A sharp fall in H-1B registrations can matter to an Indian technology professional considering an overseas assignment. But the first question is what stage of the process the figure describes.
A US congressional research note published on October 14 reports that Cognizant, Infosys and Tata Consultancy Services submitted 100%, 91% and 95% fewer registrations, respectively, for the fiscal-year 2027 H-1B lottery than for FY2026. The note does not give the underlying company counts.
The Breakdown
USCIS scheduled FY2027’s initial registration window for March 4–19, 2026. The fiscal-year label is not the calendar year of registration, and the October report is not announcing a new registration drive.
US immigration authorities explained that a selected registration was required before an employer could file the corresponding cap-subject petition. Registration, selection and the petition decision are different stages. The reported declines cannot be read as the same percentage reduction in approved visas or jobs.
What the figures leave open
The comparison describes entries by these employers in one process. It does not count their entire US workforce or tell us what happened to every employee already working there. Nor does it show how many Indian professionals eventually received an overseas assignment.
It also leaves the business explanation open. An employer-level percentage, by itself, cannot identify which client requirements changed, whether work moved elsewhere, or how much of the decision was caused by a particular policy. Those questions need company-specific evidence.
Why This Matters for India
For candidates, the useful conversation is about the actual role: where the work will be performed, whether sponsorship is part of the offer, and which steps remain unresolved. A company-wide headline cannot settle an individual application.
For clients reviewing a delivery plan, the equivalent questions concern staffing and responsibility. Which tasks need people onsite, which can be performed elsewhere, and what assumptions support the proposed start date? A lower registration total does not answer those operational questions.
There is equally no basis in this comparison alone to count a matching gain for Indian Global Capability Centres. Fewer entries into one US process and additional hiring in India would need to be measured separately.
The Crunch
Start with what the number counts before asking what it changes. The next useful evidence is the employer’s actual staffing plan and the individual case’s progress, not an assumed one-for-one conversion from registrations to jobs.