Skilled Migration Dilemma

Tariff pressures compel India to evaluate its policies from multiple perspectives. We cannot continue to have unrestrained brain drain while national interests are prejudiced. India is one of the world’s largest hubs of both medical talent and technology professionals. Each year, thousands of Indian-trained doctors and tech experts migrate to the United States and other developed countries. In this context, regulating the migration of the skilled workforce, linking it to broader economic strategies, including tariff retaliation/reaction, calls for consideration.

While migration of trained professionals, such as highly skilled doctors and technology experts, enhances India’s global soft power, it simultaneously contributes to domestic shortages, especially in healthcare within rural and underserved regions. The suggestion is not just a reaction to unprecedented policies like tariff hikes, but overall in the national interest. Moreover, India has substantially progressed from what it was decades back, when migration was sometimes a necessity for individuals.

The National Medical Commission Act, 2019 (which replaced the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956) regulates recognition of medical qualifications and licensing within India. The Emigration Act, 1983, governs the overseas employment of Indian citizens and focuses primarily on protecting vulnerable workers. None of these statutes, or any other statute, prevents highly skilled professionals from leaving for overseas employment. One possible policy option would be to promulgate a fresh statute or amend the Emigration Act, 1983, classifying doctors, technology professionals, etc., as a special category requiring government clearance before migration. Such modifications would help not only domestic workforce requirements but also aid in foreign policy considerations, including tariff retaliations. India could leverage its skilled professional power not just as a domestic asset but also as a strategic tool in international negotiations.

However, any such restriction must pass the test of constitutionality. The Indian Constitution guarantees the freedom to practice any profession and the right to livelihood under Article 19(1)(g) and Article 21. In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), the Supreme Court held that restrictions on movement abroad must be “just, fair and reasonable.” However, precedents also exist for imposing limited obligations. In State of Punjab v. Ram Lubhaya Bagga (1998), the Apex Court upheld the principle that government policy can evolve to protect public interest.

Furthermore, the Foreign Trade Policy and tariff-related legislation, such as the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992, could be amended to link migration of skilled professionals with international trade negotiations. Restricting this flow can be used as leverage in negotiations, particularly in the context of US trade policies. For instance, India could retaliate by limiting the flow of doctors to the US, affecting American hospitals that rely heavily on Indian-origin doctors.

Most importantly, the domestic advantage of this is clear: retaining doctors would improve the doctor–patient ratio, strengthen public health infrastructure, and ensure that the taxpayer’s investment in subsidised medical education benefits Indian citizens. More doctors in India would improve primary care, reduce disease burden, and help tackle issues in remote areas without dependence on foreign-trained professionals. Additionally, skilled manpower becomes a bargaining chip in diplomacy and trade negotiations, much like natural resources or industrial tariffs. However, over-restrictions need to be avoided, as that may violate constitutional rights to employment and movement under Article 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution.

Some states impose bonds on doctors who study in government colleges, requiring them to serve in India for some years, although enforcement remains inconsistent. Similar bonds also exist in certain private institutions, including for tech professionals. Expanding this practice more systematically across the country would not only strengthen public health and tech delivery but also give professionals time to reflect on their long-term career goals.

A balanced policy approach is necessary. Skilled migration could be aligned with trade policy through targeted amendments to existing laws. At the same time, there could be incentives such as better pay and improved working conditions to make it more attractive for professionals to remain in India. On assignment-based models, short-term global engagements, research exchanges, and assignment-based overseas service should be encouraged, as they allow professionals to contribute internationally while continuing to serve domestic needs, apart from adding to India’s income and reputation.

The challenge posed by rising tariffs should be converted into an opportunity for India to rethink its policies. Were we being too generous in allowing unrestricted outflow of our best-trained talent? Thoughtful changes could allow the government to retain critical human capital, especially for domestic health requirements, while at the same time using skilled migration as leverage in trade negotiations, particularly in the context of tariff actions by the United States. The solution lies in building a balanced ecosystem where Indian doctors, tech professionals, etc., serve the nation first while also engaging globally in ways that strengthen India’s healthcare system, economy, and bargaining power on the world stage.

Views expressed are personal