« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Illegal Immigration Costs Us Net $100 Billion

The debate over illegal immigration often is clouded with the question of whether illegal immigrants are a net economic benefit or cost to society. This is often amplified by the leftist when he says “these people do the jobs Americans won’t do,” which has often struck me as rather demeaning of both the immigrant and the American – not to mention being ridiculous.

As someone who lives in Texas and has dealt with the illegal population first hand – in both a personal and professional capacity – my belief is that it is critically important we remember that these are human beings, each with his own story, the vast majority of whom are good people looking for a better way of life in America.

But it is neither good for America nor good for immigrants, legal or illegal, for our country to abandon the rule of law and to continue to absorb the cost of illegal immigration. Now, of course, it is a difficult calculation – having to take into account various taxes paid vs. all services consumed, and basing that on an unknown number of people here illegally. But the good folks at FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform) have issued a report estimating that the net cost of illegal immigration to the American taxpayer is approximately $100 billion.

According to the FAIR press release, the report, entitled “The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on U.S. Taxpayers,” offers the following:

* The $113 billion in outlays for services and benefits to illegal aliens and their families represents an average cost to native-headed households of $1,117 a year. Because the burdens of illegal immigration are not evenly distributed, the costs are much higher in states with large illegal alien populations.
* Education for the children of illegal aliens represents the single largest public expenditure at an annual cost of $52 billion. Nearly all of that cost is absorbed by state and local governments.
* The federal government recoups about one-third of its share of the costs of illegal immigration in the form of taxes collected. States, which bear a much greater share of the costs, recoup a mere 5 percent of their expenditures from taxes paid by illegal aliens.
* Granting amnesty to illegal aliens, as President Obama and others propose, would not significantly increase tax revenues generated by current illegal aliens. However, over time, amnesty would dramatically increase public costs as newly-legalized aliens become eligible for all means-tested government programs.
* Arizona’s annual cost of illegal immigration is $2.5 billion.

To ignore the cost of illegal immigration is to ignore the fundamental problem itself. It is real, and hiding behind nonsensical rhetoric and glib one liners about who will do what job only makes the situation worse for everyone involved. Good for FAIR for trying to sort through this problem.

COMMENTS

  • republicanblack

    This article just talks about the cost, but it doesn’t really go into contribution. I am tired of blaming Mexicans for taking american jobs. The truth is it is some white-faced american firing my american tail and hiring a foreign national just to save some bucks. I want to work, but I can’t work for the same pay I did 24 years ago, that’s the problem. A mexican can cause he doesn’t have to pay the full cost of living. We cannot survive on $6/hr. But I am still against the AZ law, simply because I read this article and it clearly showed how the government will win and how it is unconstitutional.

    http://bit.ly/bujRxn

    • redneck_hippie

      that “clearly showed how the government will win and how it is unconstitutional.”

      I know what is in the FAIRus study, but I have no idea what “article” you read.

      Have you read the FAIRus study linked above?

      Maybe you overlooked the word “net” in the title.

    • banzaibob

      What this article fails to say is anyone who does not provide proper ID after a law enforcement official is in the act of a arresting or issuing a ticket can be detained. It doesn’t matter if you have a southern drawl or have a mexican accent, if you have the proper ID you can go about your business, no discrimination.

      Illegal one day then legal the next, how often does that happen? If the next civil war breaks out in Mexico I can agree. Until then I don’t buy it.

      Also if the president would do his constutional duties by enforcing immigration laws we wouldn’t have this big of a problem.

      • porttabacco

        Then it is very easy to obtain a legal ID.
        Or didn’t you know that?

        The President is not going to enforce our immigration laws, why do you think Gov. Brewer had to go this route?
        The State of Arizona will win unless a corrupt Judge is appointed.

        SB2070 mirrors Federal Immigration law that you claim Obama
        should be using.
        An extremely intelligent Professor of law wrote SB 1070 for Arizona.
        His name is Kris Kobach. The ACLU fears him. And so will open border radicals.

