illegal immigration-amnesty costs to us taxpayer

7/30/2019 Illegal Immigration-Amnesty Costs to US Taxpayer

1/102

The Fiscal Cost of Unlawful Immigrants

and Amnesty to the U.S. Taxpayer

by Robert Rector and Jason Richwine, PhD

SPECIAL REPORT No. 133 | MAY 6, 2013from THE DOMESTIC POLICY STUDIES DEPARTMENT


2/102

SR-133



Robert Rector and Jason Richwine, PhD


3/102

Thispaperinitsentiretycanbeoundat

http//reportheritageorg/sr

ProducedbytheDomesticPolicyStudiesDepartment

TheHeritageFoundation

MassachusettsAvenueNEWashingtonDC()-|heritageorg

NothingwrittenhereistobeconstruedasnecessarilyreectingtheviewsoTheHeritageFoundationorasanattempttoaidorhinderthepassageoanybillbeoreCongress

About the Authors

Robert Rectoris Senior Research Fellow in the Domestic Policy StudiesDepartment at The Heritage

Foundation.

Jason Richwine, PhD is Senior Policy Analyst or Empirical Studies in the Domestic Policy StudiesDepartment at The Heritage Foundation.


4/102

iii

SPECIAL REPORT | NO. 133May 6, 2013

Table o Contents

Executive Summr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .v

The Fiscl Cost o Unlwul Immigrnts nd amnest to the U.S. Txper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

appendix a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39

appendix B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43

appendix C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45

appendix D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47

appendix E. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53

appendix F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59

appendix G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61

appendix Tbles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63

Endnotes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .87


5/102


6/102

v





Executive Summary

Unlwul immigrtion nd mnest or cur-rent unlwul immigrnts cn pose lrge sclcosts or U.S. tx pers. Government provides our

tpes o benets nd services tht re relevnt to

this issue:

Direct benets. These include Socil Securit,Medicre, unemploment insur nce, nd workers

compenstion.

Means-tested welare benets. There re over80 o these progrms which, t cost o nerl

$900 billion per er, provide csh, ood, housing,

medicl, nd other services to roughl 100 million

low-income americns. Mjor progrms include

Medicid, ood stmps, the reundble Erned

Income Tx Credit, public housing, Supplementl

Securit Income, nd Temporr assistnce or

Need Fmilies.

Public education. at cost o $12,300 per pupilper er, these services re lrgel ree or hevil

subsidized or low-income prents.

Population-based services. Police, re, high-ws, prks, nd similr services, s the Ntionl

acdem o Sciences determined in its stud o

the scl costs o immigrtion, generll hve to

expnd s new immigrnts enter communit;

someone hs to ber the cost o tht expnsion.

The cost o these governmentl services is r lrg-

er thn mn people imgine. For exmple, in 2010,

the verge U.S. household received $31,584 in gov-

ernment benets nd services in these our ctegories.

The governmentl sstem is highl redistributive.

Well-educted households tend to be net tax contribu-

tors: The txes the p exceed the direct nd mens-

tested benets, eduction, nd popultion-bsed ser-

vices the receive. For exmple, in 2010, in the whole

U.S. popultion, households with college-eductedheds, on verge, received $24,839 in government

benets while ping $54,089 in txes. The verge

college-educted household thus generted scl

surplus o $29,250 tht government used to nnce

benets or other households.

Other households re net tax consumers: The ben-

ets the receive exceed the txes the p. These

households generte scl decit tht must be

nnced b txes rom other households or b gov-

ernment borrowing. For exmple, in 2010, in the U.S.

popultion s whole, households heded b persons

without high school degree, on verge, received$46,582 in government benets while ping onl

$11,469 in txes. This generted n verge scl de-

icit (benets received minus txes pid) o $35,113.

The high decits o poorl educted households

re importnt in the mnest debte becuse the

tpicl unlwul immigrnt hs onl 10th-grde

eduction. Hl o unlwul immigrnt households

re heded b n individul with less thn high

school degree, nd nother 25 percent o household

heds hve onl high school degree.


