All About O-1 Visa, Entry Route To US Gaining Popularity Among Indians
As Indians face challenges in getting a work visa in the United States due to long queues and the Trump administration's crackdown on immigration, the O-1 visa is emerging as an alternative for professionals seeking job opportunities in the US. The O-1 is a specialised non-immigrant visa for individuals with "extraordinary ability" in the field of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics), arts, education, business, athletics, or the film or television industry.
Established under the Immigration Act of 1990, the O-1 visa is being touted as an alternative to the increasingly competitive H-1B visa, but "with no lottery system."
What Is An O-1 Visa?
The O-1 offers a temporary entry into the US to individuals who demonstrate extraordinary ability by sustained national or international acclaim, or a record of extraordinary achievement in the motion picture and television industry. To get this visa, applicants are required to meet at least three of eight rigorous criteria, such as major awards, scholarly publications, or original contributions to their field.
Unlike the H-1B, which has a mere 37 per cent approval rate due to intense scrutiny, the O-1 allows high-skilled talent to bypass systemic uncertainties. It gives more eligibility flexibility to applicants, as it requires no minimum salary or formal degree, and accepts international awards or media coverage as proof of an individual's achievements.
However, an O-1A visa application is typically much costlier than the H-1B application. Its costs range from $10,000-$30,000, around 10 times higher than H-1B fees. But, it has a success rate of 93 per cent and offers initial validity for up to three years with unlimited extensions.
O-1 Visa Gaining Popularity Among Indians
According to the US Department of State data, O-1A issuances surged from 8,838 in FY2020 to 18,994 in FY2023, with Indians driving much of this growth.
Per the FY2023 data, Indians were the third-largest cohort of O-1A visa recipients globally, by receiving 1,418 O-1A visas, trailing only the U.K. and Brazil.
The visa is not only becoming increasingly popular among solo entrepreneurs, but also among multinational firms like Google and Tesla.
Highlighting its accessibility beyond traditional employment, Soundarya Balasubramani, a 28-year-old founder of educational venture The Curious Maverick, told Ecanomics Times (ET), recounted the ease with which she secured an O-1A as a solo entrepreneur.
"I got my O-1A (visa) approved as the solo founder and 100 per cent owner of an educational venture that publishes books and builds communities," she said.
Another reason for its popularity is no lottery system in the O-1 category. Sahil Nyati, founder at Jinee Green Card, describes the O-1A as an H-1B visa without a lottery.
"There's definitely higher interest in O-1A, simply because it's like an H-1B without a lottery, although it's not a piece of cake," Nyati told ET.
In FY2024, a total of 225,957 H-1B visas were approved as compared to only 22,669 O-1s. But since then, the demand for H-1B has seen a declining trend, while O-1s are witnessing nearly 10 per cent year-on-year growth.
Aslam Ahmed, Partner, Singhania & Co, told the publication that companies like Google, OpenAI, Tesla, and McKinsey are among those open to recruiting promising new talent from India and attracting well-established players in their fields to their US headquarters. "Top universities like Harvard, Yale and Columbia are always looking to hire the best faculty and researchers globally," he added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
26 minutes ago
- Economic Times
New lawsuit challenges Trump's federal takeover of DC police department as crackdown intensifies
The nation's capital challenged President Donald Trump's takeover of its police department in court on Friday, hours after his administration stepped up its crackdown on policing by naming a federal official as the new emergency head of the department, with all the powers of a police chief. ADVERTISEMENT District of Columbia Attorney General Brian Schwalb said in a new lawsuit that Trump is going far beyond his power under the law. Schwalb asked a judge to find that control of the department remains in district hands. "The administration's unlawful actions are an affront to the dignity and autonomy of the 700,000 Americans who call DC home. This is the gravest threat to Home Rule that the District has ever faced, and we are fighting to stop it," Schwalb said. The lawsuit comes after Trump Attorney General Pam Bondi said Thursday night that Drug Enforcement Administration boss Terry Cole will assume "powers and duties vested in the District of Columbia Chief of Police." The Metropolitan Police Department "must receive approval from Commissioner Cole" before issuing any orders, Bondi said. It was unclear where the move left the city's current police chief, Pamela Smith, who works for the mayor. Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser pushed back, writing on social media that "there is no statute that conveys the District's personnel authority to a federal official." ADVERTISEMENT Chief had agreed to share immigration information Schwalb had said late Thursday that Bondi's directive was "unlawful," arguing it could not be followed by the city's police force. He wrote in a memo to Smith that "members of MPD must continue to follow your orders and not the orders of any official not appointed by the Mayor," setting up the legal clash between the heavily Democratic district and the Republican administration. ADVERTISEMENT Bondi's directive came even after Smith had told MPD officers hours earlier to share information with immigration agencies regarding people not in custody, such as someone involved in a traffic stop or checkpoint. The Justice Department said Bondi disagreed with the police chief's directive because it allowed for continued enforcement of "sanctuary policies," which generally limit cooperation by local law enforcement with federal immigration said she was rescinding that order as well as other MPD policies limiting inquires into immigration status and preventing arrests based solely on federal immigration warrants. All new directives must now receive approval from Cole, the attorney general said. ADVERTISEMENT The police takeover is the latest move by Trump to test the limits of his legal authorities to carry out his agenda, relying on obscure statutes and a supposed state of emergency to bolster his tough-on-crime message and his plans to speed up the mass deportation of people in the US also marks one of the most sweeping assertions of federal authority over a local government in modern times. While Washington has grappled with spikes in violence and visible homelessness, the city's homicide rate ranks below those of several other major US cities and the capital is not in the throes of the public safety collapse the administration has portrayed. ADVERTISEMENT Residents are seeing a significant show of force A population already tense from days of ramp-up has begun seeing more significant shows of force across the city. National Guard troops watched over some of the world's most renowned landmarks and Humvees took position in front of the busy main train station. Volunteers helped homeless people leave long-standing encampments - to where was often of Homeland Security police stood outside Nationals Park during a game Thursday between the Washington Nationals and the Philadelphia Phillies. DEA agents patrolled The Wharf, a popular nightlife area, while Secret Service officers were seen in the Foggy Bottom walking a tightrope between the Republican White House and the constituency of her largely Democratic city, was out of town Thursday for a family commitment in Martha's Vineyard but would be back Friday, her office uptick in visibility of federal forces around the city, including in many high-traffic areas, has been striking to residents going about their lives. Trump has the power to take over federal law enforcement for 30 days before his actions must be reviewed by Congress, though he has said he'll re-evaluate as that deadline set up a checkpoint in one of DC's popular nightlife areas, drawing protests. Troops were stationed outside the Union Station transportation hub as the 800 Guard members who have been activated by Trump started in on missions that include monument security, community safety patrols and beautification efforts, the Pentagon said. Troops will assist law enforcement in a variety of roles, including traffic control posts and crowd control, National Guard Major Micah Maxwell said. The Guard members have been trained in de-escalation tactics and crowd control equipment, Maxwell said. National Guard troops are a semi-regular presence in DC, typically being used during mass public events like the annual July 4 celebration. They have regularly been used in the past for crowd control in and around Metro stations.
Hindustan Times
26 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Trump says it will be up to Ukraine to decide on territorial swaps
By Steve Holland Trump says it will be up to Ukraine to decide on territorial swaps ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE -U.S. President Donald Trump said he would not negotiate on behalf of Ukraine in his Friday meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin and would let Kyiv decide whether to engage in territorial swaps with Russia. Trump said his goal was to get the two sides to start a negotiation, with any territorial swaps to be addressed then. "They'll be discussed, but I've got to let Ukraine make that decision, and I think they'll make a proper decision. But I'm not here to negotiate for Ukraine, I'm here to get them at a table," Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One. Trump's remarks are likely to offer some assurance to Ukraine, which is worried that the U.S.-Russia talks could freeze the conflict at Ukraine's expense. Trump said the Russian offensive in Ukraine was likely aimed at helping to strengthen Putin's hand in any negotiations to end the war. "I think they're trying to negotiate. He's trying to set a stage. In his mind that helps him make a better deal. It actually hurts him, but in his mind that helps him make a better deal if they can continue the killing," he said. The U.S. president said he expected his meeting with Putin to produce results, given the stakes involved and weakness in the Russian economy. "He's a smart guy, been doing it for a long time but so have I ... we get along, there's a good respect level on both sides, and I think, you know, something's going to come of it," he said. Trump said it was a good sign that Putin was bringing business executives with him from Russia, but said no deals could be made until the war was settled. "I like that 'cause they want to do business, but they're not doing business until we get the war settled," he said. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Hindustan Times
26 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
How to win at foreign policy
