Trump Administration Suspends PERM for Microsoft, Adobe and Major IT Firms: What It Means and What Options Remain

Written by John Goslow, an Ellis Porter immigration attorney. It is general information, not legal advice.

In plain English: The Trump administration has announced a suspension of PERM labor certification processing for Microsoft, Adobe, Cognizant, Infosys, Tata Consultancy Services, Wipro, HCL and Capgemini. According to the announcement, the Department of Labor will not accept new permanent labor certification applications or process pending applications involving these companies. Officials cited alleged fraud and federal investigations.

The Trump administration has announced a suspension of PERM labor certification processing for Microsoft, Adobe, Cognizant, Infosys, Tata Consultancy Services, Wipro, HCL and Capgemini. According to the announcement, the Department of Labor will not accept new permanent labor certification applications or process pending applications involving these companies. Officials cited alleged fraud and federal investigations.

For affected professionals and their families, the announcement creates serious uncertainty. It also demands scrutiny.

Protecting American workers is a legitimate responsibility of the Department of Labor. Portraying the PERM program as an unchecked avenue for replacing those workers, however, ignores the program’s purpose and its extensive safeguards.

In our view, this sweeping announcement risks turning immigration enforcement into political theatre. The administration has delivered public accusations and immediate disruption without a comparably detailed public explanation of the evidence or why this particular response is justified.

For professionals trying to understand their options, another distinction matters: a PERM suspension is not a suspension of every employment-based immigration pathway. EB-2 National Interest Waiver and EB-1A petitions do not require PERM. O-1 classification may offer a separate temporary work option for qualifying individuals.

These categories serve different purposes and carry different requirements. Understanding those differences can help professionals make informed decisions rather than react to an alarming headline.

What Did the Department of Labor Announce?

On October 8, 2026, administration officials announced that eight major technology and IT services companies would be suspended from the Permanent Labor Certification Program, commonly called PERM. DOL stated that it would neither accept new applications nor process pending applications involving the named companies.

The affected companies are:

• Microsoft
• Adobe
• Cognizant
• Infosys
• Tata Consultancy Services, or TCS
• Wipro
• HCL
• Capgemini

The announced action concerns the labor certification stage of employer-sponsored permanent residence. It should not be confused with a determination that every affected employee committed wrongdoing or that every immigration benefit connected to these employers has been revoked.

Because this is a developing announcement, affected employees should distinguish public statements from the specific notices, instructions and decisions governing their own cases.

Allegations of PERM Fraud Are Not Proof of Widespread Abuse

The administration has cited alleged fraud and investigations. However, the announcement and initial reporting reviewed for this article provide little specific public evidence demonstrating the alleged misconduct across the affected employers or explaining why an employer-wide processing suspension is warranted.

That distinction matters.

An investigation may uncover violations. It may also show that particular allegations are unsupported or narrower than initially suggested. The existence of an investigation is not itself a finding that an employer’s PERM applications are fraudulent.

We are not suggesting that immigration fraud should be ignored. If an employer falsified recruitment results, misrepresented a job opportunity or violated wage requirements, the government should investigate and pursue appropriate consequences.

But enforcement should be grounded in evidence, applicable law and a clearly explained process. It should not rest on the assumption that employing foreign-born professionals is inherently suspicious.

The relevant questions are straightforward:

• What specific conduct is alleged?
• Which applications or practices are implicated?
• What evidence supports the allegations?
• What legal authority supports the scope and duration of the suspension?
• What process will allow affected employers to respond?

Until those questions are answered, broad claims of abuse should be treated as allegations, not established facts.

The absence of detailed public evidence does not establish that no evidence exists. It does mean the public should not be asked to accept sweeping conclusions simply because administration officials announce them.

How the PERM Process Protects American Workers

PERM labor certification is not simply an employer asking permission to sponsor a foreign worker. It is a regulated labor-market process designed to protect U.S. workers.

Before certification, DOL must determine that there are insufficient U.S. workers who are able, willing, qualified and available for the job. It must also determine that employing the foreign worker will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of similarly employed U.S. workers.

The process includes several layers of protection.

A Prevailing Wage Requirement

Employers generally obtain a prevailing wage determination from DOL based on the position and area of intended employment. The offered wage must meet or exceed the applicable prevailing wage, and employers make required wage attestations under penalty of perjury.

