Photo by Studio Republic on Unsplash
When Donald Trump slapped a $100,000 fee on H-1B visas, the Indian tech ecosystem went into predictable hysteria. Social media erupted with tales of dreams crushed, futures destroyed, and the American Dream becoming unaffordable. But perhaps it's time we asked ourselves, why are we mourning the end of what was essentially a modern form of intellectual colonialism?
For decades, India has been transferring its finest minds to build American unicorns while our own startup ecosystem struggled for talent. We celebrated when Sundar Pichai became Google's CEO, when Satya Nadella took Microsoft's controls, but conveniently ignored the uncomfortable truth that these success stories represent brain drain, not brain gain for India.
The numbers reveal our collective delusion. Currently, 300,000 Indian professionals work in America on H-1B visas, representing 70% of all recipients. These aren't just any professionals, they're the majority of our engineering colleges, the IIT and NIT graduates who could have transformed India's technological landscape.
Instead, they've been subsidizing American innovation at bargain prices. The average H-1B holder earns around $65,000 annually decent money, but hardly reflective of their true value. Meanwhile, American companies have been getting world-class talent at a fraction of what they'd pay domestic workers. Trump's $100,000 fee doesn't kill the program; it finally prices it correctly.
Indian IT majors like TCS, Infosys, and Wipro have built empires on this arbitrage model. They've positioned themselves as global technology leaders while essentially functioning as sophisticated staffing agencies, moving Indian engineers to American offices to do work that could and should be done in India.
TCS CEO K. Krithivasan's casual dismissal that 3,000-4,000 H-1B visas represent "a small number" reveals the industry's comfort with the status quo. When he says work can be "moved to India" if visas become scarce, he inadvertently admits these roles never needed to be in America in the first place.
This raises the question: if the work can be done remotely from India, why have we been so desperate to physically relocate our talent?
The Silicon Valley among Indian engineers has created a dangerous dependency. We've convinced an entire generation that true success means leaving India, that innovation can only happen in California and that worth is measured by H-1B approvals rather than Indian achievements.
This mindset has had devastating consequences for our domestic tech ecosystem. While we were celebrating Indians becoming millionaires in America, we neglected building world-class companies at home. We created a generation that viewed India as a stepping stone rather than a destination.
Prime Minister Modi's call for "atmanirbharta" (self-reliance) suddenly doesn't sound like nationalist rhetoric rather it sounds like economic common sense. When Modi declared that "whether it is a chip or a ship, we must make it in Bharat," he wasn't being protectionist; he was being practical.
Trump's H-1B fee hike forces us to confront an uncomfortable reality: we've been outsourcing our intellectual capital to build someone else's economy. The 140 crore Indians Modi speaks of include some of the world's most talented engineers, mathematicians, and computer scientists. Why should they enrich American shareholders when they could build Indian unicorns?
The panic surrounding Trump's decision reveals who benefits from the current system. American tech giants have been the biggest winners, accessing top-tier talent at below-market rates. Indian IT companies have profited from the arbitrage. But India as a nation? We've been the biggest loser.
Consider this: if even half of the 300,000 Indian H-1B holders had stayed in India and started companies, we might have had our own Google, Microsoft, or Tesla by now. Instead, we have success stories that ultimately benefit American stock markets and American consumers.
The $100,000 fee creates an inadvertent forcing function for Indian innovation. When the best engineering talent can't easily emigrate, it becomes available for Indian startups, Indian research institutions, and Indian R&D centers.
Companies like HCLTech and Wipro, which already maintain 80% local hiring in their US operations, prove that high-quality work doesn't require physical presence in America. If global delivery models work for client services, why not for innovation?
The Indian media's portrayal of Trump's decision as an attack on Indian dreams misses the bigger picture. This isn't about America rejecting Indian talent and it's about America finally paying market rates for premium services. The $100,000 fee doesn't eliminate opportunities; it eliminates exploitation. For too long, we've accepted that Indian engineers should work for American companies at American wages to gain "exposure" and "experience." This colonial mindset assumes that Indians can only learn from Americans, never the reverse. The fee hike forces us to question these assumptions.
India's startup ecosystem, currently valued at over $350 billion, represents the alternative path we should have taken decades ago. Companies like Flipkart, Paytm, and Zomato prove that Indian entrepreneurs can build world-class products for global markets without emigrating.
The H-1B fee hike could accelerate this trend. When emigration becomes expensive, entrepreneurship becomes attractive. When American dreams become unaffordable, Indian dreams become inevitable.
Perhaps it's time to redefine what success looks like for Indian technologists. Instead of measuring achievement by H-1B approvals or American salaries, we should celebrate Indian IPOs, patent filings, and technological breakthroughs that happen on Indian soil.
The global remote work revolution, accelerated by the pandemic, has already begun demolishing the myth that innovation requires physical presence in Silicon Valley. Trump's fee hike simply accelerates this inevitable transition.
Trump's $100,000 H-1B fee might be the wake-up call India needed. It forces us to confront uncomfortable truths about brain drain, dependency, and misplaced priorities. Most importantly, it creates an opportunity to build the innovation economy we should have prioritized decades ago.
Instead of mourning the end of subsidized emigration, we should celebrate the beginning of competitive retention. The same talent that built American unicorns can build Indian ones—if we finally give them compelling reasons to stay. The American Dream was never about geography; it was about opportunity. Trump's fee hasn't killed that dream and he's simply relocated it. The question is: are we ready to embrace it at our motherland?
References: