3–5% H-1B Exposure in Indian IT; New $100K Fee Seen as Marginal

(INDIA) Indian technology firms say they are bracing, not breaking, after the United States 🇺🇸 proposed a one-time $100,000 visa fee on each new H-1B visa application. The headline number sparked worry across markets and social media, but Indian IT leaders and sector analysts argue the direct hit is likely to be modest. Their core point: only 3–5% of the Indian IT workforce is on H-1B status, and the proposed fee would apply only to new filings beginning in FY27, not to extensions. That small base, plus time to plan, reduces the shock.

Motilal Oswal Financial Services (MOFSL) estimates that in a typical Indian IT vendor, about 20% of employees are on client sites in the United States. Of those onsite staff, only 20–30% hold H-1B visas—a slice that translates into just 3–5% of total workforce exposure. Many firms have already cut their reliance on H-1B hiring over the last decade by expanding offshore delivery and hiring more local staff in the U.S. This shift is why the proposed visa fee looks less threatening to the overall Indian IT sector than first feared.

The fee, set to take effect for petitions filed for FY27 and after, is a one-time charge on new H-1B hires. It does not apply to renewals, giving employers further room to manage costs. The timing also matters: the new rule is tied to filings that would begin after September 21, 2025, which gives IT firms four active quarters to plan recruiting, revise budgets, adjust pricing, and discuss staffing models with clients.

Policy shift and limited exposure

Corporate comments show a cautious but steady stance.

• Persistent Systems (nearly 80% U.S. revenue) told investors it does not expect a large effect on operations or its profit profile from the proposed H-1B visa fee.
• Cyient reported just six employees in new H-1B roles in FY25 and does not expect material fallout in the near term.
• Coforge disclosed it filed 65 new H-1B petitions in FY25 (with 63 approvals) and has steadily reduced fresh H-1B filings over time.

The common thread: deliberate restraint on new petitions even before the fee surfaced.

Analysis by VisaVerge.com and MOFSL suggests the fee will likely raise conversation, not crisis. Key points:

• The small share of H-1B workers in the overall Indian IT base will cap direct drag.
• The fee is a one-time, front-loaded cost attached to a limited pipeline of new roles, which lowers run-rate impact on margins compared with a recurring levy.

Sector models shared with investors indicate the incremental cost could trim operating margins by just 10–20 basis points, a contained move many management teams believe they can absorb. Analysts also expect firms to pass through 30–70% of the added cost to clients via rate cards, change orders, or project-level commercials.

Today, visa costs account for an estimated 0.02–0.05% of total employee costs for large Indian IT vendors. With the fee, that could rise to roughly 0.3–1.0% of employee costs depending on the share of new H-1B hiring in a given year.

For readers seeking official program details—such as eligibility, cap, and employer roles—USCIS maintains an overview of the H-1B category for specialty occupations on its website. See the agency’s page on H-1B Specialty Occupations for current rules and process steps, which apply separately from the proposed one-time visa fee change to new filings: USCIS H-1B Specialty Occupations.

Company signals and cost math

Where the fee sits in project economics matters. For high-margin roles or projects that demand onsite presence for security, co-creation, or rapid rollout, executives say the $100,000 outlay can be weighed against expected return. Legal advisors note employers could still make the numbers work when clients need niche skills onsite for time-bound delivery.

In many other cases, firms will pursue substitutes:

• More offshore delivery
• Increased local hires
• Use of nearshore centers

Three strategic paths will likely shape the next year:

1. Offshore expansion: Grow delivery teams in India and other cost-friendly hubs. The fee nudges an existing trend toward more offshore work.
2. Local hiring: Increase direct U.S. recruiting. The industry already spends heavily—over $1 billion yearly—on upskilling and hiring local talent.
3. Targeted onsite for niche roles: Absorb the fee for high-pay, specialized work where onsite presence is vital.

Different firms will feel different pressures. Vendors with large onsite teams or those relying on quick U.S. ramp-ups could need to rework delivery plans. Smaller firms that counted on steady streams of new H-1B hires may face sharper choices: pay the fee for select roles or pivot faster to local/offshore models. The FY27 start date provides breathing room to re-plan.