This requirement directly addresses the concern that an employer might use permanent immigration sponsorship to undercut local wage standards.

PERM is not intended to provide access to cheaper labor. Its wage requirements are specifically designed to protect against that outcome.

Required Recruitment of U.S. Workers

For a typical professional PERM position, employers must complete prescribed recruitment steps. These generally include a state workforce agency job order, newspaper advertisements and additional recruitment activities.

The rules also require notice of the filing to the appropriate bargaining representative or through workplace posting and applicable internal media.

These requirements are intended to give U.S. workers a genuine opportunity to learn about and apply for the position.

Lawful Consideration of Applicants

Employers cannot simply reject qualified U.S. applicants because they prefer the sponsored employee. They must document lawful, job-related reasons for rejecting U.S. workers and prepare a recruitment report describing the results.

The regulations also limit unnecessarily restrictive job requirements and address requirements that depart from those normally associated with the occupation.

In other words, the process is not supposed to allow an employer to manufacture an artificial shortage by designing a position that only one preferred candidate could fill.

Recordkeeping and Audits

Employers must retain supporting documentation for five years from the filing date. DOL can audit applications and request the records needed to evaluate compliance.

The application is therefore not an unsupported assertion that no American workers are available. It is backed by documentation that the employer must be prepared to produce.

Supervised Recruitment and Enforcement

DOL can require supervised recruitment, under which the agency exercises additional oversight over the recruitment process. The regulations also provide mechanisms addressing fraud, willful misrepresentation, revocation and debarment.

No regulatory system eliminates misconduct entirely. But PERM already contains substantial safeguards and enforcement tools.

That is why the administration should explain why those tools, together with a fact-specific enforcement response, are insufficient before imposing a sweeping disruption on employers and the professionals they sponsor.

What the PERM Suspension Means for Affected Professionals

The immediate concern is the employer-sponsored green card process. Employees with pending PERM applications or planned filings may face uncertainty about whether and when their cases can proceed under the announced policy.

The effect on an individual’s broader immigration situation depends on the stage of the case, existing immigration status, petition history and other circumstances. A pending PERM application, an approved labor certification and an approved immigrant petition are not interchangeable.

Before changing employers, withdrawing a case or pursuing a different filing strategy, affected professionals should obtain an individualized review.

That review should also consider an important question: is an employer-sponsored PERM case the only viable path?

For some professionals, the answer is no.

EB-2 National Interest Waiver: A Green Card Pathway Without PERM

The EB-2 National Interest Waiver, commonly called an NIW, allows qualifying individuals to seek permanent residence without a PERM labor certification or an employer-sponsored job offer. Applicants may self-petition.

An applicant must first qualify for EB-2 as an advanced-degree professional or a person of exceptional ability. The applicant must also establish that:

1. The proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national importance.
2. The applicant is well positioned to advance that endeavor.
3. On balance, it would benefit the United States to waive the job offer and labor certification requirements.

Potential Benefits of an NIW

For an eligible professional, an NIW can:

• Remove the PERM recruitment and certification requirement.
• Reduce dependence on a particular employer’s willingness or ability to sponsor.
• Allow the applicant to build a petition around a qualifying proposed endeavor and the evidence supporting it.

For professionals concerned about their employer’s ability to continue PERM sponsorship, the ability to pursue an independent petition may be particularly important.

However, a technical job title, advanced degree or employment at a prominent company does not automatically establish NIW eligibility. The petition must explain the proposed work and demonstrate why its importance extends beyond merely benefiting an employer or its customers.

An NIW petition also does not, by itself, grant work authorization or eliminate immigrant visa backlogs. It is a different route to immigrant classification, not a guarantee of immediate permanent residence.

EB-1A Extraordinary Ability: An Independent First-Preference Pathway

EB-1A is an employment-based first-preference green card category for individuals with extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business or athletics.

Applicants must demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and satisfy the applicable evidentiary and overall eligibility standards. EB-1A does not require PERM or a job offer, and applicants may self-petition.

Potential Benefits of EB-1A

For qualifying individuals, EB-1A offers:

• No PERM labor certification requirement.
• No employer sponsorship requirement.
• First-preference immigrant classification.
• A petition centered on the individual’s achievements and continued work in their field.

Evidence may include significant original contributions, published work, judging the work of others, qualifying awards or leading or critical roles, depending on the individual’s record.

