Report: Illegal immigrants in just a handful of states costing taxpayers $454 million


According to a report published by the Federation for American Immigration Reform, illegal immigrants residing in certain states are creating a net tax deficit of between $4,000 and $6,500 for every illegal present in those states per year.

FAIR’s report dove into great detail about the specific states affected financially by those unlawfully present within the country.

A follow up summary report that FAIR published in February detailed what states are facing these net tax deficits via those illegally present.

The February summary stated the following:

“The ten states analyzed in the study, Small Migrant Populations, Huge Impacts, are New Hampshire, Mississippi, Alaska, Maine, North Dakota, West Virginia, South Dakota, Vermont, Montana and Wyoming. 

The study found that both legal and illegal migration have a profound and mostly negative impact on the aforementioned states.”

From what the report detailed; the aforementioned states hosted approximately 415,000 foreign-born residents collectively.

Out of that 415,000-figure represented, the study stated that approximately 88,000 of those foreign-born residents were present in the country illegally.

It was noted that these illegal immigrants pose a cost of approximately $454 million annually to tax payers within all the states. When calculating those present illegally within each state along with the overall annual tax costs – the study concluded that each illegal alien ran a tax deficit of somewhere between $4,000 and $6,500 annually.

The report noted that states, like the ones examined in the report, are at greater risk of financial and economic repercussions from illegal immigration:

“In fact, states with smaller overall populations actually experience a proportionally greater effect from migrant influxes because such states typically have fewer jobs available and condensed economies, making it harder to absorb newcomers.”



What’s more concerning about the revelations from the study was that some of the states examined actually carried “sanctuary statuses” that often attracts illegal immigration:

“Currently, there are 29 “sanctuary” jurisdictions in the states covered by this report, including the entire state of Vermont. Aliens living in “sanctuary cities” like New York City and Los Angeles count on local police refusing to cooperate with immigration authorities.”

Dan Stein, president of FAIR, stated the following about the rising immigration, both legal and illegal, in these states:

“In many ways, the influx of immigrants into less populous areas of the country has an even greater impact on long-time residents than it does in larger and more urban areas.

These areas have neither the tax base, nor the economic and social infrastructure to accommodate the needs of the growing numbers of immigrants taking up residence.”

Stein was also harshly critical against those that claim immigration is some sort of economic stimulus:

“Many local officials tout immigration, including illegal immigration, as a remedy to economic stagnation.

However, as this report reveals, the reality is precisely the opposite. Illegal immigration, in particular, drives down wages and inhibits job opportunities for legal residents, while bringing more low-skilled, low-wage workers to these states.” 

Within the report, the topic of Limited English Proficiency school-aged students cropped up as well. Most LEP students can be traced directly back to foreign-born parents, and apparently the group of students are one of the most expensive demographics to educate.

Out of the states examined in the report, there were approximately 50,000 LEP students accounted for that cost roughly $96 million per year to educate. In comparison to those numbers, the report noted:

“The Boston public school system has just over 54,000 students. Yet, it spends only $60.2 million for all of its central administrative costs.

That means it costs $36 million dollars more to educate LEP students in the ten states covered by this report than Boston – a highly-regarded school system in one of America’s most densely populated urban technological hubs – spends on things like heat, light, water, school supplies, staff education and workers compensation claims.” 

Matt O’Brien, director of research at FAIR, spoke with about cities like Lewiston, Maine, which have seen a hefty rise in immigrants in the past 15 years.

The city’s population of under 40,000 has introduced over 7,500 migrants in that time span. As a result, the percentage of LEP students jumped from 5 percent in 2004 to 30 percent by 2017.

Stein noted, at the end of his recent release on the report, the following sentiment:

“Americans, in every part of the nation, are being affected by antiquated and unenforced immigration policies, which is why it is at the top of the list of voter concerns heading into the 2020 elections.”

That’s not even taking into consideration what’s going on in California – a state with an unfunded pension burden of $1 trillion dollars.

In January, Newsom unveiled a $222 billion state budget that proposes to use $80.5 million to extend health coverage to 27,000 illegal aliens in the state.

The state, which fancies itself a “sanctuary” where illegals are welcome with open arms, in many cases to commit crimes and even kill people, is in the throes of a homeless problem and its two major cities, San Francisco and Los Angeles are getting a reputation for feces infested ratholes.

LET has a private home for those who support emergency responders and veterans called LET Unity.  We reinvest the proceeds into sharing untold stories of those patriotic Americans. Click to check it out.

San Francisco's new DA fires seven senior prosecutors in two days because they enforced laws

But we are worried about extending health insurance for illegals. Got it.

Since California started its state-run health care program, it has steadily added different groups of illegal aliens to the program. The latest expansion, which includes illegals 65 and over has gotten the attention of people who question the cost of adding this demographic, which is more expensive to insure due to increased health issues.

State Sen. Patricia Bates told the Los Angeles Times that extending coverage would increase wait times and magnify doctor shortages.

“There are issues with access,” she said.

She said extending coverage to more people when those currently enrolled struggle to get appointments would constitute a “false promise.”

The number of people who will receive coverage under the expansion is relatively small in the grand scheme of things, and the estimated costs are a fraction of the state budget.

However, the state’s health insurance program, Medi-Cal already covers one-third of state residents. Critics of expanding the program say it is already struggling with long wait times (can you say Canada?) because of a shortage of doctors who are willing to accept the state’s low reimbursement rates.

So, what does an already broke state do when it has a shortage of doctors? Pay off student loans to coerce, um, convince doctors to participate in Medi-Cal. The program requires physicians or dentists to commit to taking 30% of their caseloads from Medi-Cal patients.

Supporters of the program believe this is a good step toward eventual universal health coverage in the state, which was part of Newsom’s campaign platform.

Anthony Wright, executive director of Health Access California, a consumer advocacy group, believes it’s a step in the right direction.

“We believe fundamentally that primary and preventative care makes our healthcare system more efficient and effective for everyone,” he said.

“It’s important that we take these important steps to provide real relief to Californians who are excluded due to eligibility or affordability.”

He said it’s not right.

“For many of these seniors, they have made a lifetime of contributions to California—to our economy, tax base and our society—and right now they are excluded from healthcare programs,” Wright said.

“It makes sense to focus on those who need this the most. It doesn’t mean we don’t want to get everyone, so we will continue to press on that as well.”

Got it. Illegals over citizens. Right in the California playbook.

Medi-Cal is funded by both state and federal money, however Obamacare prevents the use of federal dollars for covering illegal immigrants, so responsibility for that falls strictly on California.

Regarding the homeless issue, last week Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti revealed the first homeless housing project had been completed, despite the fact that they were supposed to have been finished by last year.

Three projects were partially funded by a $1.2 billion bond, however due to the substantial increase in homeless exacerbated by the state’s sanctuary policies, he has called for more state funding to complete the projects.

The bond was approved by Los Angeles voters in 2016 and after three years, only one housing project with 46 units has been completed.

And California wonders why it is broke. Those pension liabilities are like a dam, ready to break. California is only one of many states who are living downstream and will be in the way when that dam breaks.

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today?  With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.  

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing!  (See image below.)  Thanks for being a part of the LET family!

Facebook Follow First


Submit a Correction
Related Posts