    • redware

      money that could cover the cost of rounding them up and shipping them home.What a shovel ready project!I know the jobs would be temporary,but what a net plus for our economy in the long term.The negatives far outweigh any contribution these illegals are performing.They and the employers who hire them are both to blame.You are falling for the typical liberal “victimization”
      rationale.Legitimate American citizens and those who would love to legally become citizens are the only victims here!

    • ritaok

      your republicanblack analysis. The AZ law defends our border, regardless of race, creed or color. Would you think it so unconstitutional if and when these border crossings morphe into the warm fuzzy entries of Al Quaida, or the South American drug cartel crime syndicate? Illegal entry is a grave issue and has a myriad of ramifications beyond minimum wage questions.

    • realskinny

      Mr. Moore appears clueless in how the law would function. He also doesn’t seem to understand how local law enforcement interacts with ICE. The short story is that most of his arguments are irrelevant and the rest are wrongheaded.

      The concurrent enforcement in the law have been upheld several times. It conflicts in no way with Federal law. It is constitutional and will almost certainly be upheld. This is just more of Barry’s dishonesty and pandering.

      The State of California spends over 5 billion annually on prisons. 40% of those in prison are illegals. The border fence could be built for less than CA spends annually on illegals. The reason Washington will not build it is not because they have a problem with wasting money. They won’t build it because it would work.

      Back in 2005, the NYT had an article lamenting that wages at the low end of the scale had not increased in 15 years while they had increased nicely at the top. In the same paper they berated “Nativists” and called for Comprehensive Immigration Reform (Amnesty). These idiots are incapable of seeing the connection between wages for low skilled labor being stagnant and an unlimited supply of low skilled labor.

      If we stop the flow , the problem of those who are here will take care of itself. Some will go home and not come back. Some will be caught and deported and some will be assimilated and become Americans with fake ID.

    • Right Reason

      The website also has a great piece on how the Tea Party is a “stunt devised and manipulated by Republican Strategists”.

      Isn’t there an article from Mother Jones that you could cite as well?

      I smell MOBY.

    • snowshooze

      I wouldn’t give it too much weight, especially after having read some of the comments on it.

  • banzaibob

    Even if they were a net positive they are still cheaters.

    They cheat the youth in America who can’t get entry level jobs causing higher unemployment and lack of job experience when they graduate from high school.

    They cheat American citizens and legal aliens by depressing wages by working for less than minimum wage and no benefits.

    They cheat those who are waiting to emigrate to this country who study our culture, language, and laws years before they get here. The illegal doesn’t care for our culture, language, or laws and they prove it by being here illegally.

    • The_Rebel

      I’m having my kitchen redone after 30 years-floors, cabinets, ceiling, everything including the kitchen sink (no pun intended). The contractor is from Lebanon, but we have seen his work and he has done an excellent job on friends and neighbors homes. He subs out a lot of the installation work to illegals-all of whom speak little or no English.

      I’m sure that he can keep his price to me down because of this. I had no idea he would be using illegals. If these people were deported or never allowed into the country in the first place, it would open a lot of jobs that many unemployed people would take, albeit at higher wage levels and tax withholdings. Which would mean a higher price to me to pay for the job. I can live with that, though.

      What we are getting here is the contractor paying these people cash, under the table, with no taxes paid. And the contractor is also hiding income since he cannot deduct wages he is paying under the table. He prefers, where possible, for us to pay him cash, rather than by checks. Thus far, we have seen about 5 or 6 illegals here at various times, doing different aspects of the job.

      So yes, they are cheating American citizens and legal immigrants. This is just one of the ways.

      • johnCV

        Are you going to say anything? When I GC’ed my house, I made it specifically clear that there were to be no illegals on the job.

        You now have an opportunity to do actually take some action, so either stand up or don’t complain about the problem. Sorry to be so blunt, but if everyone just assumes ‘well, it’s only my one little job’, it will only get worse. The money you save on this project is covered by every other tax payer (as you cover their ‘cheap’ jobs).