7/102

vi

THE FISCAL COST OF UNLAWFUL IMMIGRANTS

AND AMNESTY TO THE U.S. TAXPAYER

Some rgue tht the decit gures or poorl

educted households in the generl popultion

re not relevnt or immigrnts. Mn believe, or

exmple, tht lwul immigrnts use little welre.

In relit, lwul immigrnt households receive

signicntl more welre, on verge, thn U.S.-

born households. Overll, the scl decits or sur-

pluses or lwul immigrnt households re the

sme s or higher thn those or U.S.-born house-

holds with the sme eduction level. Poorl edu-

cted households, whether immigrnt or U.S.-born,

receive r more in government benets thn the

p in txes.

In contrst to lwul immigrnts, unlwul immi-

grnts t present do not hve ccess to mens-tested

welre, Socil Securit, or Medicre. This does notmen, however, tht the do not receive government

benets nd services. Children in unlwul immi-

grnt households receive hevil subsidized public

eduction. Mn unlwul immigrnts hve U.S.-

born children; these children re currentl eligible

or the ull rnge o government welre nd medicl

benets. and, o course, when unlwul immigrnts

live in communit, the use rods, prks, sew-

ers, police, nd re protection; these services must

expnd to cover the dded popultion or there will

be congestion eects tht led to decline in ser-

vice qulit.In 2010, the verge unlwul immigrnt house-

hold received round $24,721 in government ben-

ets nd services while ping some $10,334 in

txes. This generted n verge nnul scl de-

cit (benets received minus txes pid) o round

$14,387 per household. This cost hd to be borne

b U.S. txpers. amnest would provide unlw-

ul households with ccess to over 80 mens-test-

ed welre progrms, Obmcre, Socil Securit,

nd Medicre. The scl decit or ech household

would sor.

I encted, mnest would be implemented inphses. During the rst or interim phse (which is

likel to lst 13 ers), unlwul immigrnts would

be given lwul sttus but would be denied ccess to

mens-tested welre nd Obmcre. Most n-

lsts ssume tht roughl hl o unlwul immi-

grnts work o the books nd thereore do not p

income or FICa txes. During the interim phse,

these o the books workers would hve strong

incentive to move to on the books emploment.

In ddition, their wges would likel go up s the

sought jobs in more open environment. as result,

during the interim period, tx pments would rise

nd the verge scl decit mong ormer unlwul

immigrnt households would ll.

ater 13 ers, unlwul immigrnts would

become eligible or mens-tested welre nd

Obmcre. at tht point or shortl thereter, or-

mer unlwul immigrnt households would likel

begin to receive government benets t the sme

rte s lwul immigrnt households o the sme

eduction level. as result, government spending

nd scl decits would increse drmticll.

The nl phse o mnest is retirement.

Unlwul immigrnts re not currentl eligible or

Socil Securit nd Medicre, but under mnest

the would become so. The cost o this chnge wouldbe ver lrge indeed.

as noted, t the current time (beore mnest),the verge unlwul immigrnt household hs

net decit (benets received minus txes pid) o

$14,387 per household.

During the interim phse immeditel termnest, tx pments would increse more thn

government benets, nd the verge scl de-

cit or ormer unlwul immigrnt households

would ll to $11,455.

at the end o the interim period, unlwul immi-grnts would become eligible or mens-tested

welre nd medicl subsidies under Obmcre.

averge benets would rise to $43,900 per

household; tx pments would remin round

$16,000; the verge scl decit (benets minus

txes) would be bout $28,000 per household.

amnest would lso rise retirement costs bmking unlwul immigrnts eligible or Socil

Securit nd Medicre, resulting in net scldecit o round $22,700 per retired mnest

recipient per er.

In terms o public polic nd government decits,

n importnt gure is the ggregte nnul decit

or ll unlwul immigrnt households. This equls

the totl benets nd services received b ll unlw-

ul immigrnt households minus the totl txes pid

b those households.


8/102

vii


Under current lw, ll unlwul immigrnt house-holds together hve n ggregte nnul decit o

round $54.5 billion.

In the interim phse (roughl the rst 13 erster mnest), the ggregte nnul decit

would ll to $43.4 billion.

at the end o the interim phse, ormer unlw ulimmigrnt households would become ull eligi-

ble or mens-tested welre nd helth cre ben-

ets under the aordble Cre act. The ggregte

nnul decit would sor to round $106 billion.