WHEN DONALD TRUMP meets Vladimir Putin in Alaska it will be the seventh time the two have talked in person. This time is different, though. Since their last sit-down, Mr Putin has launched an unprovoked war, lost perhaps a million Russian soldiers (dead and wounded) and inflicted ceaseless misery on Ukrainians in pursuit of an imperial dream. Undaunted, Mr Trump hopes to get in a room with a wily dictator, feel him out and forge a deal. It is the biggest test yet of his uniquely personal style of diplomacy. It is also a reminder of how unpredictable American foreign policy has become. Will Mr Trump be firm, making clear that America and its allies will do what it takes to guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty? Or will he be in such a rush to reopen business with Russia that he rewards its aggression and leaves Ukraine vulnerable to future attacks? As everyone clamours for the president's ear, no one knows what he will do. At the beginning of Mr Trump's second term his supporters had a theory about how he would wield American power. Rather than relying on deep relationships and expertise, he would rely on his gut. As a master negotiator with a knack for sensing what others want and fear, he would cut through the waffle and apply pressure ruthlessly. Everyone wants access to American markets. By threatening to shut them out, he would force recalcitrant foreigners to end wars and reset the terms of trade to America's advantage. Career diplomats and experts would be replaced by rainmakers. Yes, his transactional approach might foster a bit of corruption. But if it brought peace in Ukraine or Gaza, who cared? Alas, there are drawbacks to this approach. Using tariffs as a weapon hurts America, too. More fundamentally, junking universal principles for might-makes-right repels friends without necessarily cowing foes. And the substitution of presidential whim for any coherent theory of international relations makes geopolitics less predictable and more dangerous. Mr Trump is not a globalist, obviously. Nor is he an isolationist, or a believer in regional spheres of influence. He simply does what he wants, which changes frequently. One way to make sense of Trumpism is that he divides his efforts at dealmaking into three categories: high, medium and low stakes. In the first category are America's relations with unfriendly great powers, principally China and Russia. Israel is here, too, because of its importance in American domestic politics. Iran makes an appearance, because of the way it threatens its neighbours. All these relationships are complex, difficult and matter a lot to Mr Trump. If he scores a win here—if he ends the war in Ukraine, or brings peace between Israel and the Palestinians, or finds a formula for co-operating with China without endangering national security—then the pay-off is potentially staggering. In the medium-stakes category Mr Trump puts Brazil, South Africa and, oddly, giant India. These are important countries that both America and China want in their camp. In most cases, their values are far closer to America's than to China's. Ties with them ought to be win-win. But they are unwilling to be bossed around, and take offence when Mr Trump insults or tries to bully them. The small stakes, for Mr Trump, are in small or poor countries. A superpower can wield great influence over such places, sometimes to good ends. Mr Trump helped cement a peace deal between Azerbaijan and Armenia, for example, and brokered a truce between the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda. These are welcome achievements. Azerbaijan and Armenia had been fighting for 35 years. Mr Trump mediated a reopening of trade and transport links. The fruits may include a weakening of Russian influence in the area. The Congo-Rwanda deal is much shakier—Rwandan-backed rebels have violated it repeatedly—but not nothing. And there may be an upside for America, in the form of mineral deals. When it comes to medium-size stakes, Mr Trump's method works less well. He has started needless feuds with the leaders of Brazil (because it is prosecuting a Trumpy ex-president for allegedly attempting a coup), with South Africa (because he believes, wrongly, that it is persecuting whites) and with India (infuriating its prime minister with painful tariffs and undiplomatic boasting). The result? India will draw closer to Russia again, and be less inclined to act as a counterweight against China. Brazil and South Africa see China as a more reliable partner than America. Mr Trump has won headlines that play well with his most ardent supporters. But America has lost out. And when it comes to the highest stakes, the president is floundering. He has tried to coerce China with tariffs, but it is fighting back. This week Mr Trump blinked and extended another deadline. He also undermined his own national-security policy by lifting a ban on exports of Nvidia chips to China, while insisting that Uncle Sam gets a 15% cut. On Ukraine, he has been wildly inconsistent, one day blaming it for having been invaded and threatening to cut military aid, then accusing Mr Putin of bad faith and threatening stiffer sanctions on Russia. On Israel, he has consistently given Binyamin Netanyahu everything he wants and extracted nothing in return. If Mr Trump's bombing of Iran's nuclear sites made Israel safer, well and good. But he has failed to use his leverage to restrain Israel's unending war in Gaza. The world is flattery Other countries are learning how to play Mr Trump. A crypto deal and a nomination for a Nobel peace prize worked for Pakistan. A plane helped Qatar. The corruption is turning out to be as bad as almost anyone feared; the great deals have yet to materialise. Those who say Mr Trump is looking out for his own interests, not America's, have plenty of ammunition. All this is only a preliminary judgment. If Mr Trump stands up to Mr Putin this week, perhaps he can make his greatest-ever deal, ending Europe's worst war since 1945. Sadly, the odds are against it. For subscribers only: to see how we design each week's cover, sign up to our weekly Cover Story newsletter.