        • The_Rebel

          What would I accomplish now by saying anything? I never gave it a thought when we signed up for this. So you would have me stop all work, have a lawsuit to deal with, and have an unfinished kitchen with no stove, dishwasher, sink, etc for weeks, if not months. Get real. I was only doing a kitchen, not a complete house, unlike you. You thought to ask, I didn’t.

      • realskinny

        When I first did carpentry as a lead carpenter in 1992, I got 20 dollars an hour. When I retired in 2008, I was getting $22.00. Adjusted for inflation I was getting about $6.00 less. Over the 16 years the number of Mexicans one saw on jobs at least tripled. One of the reasons America has always—even before 1776—had higher incomes is there has never been enough hands available for the work that needs to be done. This has also spurred the development of labor saving machinery. Thus we have substituted machines and energy for muscle power. The resulting productivity has boosted our standard of living to heights undreamed of 2 centuries ago.

        If you wish to lower the American standard of living, just open the borders and cut us off from plentiful energy. Which brings us back to the Obama agenda.

      • snowshooze

        If you have to file a lawsuit on this guy, can he cover it?
        If one of the guys gets hurt on your property, it may well fall to your insurance to cover it.
        If you are paying out of pocket, can you deduct the expenses for improvments at your time of sale, or is the margin good enough where you are already ahead?
        Those are just a couple issues I would immediately be concerned about.

  • Russ Martin

    for finally bringing this issue to proper context. If we’re going to win the debate on illegal immigration, we must NOT fight it on the libs’ terms. We’ve got to move the discussion beyond “race”, and “hate”, and who will or won’t do what jobs for what pay.

    With the nation’s attention focused on deficits and spending, we must steer the argument on illegal immigration to the COST. We must keep the argument simple and sell-able to the general public. We must continue to hammer on the costs of illegal immigration – education, housing assistance, welfare, unemployment, Earned Income Credit, SSI, medcaid, etc. We need to show the costs to each state (and to each state’s taxpayers), based on the best estimates of illegal alien populations.

    I would also like to see someone come up with the number of American citizens that are killed each year by illegal aliens via crime and drunk driving.

    When we debate the issue on these terms, we’ll win it, overwhelmingly, with the American people – especially those NOT in border states.

  • snowshooze

    I have to file an I-9 for every hire, see three pieces of ID, or I am in violation.
    As a business, I cannot hire and pay cash under the table, that would not be a business deduction and the money would have to be taxed as my personal income.
    Further, I can’t see how I could cover an Illegal under Workman’s Compensation insurance and if anyone wound up getting injured, I would be liable, illegal or not.
    I really do not understand how or why I would want to do it,
    How does anyone get away with it to start with?

    • Russ Martin

      Illegals can purchase forget documents – social security cards, driver’s licenses, etc. just about anywhere. They present them to you, the employer. Unless you use E-Verify, then you won’t know the SSN doesn’t match the name until you receive a “No Match” letter from the IRS, sometime in October, for the previous year’s W-2s you submit. By that time, the employee has probably moved on.

      Bottom line: Use E-Verify to ensure the SSNs you’re getting match the individual.

      • snowshooze

        E-verify it is.
        I can’t see how it could be made mandatory, but it should be. It would seem that fax/phone verifications should be honored and responded to in minutes.
        If it were, then there would be less pressure to cross the border as forged papers wouldn’t work.

      • pamela1631

        A dry wall installer run down a list of social security numbers trying to find one that would “work” in order to get a job.
        It was 20 years ago when I was in housing construction and a lot easier for illegals to float in the economy.
        I told the purchasing agent, don’t you even give him the contract, they won’t be covered under our insurance and would void the company’s policy.

        Needless to say he was real ticked off at me.

  • tngal

    How much in tax revenue was lost when the construction job was given to an illegal instead of legal citizen? The loss to the country’s revenue stream was not calculated.

    When an illegal gets the construction or hotel job instead of a legal citizen he/she sends much of their wages back to their home country. The same illegal spends only a fraction in this country of a what a legal citizen spends on goods, services, taxes and charities.