Pricing discussions will move in tandem. If a project needs a new H-1B worker, firms may explore:

• Cost-sharing with clients
• Milestone-based billing
• Blended rates that spread the fee across the project life

Clients in highly regulated sectors may prefer a local-plus-offshore mix for control and continuity. Others, especially cost-sensitive programs, may accept more offshore work if delivery quality and time-to-value remain.

The U.S. accounts for about 53% of export revenue for Indian IT. That dependence makes Washington policy changes draw intense attention. Still, the last decade of adaptation—more local hiring, bigger offshore centers, and improved collaboration tools—has reduced the need to ship large numbers of staff onsite under H-1B.

Strategic adjustments, risks, and what to watch

Firms are likely to run multiple playbooks in parallel:

• Offshore-first planning: Launch new deals with larger offshore cores and limited planned onsite stints by senior staff.
• Expand local talent pools: Target secondary U.S. tech hubs with lower wages than coastal cities; use nearshore centers in North America.
• Invest in automation and platforms: Reduce the need for large onsite teams by cutting manual effort and speeding builds.
• Client education: Run workshops to explain trade-offs between onsite staffing and offshore-heavy models.

Real risks to track:

• Firms with large, fresh H-1B recruitment plans will be hit hardest if they do not pivot; the one-time visa fee creates a large upfront cash need per employee.
• Clients may push harder for local staffing; if demand outpaces supply, U.S. wage costs could rise, pressuring margins.
• Transition timelines could stretch if firms abruptly reduce new H-1B filings, forcing delivery chains to rebalance.

Clear upsides exist too:

• A higher share of offshore work tends to support margins due to persistent labor cost gaps.
• Lower dependence on H-1B flows could make companies more resilient to future immigration rule changes.

Key indicators to watch next:

• Pace of pullback in new H-1B filings: Will large vendors stop most new filings or keep a small, targeted set?
• Investment tilt: Does spending accelerate toward automation, offshore centers, and local U.S. hiring?
• Client responses: Do buyers push for more U.S-based teams or accept larger offshore shares?

At the project level, firms will vary in responses. Some may front the fee for specialized roles and push testing, integration, and support offshore. Others may opt for local hiring sprints for complex multi-site rollouts.

Labor market and career implications

For professionals, day-to-day changes may be subtle at first:

• More roles based in India with short travel windows to client sites
• U.S. residents and green card holders may see more openings at Indian-headquartered vendors, especially in consulting-heavy roles
• Hiring managers may prefer broader skill sets—engineers who can handle solutioning and client workshops in short bursts rather than extended onsite rotations

Broader contract and pricing questions to follow:

• Will vendors shift more toward outcome-based pricing so cost and value align?
• Will client contracts include cost-sharing triggers tied to regulatory shifts?

These conversations are likely already underway as vendors seek ways to spread upfront costs and buyers press for predictability.

Bottom line and checklist

The proposed fee is a big headline number, but sector exposure is small and the timeline is long. With only 3–5% of employees on H-1B across the sector—and many vendors already adopting offshore-first and local-hire models—the near-term shock is likely muted.

Actionable checklist for stakeholders:

• Employers:
  • Tighten workforce planning for FY27
  • Tag roles that truly need onsite presence
  • Build pass-through models for the visa fee
  • Invest more in offshore and local pipelines
• Clients:
  • Review location strategies with vendors
  • Decide where onsite adds real value
  • Support blended teams that balance cost and timelines
• Workers:
  • Build transferable skills—architecture, security, product thinking—to enable short onsite trips instead of long rotations

Market history supports a measured view: initial H-1B approvals for top Indian IT firms fell 56% from FY2015 (~15,100) to FY2023 (~6,700). For the top 10 India-centric tech employers, H-1B workers now make up less than 1% of the entire employee base. That structural shift reduces the sector’s vulnerability to U.S. immigration policy changes.

Policy watchers will note the calendar: because the fee applies to new applications from FY27 onward—and not to renewals—employers can stagger plans (prioritize extensions, curb fresh filings, route new demand to local/offshore teams) to lower disruption.

In short: the fee is a budgeting and staffing variable more than a turning point. The big tests will be how many fresh H-1B filings firms retain, how they price truly onsite work, and whether clients accept a greater offshore mix. Early signals from company statements and analyst models point to controlled change rather than upheaval.