India Questions US Labour-Certification Curbs; TCS Explains Its Exposure

October 9, 2026 edition. Published October 10, 2026. Reporting cutoff: October 9, 11:59 p.m. India time.

India raised concerns on October 9 about US action affecting the Permanent Labor Certification programme for certain companies. The foreign ministry said the steps did not advance the countries’ shared ambitions and emphasised the mutual benefits of talent mobility, according to Reuters. The response places skilled employment alongside the wider discussion about the economic relationship between the two countries.

The diplomatic objection and the effect on a particular company are separate questions. A restriction can matter to an individual’s long-term plans even when an employer says its overall business exposure is small. Equally, concern at government level does not establish that every Indian technology worker faces the same outcome.

What TCS told the exchanges

In an October 9 filing, Tata Consultancy Services said it would comply with Department of Labor directives. The company described a US staffing strategy centred on local recruitment, including campus hiring, across 31 offices and delivery centres. It repeated an existing intention to recruit another 15,000 people in the country over five years.

TCS said its PERM applications had been in single digits during the previous two years. On that basis, it said it did not expect the suspension to affect its workforce strategy or customer engagements. That is the company’s assessment of its own exposure; it should not be read as a finding about other employers or a guarantee covering each employee’s circumstances.

What the programme actually does

The Department of Labor’s programme guidance explains that permanent labour certification is an employer-led step in many employment-based immigration cases. The department considers whether sufficient qualified US workers are available for the job and whether employing a foreign worker would adversely affect comparable US workers’ wages and working conditions.

Certification is not the final immigration approval. In the usual process described by the department, the employer subsequently seeks immigration authorisation from US Citizenship and Immigration Services. This distinction matters when reading headlines: a change at one stage should not automatically be described as a cancellation of every immigration permission held by workers at a company.

How to read the next developments

The useful questions are specific: which employer and application are covered, which stage is affected, and what the implementing instructions say. A broad headline cannot answer those questions for an individual. The government’s statement, a company’s staffing forecast and an immigration decision each serve different purposes.

For readers following the business story, TCS’s disclosed use of the programme gives a concrete measure of exposure, while India’s response shows the diplomatic concern. Future reporting should test both against the actual scope and implementation of the US action. As of this edition’s cutoff, the verified material supports those distinctions, rather than a single prediction about the entire technology sector.

Sources: Reuters report on India’s response; TCS exchange filing, October 9 (PDF); US Department of Labor programme guidance.