In the retirement phse, the nnul ggregte

decit would be round $160 billion. It wouldslowl decline s ormer unlwul immigrnts

grdull expire.

These costs would hve to be borne b lred

overburdened U.S. txpers. (all gures re in 2010

dollrs.)

The tpicl unlwul immigrnt is 34 ers old.

ater mnest, this individul will receive govern-

ment benets, on verge, or 50 ers. Restricting

ccess to benets or the rst 13 ers ter mnest

thereore hs onl mrginl impct on long-term

costs.I mnest is encted, the verge dult unlwul

immigrnt would receive $592,000 more in govern-

ment benets over the course o his remining lie-

time thn he would p in txes.

Over lietime, the ormer unlwul immigrnts

together would receive $9.4 trillion in government

benets nd services nd p $3.1 trillion in txes.

The would generte lietime scl decit (totl

benets minus totl txes) o $6.3 trillion. (all g-

ures re in constnt 2010 dollrs.) This should be

considered minimum estimte. It probbl under-

sttes rel uture costs becuse it undercounts thenumber o unlwul immigrnts nd dependents

who will ctull receive mnest nd underesti-

mtes signicntl the uture growth in welre nd

medicl benets.

The debte bout the scl consequences o

unlwul nd low-skill immigrtion is hmpered b

number o misconceptions. Few lwmkers rell

understnd the current size o government nd the

scope o redistribution. The ct tht the verge

household gets $31,600 in government benets ech

er is shock. The ct tht household heded b

n individul with less thn high school degree

gets $46,600 is bigger one.

Mn conservtives believe tht i n individul

hs job nd works hrd, he will inevitbl be net

tx contributor (ping more in txes thn he tkes

in benets). In our societ, this hs not been true or

ver long time. Similrl, mn believe tht unlw-

ul immigrnts work more thn other groups. This is

lso not true. The emploment rte or non-elderl

dult unlwul immigrnts is bout the sme s it is

or the generl popultion.

Mn policmkers lso believe tht becuse

unlwul immigrnts re comprtivel oung, the

will help relieve the scl strins o n ging soci-

et. Regrettbl, this is not true. at ever stge o thelie ccle, unlwul immigrnts, on verge, gener-

te scl decits (benets exceed txes). Unlwul

immigrnts, on verge, re lws tx consumers;

the never once generte scl surplus tht cn

be used to p or government benets elsewhere in

societ. This sitution obviousl will get much worse

ter mnest.

Mn policmkers believe tht ter mnes-

t, unlwul immigrnts will help mke Socil

Securit solvent. It is true tht unlwul immi-

grnts currentl p FICa txes nd would p

more ter mnest, but with verge ernings o$24,800 per er, the tpicl unlwul immigrnt

will p onl bout $3,700 per er in FICa txes.

ater retirement, tht individul is likel to drw

more thn $3.00 in Socil Securit nd Medicre

(djusted or intion) or ever dollr in FICa

txes he hs pid.

Moreover, txes nd benets must be viewed

holisticll. It is mistke to look t the Socil

Securit trust und in isoltion. I n individul

ps $3,700 per er into the Socil Securit trust

und but simultneousl drws net $25,000 per

er (benets minus txes) out o generl govern-ment revenue, the solvenc o government hs not

improved.

Following mnest, the scl costs o ormer

unlwul immigrnt households will be roughl the

sme s those o lwul immigrnt nd non-immi-

grnt households with the sme level o eduction.

Becuse U.S. government polic is highl redistrib-

utive, those costs re ver lrge. Those who clim

tht mnest will not crete lrge scl burden re

simpl in stte o denil concerning the underling


9/102

viii



redistributionl nture o government polic in the

21st centur.

Finll, some rgue tht it does not mtter wheth-

er unlwul immigrnts crete scl decit o $6.3

trillion becuse their children will m ke up or these

costs. This is not true. Even i ll the children o

unlwul immigrnts grduted rom college, the

would be hrd-pressed to p bck $6.3 trillion in

costs over their lietimes.