    Consider a house in which resides a legal family of four (with grown or adult children.) There’s at least three cars, all with insurance and even when one or two aren’t working , what money there is remains in America to flow into the revenue stream.

    Whereas, a rental unit down the street designed for three or four people is crammed with half a dozen or more illegals, splitting rent. maybe two vehicles. Less if they can catch a ride from an employer on the corner. Buying only what they need to survive and sending everything that remains back to where ever. The disposable income is virtually nil. And since many aren’t buying necessiities like insurance they save even more.

    We have the figures to show how much we’re spending on the illegals. But how come no one is trying to quantify how much money we’re losing because of them?

  • teapartypatriot

    The open borders advocates never admit to the horrific economic penalty American citizen workers and taxpayers must pay due to the illegals. But the people of Arizona, who have had to carry the massive burden of ILLEGALS more than most, certainly understand the problem.

    For example, the results of a recent landmark study by George Borjas, professor of economic and social policy at Harvard University, showed that Arizona workers lose $1.4 billion in wages a year because companies there hire illegals and because foreigners in the state illegally have reduced the employment rate of legal Arizona residents. These results reinforce those of the outstanding 2007 Heritage Foundation study by Robert Rector, which showed that the average cost to taxpayers in government services is about $32,000 per household of illegals.

    In addition to this staggering burden, the taxpayers in Arizona have recently gotten a bill from the state for $300 MILLION to teach illegals English due to federal mandates!

    These are some the costs of the massive invasion of the US by illegals. The open-borders advocates just don’t get it – but the legal workers and taxpayers in Arizona do! Hopefully, all American works will soon get this message: either get rid of ILLEGALS for pay through the nose to support them.

  • aesthete

    because we lose every time. First of all, it is a fact that illegals do help the economy — that is not in dispute among statisticians or economists. Many of the gains are quite large, esp. in construction and agriculture. The question with less sure footing is whether or not they are, on net, contributors to the system or net takers. I’ve seen everything from ~+80 billion in tax revenues to ~-125 billion in tax revenues. IMO, it is a drain on our coffers, but not a particularly large one (though that cost is disproportionately borne by California and AZ).

    Secondly, the correct counter-example to use is not a world where illegals simply don’t exist, but one with a regulatory and law enforcement system that would get rid of illegals. Proper law enforcement alone would likely cost more than what we lose from illegals, nevermind the costs added by regulation. The utilitarian arguments in favor of native employment are akin to those made by unions, in that both argue that government forcing companies to hire employees for above-market wages will spur prosperity/restore the middle class/insert prosperity cliche here.

    The argument against illegal immigration should be made exclusively on the grounds of sovereignty and an ordered society. Utilitarian cost/benefit analysis don’t favor us.

    • hogan

      I can tell you the analysis that illegals are net contributors and the argument that they do jobs Americans won’t do carried considerable weight… So it is important that we have counter analysis with which to argue.

      No one here would argue that sovereignty, the rule of law, etc… is the primary argument. It always was.

      • aesthete

        Just recognize, from someone who’s helped sift through the data (though as a lowly research assistant, not a primary contributor) that the purely utilitarian counter-argument is very weak. The first claim might be true (I lean towards small, localized drain), but the second is most definitely true: very few Americans would be willing to do seasonal and construction labor at the wages that illegals demand (though I guess you’d have to repeal min. wage laws to test that hypothesis).

        • Achance

          is that welfare pays better as does crime. A second factor is the fact that the regulatory and tax environment place a huge disincentive on using legal labor for any sort of casual or intermittent labor.

          A study back in the mid-90s during the Welfare to Work initiatives showed that here in AK, a woman with one child had to have a job paying around $34K for working to be worth more than welfare IF she used all the benefits to which she was entitled – few do use all the benefits but the serious scammers do. No non-degreed entry level jobs were paying that much anywhere in the State. That was, in fact, more than we at the State were paying for entry technical/professional jobs that would allow entry with a general batchelors degree.

