce continuity.

The FY26 data suggest that the four Indian firms had relatively few recorded PERM certifications in the period before the suspension. But the numbers do not eliminate the issue for employees whose applications are pending or whose long-term plans depend on employer sponsorship. The distinction between a company’s recent certification volume and its total immigration exposure is essential to understanding the story.

Looking Ahead

The next developments will include any clarification from the US Department of Labor about the scope and duration of the suspension, as well as responses from the affected companies. Workers and employers will also be watching for information about pending applications, possible legal challenges and whether the restrictions are revised. Until further details emerge, the 61 certified cases should be treated as a historical snapshot for the first nine months of FY26 rather than a complete measure of the policy’s effects.

For Indian IT companies, the practical response may involve reviewing immigration cases, strengthening local hiring and adjusting staffing plans where necessary. For employees, the priority is to understand their own status and application stage rather than assuming that the suspension affects every visa or green-card route identically. The longer-term consequences will depend on the final regulatory position and the ability of companies and workers to adapt to it.