O course, not ll the children o unlwul immi-

grnts will grdute rom college. Dt on inter-

genertionl socil mobilit show tht, lthough

the children o unlwul immigrnts will hve sub-

stntill better eductionl outcomes thn their

prents, these chievements will hve limits. Onl

13 percent re likel to grdute rom college, or

exmple. Becuse o this, the children, on verge,

re not likel to become net tx contributors. The

children o unlwul immigrnts re likel to remin

net scl burden on U.S. txpers, lthough r

smller burden thn their prents.

a nl problem is tht unlw ul immigrtion

ppers to depress the wges o low-skill U.S.-born

nd lwul immigrnt workers b 10 percent, or

$2,300, per er. Unlwul immigrtion lso prob-

bl drives mn o our most vulnerble U.S.-born

workers out o the lbor orce entirel. Unlwul

immigrtion thus mkes it hrder or the lest

dvntged U.S. citizens to shre in the americn

drem. This is wrong; public polic should support

the interests o those who hve right to be here, not

those who hve broken our lws.


10/102

1


Introduction

Ech er, milies nd individuls p txes tothe government nd receive bck wide vri-et o services nd benets. a scl decit occurs

when the benets nd services received b one group

exceed the txes pid. When such decit occurs,

other groups must p or the services nd benets

o the group in decit. Ech er, thereore, govern-

ment is involved in lrge-scle economic trnsero resources between dierent socil groups.

Fiscl distribution nlsis mesures the dis-

tribution o totl government benets nd txes in

societ. It provides n ssessment o the mgnitude

o government trnsers between groups.

This pper provides scl distribution nlsis

o households heded b unlwul immigrnts: indi-

viduls who reside in the U.S. in v ioltion o ederl

lw. The pper mesures the totl government ben-

ets nd services received b unlwul immigrnt

households nd the totl txes pid. The dierence

between benets received nd txes pid repre-sents the totl resources trnserred b government

on behl o unlwul immigrnts rom the rest o

societ.

Identiying the UnlawulImmigrant Population

The U.S. Deprtment o Homelnd Securit

(DHS) estimtes tht there were 11.5 million undoc-

umented, or unlwul, oreign-born persons in the

U.S. in Jnur 2011.1 These estimtes re bsed on

the ct tht the number o oreign-born persons

ppering in U.S. Census surves is considerbl

greter thn the ctul number o oreign-born per-

sons who re permitted to reside lwull in the U.S.

ccording to immigrtion records.

For exmple, in Jnur 2011, some 31.95 million

oreign-born persons (who rrived in the countr

ter 1980) ppered in the nnul Census surve,

but the corresponding number o lwul oreign-born residents in tht er (ccording to govern-

ment dministrtive records) ws onl 21.6 million.2

DHS estimtes tht the dierencesome 10.35 mil-

lion oreign-born persons ppering in the Census

americn Communit Surve (aCS)ws com-

prised o unuthorized or unlwul residents. DHS

urther estimtes tht n dditionl 1.15 million

unlwul immigrnts resided in the U.S. but did not

pper in the Census surve, or totl o 11.5 mil-

lion unlwul residents.3

DHS emplos residul method to determine the

chrcteristics o the unlwul immigrnt popultion.First, immigrtion records re used to determine the

gender, ge, countr o origin, nd time o entr o

ll oreign-born lwul residents. Foreign-born per-

sons with these chrcteristics re subtrcted rom

the totl oreign-born popultion in Census records;

the letover, or residul, oreign-born popultion is

ssumed to be unlwul. This procedure enbles DHS

to estimte the ge, gender, countr o origin, dte o

entr, nd current U.S. stte o residence o the unlw-

ul immigrnt popultion in the U.S.





11/102

2



The current Heritge Foundtion stud usesthe DHS reports on the chrcteristics o unlwul

immigrnts to identi in the Current Popultion

Surve (CPS) o the U.S. Census popultion o

oreign-born persons who hve ver high prob-

bilit o being unlwul immigrnts.4 (The Current

Popultion Surve is used in plce o the similr

americn Communit Surve becuse it hs more

detiled income nd benet inormtion.)