          The US has a tragic legacy in the way it dealt with the recently freed slaves in the aftermath of the Civil War. While hundreds of thousands of “contrabands” were camping in squalor around the union armies, the US imported European labor for the dramatic industrial expansion taking place in the Country and left the former slaves mostly to return to The South and a life of peonage for a century.

          The agricultural diaspora of the ’20s – ’40s clustered the mostly Black former agricultural workers in ghettoes in the cities where they remain to this day where they are being paid not to riot. Somehow it is socially and politically acceptable in the Country for brown people to do menial work but it is not acceptable for black people to do menial work. Perhaps it is the legacy of having only menial work available to them that has placed the stigma on menial employment for blacks. I shall always remember a visit to my hometown in Georgia ten years or so ago and a visit with an old friend who was an attorney there and a County Councilman. The unemployment rate in the county at that time was over ten percent and he was building a new luxury subdivision. I noted that the contractor was from Florida and all the labor was Hispanic and asked him how he could get away with that as a politician in a county with over 10% unemployment and he replied, “they don’t care as long as they get their welfare.” Sadly, it appeared he was and remains right.

          • aesthete

            Minimum wage disfavors inner-city poor blacks to skilled and unionized work to such a disproportionate extent that I can’t believe there aren’t politicians going to the pillory for it.

  • casca

    The real–DOUBLE–fence can be viewed in San Diego, not the partially built border fence that the federal government single fence, they keep parroting about that supposed to be secure? The Real Rep. Duncan hunter fence in California runs parallel with each other, covering just 50 miles and it has been successful in controlling both illegal immigrants and criminal activity in that region. Our legislators have completely ignored our constitution that states, ” The United States shall protect each of the states from invasion,

  • tlwinslow

    $100 billion sounds like a good figure for what it would cost to conquer Mexico and systematically murder its entire population.

    Seriously, Mexicans are here to stay, and instead of negative thinking how about positive thinking to find ways we can share the New World in peace and prosperity? One way that definitely isn’t working is the current 2-state solution with a 2K-mi. border. How about a 1-state solution under the right conditions? Find out the surprising answer at ht tp://go .to/megamerge

    • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • Carson

    Every dollar it cost us the criminals in the government, business and the general population that are aiding and abetting them gain a buck.

    • jackbenimble

      There are several groups that gain from illegal immigrants.

      The illegal immigrants themselves are better off or they would not be here. The people who hire them realize profits from cheap labor. These cheap labor savings are seldom passed on to consumers because economics tells us that the price of a good or service is set by the supply and demand for that service and is INDEPENDENT of the costs of the factors of production for that good and service. Labor union leaders are better off because they have more dues paying members. Churches are better off because they have more people in the pews. Bureaucrats are better off because a bigger population means a bigger government with more bureaucrats. Retailers are better off because illegals buy stuff.

      With the exception of the illegals themselves, the thing all of the above groups have in common is that they are part of the elite. They are insulated from the harm caused by illegals because they live in wealthy gated communities and send their children to private schools.

      The people who are not better off are America’s poor who have to compete for the same jobs and if they get one, suffer depressed wages. And they compete for the same housing at higher rents and increased crime. And they share the same crappy schools where resources are diverted from their American children to the English as a Second Language student children of illegals. Another group that is not better off is the middle class that, when you look beyond Federal Income Taxes, still carries the bulk of the tax burden in America and has to pay the bulk of the tab for the illegals and gets little benefit in return.

      Illegal immigration is like a giant regressive tax that transfers wealth from the poor and the middleclass to America’s elites. It is no surprise that more than on any other issue, America’s political class is out of touch with the American people on this issue. Illegal immigration is making the rich richer and the poor poorer and the elites like it that way.