Meeting a minimum number of evidentiary criteria does not automatically establish eligibility. The overall record must support the extraordinary ability standard.

EB-1A can be worth evaluating for accomplished technology and business professionals, not just academics or public figures. But the standard is demanding, and immigrant visa availability must be checked separately.

O-1 Visas: A Temporary Work Option, Not a Green Card

O-1 classification serves a different purpose from NIW and EB-1A. It is a temporary, nonimmigrant work classification for qualifying individuals with extraordinary ability or achievement.

For technology, science and business professionals, the relevant category is generally O-1A.

An O-1 petition does not require PERM. It must, however, be filed by a qualifying employer or agent. An individual cannot simply self-petition as they can under NIW or EB-1A.

Potential Benefits of O-1 Classification

For a qualifying professional with suitable proposed work, O-1 may provide a separate option for authorized employment while longer-term immigration planning continues.

A qualifying U.S. agent arrangement may also accommodate certain work engagements, subject to the petition’s requirements and supporting documentation. This is not unrestricted permission to work for any employer.

O-1 approval does not confer permanent residence or guarantee EB-1A approval. Although the evidence may overlap, the classifications have distinct requirements and must be evaluated separately.

The practical distinction is important: NIW and EB-1A address potential permanent residence strategies, while O-1 addresses a potential temporary work strategy.

NIW vs. EB-1A vs. O-1: Key Differences

	EB-2 NIW	EB-1A	O-1
Purpose	A permanent residence pathway.	A permanent residence pathway.	A temporary work classification.
PERM required	No.	No.	No.
Self-petition available	Yes.	Yes.	No. A qualifying employer or agent must petition.
Central eligibility focus	EB-2 eligibility and a qualifying national-interest endeavor.	Extraordinary ability and sustained national or international acclaim.	Extraordinary ability or achievement and qualifying proposed work.

None of these categories is an automatic substitute for a suspended PERM case. The right strategy depends on the individual’s qualifications, immigration history, work plans and timing.

Accountability Should Not Become an Attack on Legal Immigration

American workers deserve meaningful protection. Employers should face consequences when evidence establishes violations. Those principles do not justify treating the entire PERM framework, or the professionals who use it, as inherently suspect.

The administration owes affected employers, employees and the public a specific explanation of the evidence and legal justification for this sweeping action.

Until then, political rhetoric should not be mistaken for proof.

At Ellis Porter, immigration is personal. Behind each application is a person planning a career, a family making decisions and an employer navigating a complex legal system.

Our focus is helping people understand what has actually changed, what remains uncertain and which lawful options may fit their circumstances.

For affected professionals, that means an evidence-based review of the existing case and any potential NIW, EB-1A or O-1 strategy, rather than a rushed decision driven by a headline.

The guiding principle should be accountability: investigate actual misconduct, protect American workers and insist that government action be justified by evidence and law.

This article reflects information available on October 8, 2026. Implementation details may change. It provides general information, not legal advice for an individual case.

Frequently asked questions

Can Microsoft or Adobe Employees Still Pursue an NIW or EB-1A?

Potentially. NIW and EB-1A do not require the employer’s PERM labor certification. An employee must independently satisfy the requirements of the chosen category. Employment at an affected company neither establishes nor automatically defeats eligibility.

Can Employees of Infosys, TCS, Cognizant, Wipro, HCL or Capgemini Self-Petition for a Green Card?

Potentially, if they qualify for a category that permits self-petitioning, such as EB-2 NIW or EB-1A. The analysis should focus on the individual’s qualifications and proposed work rather than assume that their employer’s participation in the suspension determines every available immigration option.

Is O-1 an Alternative to a PERM Green Card?

Not directly. O-1 is a temporary work classification, while PERM is part of many employer-sponsored permanent residence cases. O-1 may address a different immigration need, but it does not replace a green card petition.

Does Filing an NIW or EB-1A Petition Allow Someone to Keep Working?

Not by itself. An immigrant petition and employment authorization are separate issues. Professionals must evaluate their existing status and any separately available employment authorization rather than assume that a new green card petition permits continued work.

Should an Affected Employee Withdraw a Pending PERM Application?

That decision should not be made based on the headline alone. Before withdrawing an application or making an employment change, the employee should review the existing case, applicable government instructions and the potential consequences with immigration counsel.