The procedures used to identi unlwul immi-

grnts in the CPS re similr to those used in studies

o the unlwul immigrnt popultion produced b

the Pew Hispnic Center, the Center or Immigrtion

Studies, nd the Migrtion Polic Institute. Selection

procedures included the ollowing:

1. The unlwul immigrnt popultion identied

in the CPS mtched s closel s possible the ge,

gender, countr o origin, er o rrivl, nd

stte o residence o the unlwul immigrnt pop-

ultion identied b DHS.

2. Foreign-born persons who were current or or-

mer members o the rmed orces o the U.S.

or current emploees o ederl, stte, nd

locl governments were ssumed to be lwul

residents.

3. Since it is unlwul or unlwul immigrnts

to receive government benets such s Socil

Securit, Medicre, Medicid, nd public housing,

individuls reporting personl receipt o such

benets were ssumed to be lwull resident.

4. Principles o consistenc were pplied within

milies; or exmple, children o lw ul residents

were ssumed to be lwul.

additionl inormtion on the procedures usedto identi unlwul immigrnts in the CPS is pro-

vided in appendix B. It should lso be noted tht the

Heritge Foundtion nlsis mtched the DHS g-

ures s closel s possible.5

The chrcteristics o the unlwul immigrnt

popultion estimted or the present nlsis re

shown in text Tble 1. In 2010, there were 11.5 mil-

lion unlwul immigrnts in the U.S. Some 10.34

million o these ppered in the nnul Current

Popultion Surve nd were identied b the resid-

ul method described bove. Following the DHS

estimte, n dditionl 1.15 million unlwul immi-grnts were ssumed to reside in the U.S. but not to

pper in Census surves.

as Tble 1 shows, 84 percent o unlw ul immi-

grnts cme rom Mexico, the Cribben, nd

Centrl or South americ; 11 percent cme rom

asi; nd 5 percent cme rom the rest o the world.

Unlwul immigrnts were lmost equll split b

gender: 54 percent were mles, nd 46 percent were

emles.

TaBLE 1

CharacteristicsoftheUnlawful

ImmigrantPopulation

SourcesHeritageFoundationcalculationsusingdataromtheUSCensusBureauCurrentPopulationSurveyCalculationsweredesignedtomatchguresromtheUSDepartmentoHomelandSecuritySeeAppendixTableormoreinormation

SR heritageorg

NumberofPersons

Total 11.5 million

AppearinginCensusRecords 10.34 million

NotinCensus 1.15 million

YearofArrival

45%

38%

Pre 18%

Age

Under 11%

to 13%

to 35%

to 29%

andolder 12%

Sex

Male 54%

Female 46%

RegionofOrigin

NorthandCentralAmerica 77%

Mexico 60%

Asia 11%

SouthAmerica 7%

Europe 2%

Other 3%


12/102

3


Characteristics o Unlawul Immigrantsand Unlawul Immigrant Households

an nlsis o the scl costs o unlwul immi-

grtion must del with the ct tht gret mn

unlwul immigrnts re prents o U.S.-born chil-

dren. For exmple, the Pew Hispnic Center esti-

mtes tht in 2010, there were 5.5 million children

residing in the U.S. who hve unlwul immigrnt

prents. among these children, some 1 million were

born brod nd were brought into the U.S. unlw-

ull; the remining 4.5 million were born in the U.S.

nd re treted under lw s U.S. citizens. Overll,some 8 percent o the children born in the U.S. ech

er hve unlwul immigrnt prents.6

The presence o these 4 million ntive-born chil-

dren with unlwul immigrnt prents is direct

result o unlwul immigrtion. These children

would not reside in the U.S. i their prents hd not

chosen to enter nd remin in the ntion unlwull.

Obviousl, n nlsis o the scl cost o unlwul

immigrtion must thereore include the costs sso-

cited with these children, becuse those costs re

direct nd inevitble result o the unlwul immi-

grtion o the prents. The costs would not exist in

the bsence o unlwul immigrtion.

To ddress tht issue, the present stud nlzes

the scl costs o ll households heded b unlw-

ul immigrnts. (Throughout this stud, the terms

households heded b n unlwul immigrnt

nd unlwul immigrnt households re used

snonmousl.)