  • johna650

    First, there are an estimated one million illegals in some form of detention, local, state, federal, ICE at any one time. The full cost of housing and processing and supervising them is at least $200/day or 73 billion annually.
    Second, their presence in the USA contributes to unemployment and underemployment that costs another $100 billion annually in services that taxpayers and charities furnish to US citizens who have been displaced by this horde of illegals.
    Third, they exacerbate our balance of payments problem as many send their disposable income home rather than spend it here.
    Fourthly, they are a blight on any community where they live causing a drop in property values.
    Fifth, they provide unfair competition to black sin particular who are forced to flee neighborhoods to avoid being targeted for elimination by illegal gangs. In my hometown of Santa Monica, CA, blacks were routinely murdered by illegals until they were forced to fell low rent apartment complexes.

    I commend FAIR for beginning to quantify the catastrophe of illegal immigration. I just think they must show all of the costs. Maybe that will wake up native Americans, especially blacks, to the demographic doom we are facing.

  • zeezil

    The fact that illegals are a huge net drain on the economy is without question as evidenced by a number of studies by FAIR, Heritage, Geroge Boras, Edwin Rubenstein…………….

  • zeezil

    Border police bait & switch

    A great article on Team Obama/the Fed’s hypocrisy:

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/border_police_bait_switch_9avLj7QlaBxEbIWapnRF1H

  • zeezil

    After careful review, anyone with a even a modicum of logic can come to no other conclusion: illegal immigration must be halted, illegal immigrants here now must be deported and legal immigration needs decreased from the approx. 2 million allowed in per year currently.

    Please review the following report on the FISCAL COST OF IMMIGRATION by economist Edwin Rubenstein released in April 2008:
    http://www.esrresearch.com/Rubensteinreport.pdf

    A partial summary of the report:

    The impact on 15 Federal Departments surveyed was: $346 billion in fiscal related costs in FY 2007.

    Each immigrant cost taxpayers more than $9,000 per year.

    An immigrant household (2 adults, 2 children) cost taxpayers $36,000 per year.

    Legal immigrants were not separated out from illegal immigrants for the fiscal impact study, but if they had been, the fiscal cost per ILLEGAL immigrant would be even more shocking than the figures quoted above.

    The most extensive and authoritative study, prior to economist Edwin Rubenstein’s “The Fiscal Impact of Immigration” (April 2008) , is the National Research Council (NRC)

  • zeezil

    Keep in mind the following when looking at the FAIR report (http://www.fairus.org/site/DocServer/USCostStudy_2010.pdf?docID=4921 )

    This report estimates the annual costs of illegal immigration at the federal, state and local level to be about $113 billion; nearly $29 billion at the federal level and $84.2 billion at the state and local level. The study also estimates tax collections from illegal alien workers, both those in the above-ground economy and those in the underground economy. Those receipts do not come close to the level of expenditures and, in any case, are misleading as an offset because over time unemployed and underemployed U.S. workers would replace illegal alien workers.

  • talgus

    Amazing how the Az law is bad because of possible consequences, but the Health care and financial bills we need to implement to find out what they will be.
    Health care even had IRS provisions for the VAT (1099s for every spending over $600 for a business). Wonderful, those wasscally Democrats

  • sccrenny

    requires legal immigrants to carry identification at all times proving their legal staus. What good is that if nobody can ask for ID or detain and determine? Especially since there is a 24/7 “hotline” state agencies can use for that purpose.

    The same argument goes for the proposed biometric ID for ALL Americans. Why should naturalized citizens be required to prove they are legal? Wouldn’t that entail carrying and checking of ID’s? The idiocy is stunning in that argument.

  • rightwingmom52

    As Chuck Norris so eloquently outlines in his series on immigration (see http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37051), there is a path. “Key criteria for citizenship of the Naturalization Act of 1795 remain part of American law. These include (1) five years of (lawful) residence within the United States; (2) a ‘good moral character, attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the United States’; (3) the taking of a formal oath to support the Constitution and to renounce any foreign allegiance; and (4) the renunciation of any hereditary titles.” Maybe some reform is needed, but frankly, the process shouldn’t be easy. To grant amnesty to those too lazy or unwilling to go through the process is a slap in the face to all those who have.

    • alamo294

      but what happened to the TEN YEARS that used to be required before applying for citizenship?