In 2010, 3.44 million such households ppered

in the CPS. These households contined 12.7 million

persons including 7.4 million dults nd 5.3 millionchildren. among the children, some 930,000 were

unlwul immigrnts, nd 4.4 million were ntive-

born or lwul immigrnts.7

Tble 2 shows the chrcteristics o unlwul

immigrnt households in comprison to non-immi-

grnt nd lwul immigrnt households. Unlwul

immigrnt households re lrger thn other house-

holds, with n verge o 3.7 persons per house-

hold compred to 2.5 persons in non-immigrnt

households.8

HOUSEHOLDS HEADED BY:

Unlawful Immigrant Lawful Immigrant Non-Immigrant

Numberohouseholds 3,444,955 12,601,544 102,702,224

Numberopersonsinhousehold 12,708,875 39,089,280 253,161,268

Numberoearnersinhouseholds 5,417,751 18,082,129 127,598,880

Personsperhousehold 3.7 3.1 2.5

Adultsperhousehold 2.1 2.3 1.9

Childrenperhousehold 1.6 0.8 0.6

Earnersperhousehold 1.6 1.4 1.2

Earningsperhousehold $38,988 $59,071 $53,937

Earningsperworker $24,791 $41,167 $43,413

Averagehouseholdtotalincome $40,993 $68,931 $68,095

Medianageohouseholder 34 49 50

Percentohouseholdsheadedbypersonsandolder 0.6% 19.4% 22.3%

Percentopersonsinhouseholdwhowereorolder 1.1% 11.1% 13.7%

Percentopersonsinhouseholdwhowereto 59.7% 65.9% 65.7%

Percentopersonsinhouseholdwhowereunderage 42.3% 26.3% 23.4%

Percentopersonsinhouseholdwhoarepoor 35.1% 18.8% 13.6%

TaBLE 2

DemographicCharacteristicsofUSHouseholds

NoteTheguresorunlawulimmigranthouseholdsexcludemillionadultUScitizensandadultlawulimmigrantswhoresidedinthehouseholdSourceHeritageFoundationcalculationsbasedondataromtheUSCensusBureauCurrentPopulationSurvey

SR heritageorg


13/102

4



Unlwul immigrnt households hve more wgeerners per household: 1.6 compred to 1.2 mong

non-immigrnt households. However, the ver-

ge ernings per worker re drmticll lower in

unlw ul immigrnt households: $24,791 per worker

compred to $43,413 in non-immigrnt households.

Contrr to conventionl wisdom, non-elderl dult

unlwul immigrnts re not more likel to work

thn re similr non-immigrnts.

The heds o unlwul immigrnt households

re ounger, with medin ge o 34 compred to

50 mong non-immigrnt householders. Prtl

becuse the re ounger, unlwul immigrnthouseholds hve more children, with n verge o

1.6 children per household compred to 0.6 mong

non-immigrnt households. The higher number o

children tends to rise governmentl costs mong

unlwul immigrnt households. (Both lwul nd

unlwul children in unlwul immigrnt house-

holds re eligible or public eduction, nd the lrge

number o children who were born in the U.S. re

lso eligible or mens-tested welre benets such

s ood stmps, Medicid, nd Childrens Helth

Insurnce Progrm benets.)

B contrst, there re ver ew elderl persons inunlwul immigrnt households. Onl 1.1 percent o

persons in those households re over 65 ers o ge

compred to 13.7 percent o persons in non-immigrnt

households. The bsence o elderl persons in unlw-

ul immigrnt households signicntl reduces cur-

rent government costs; however, i unlwul immi-

grnts remin in the U.S. permnentl, the number

who re elderl will obviousl increse signicntl.

Unlwul immigrnt households re r more

likel to be poor. Over one-third o unlwul

immigrnt households hve incomes below the ed-erl povert level compred to 18.8 percent o lw-

ul immigrnt households nd 13.6 percent o non-

immigrnt households.

Education Level o UnlawulImmigrant Households

The low wge level o unlwul immigrnt work-

ers is di rect result o their low eduction levels. as

Tble 3 shows, hl o unlwul immigrnt house-

holds re heded b persons without high school

degree; more thn 75 percent re heded b indi-

viduls with high school degree or less. Onl 10percent o unlwul immigrnt households re

heded b college grdutes. B contrst, mong

non-immigrnt households, 9.6 percent re heded

b persons without high school degree, round 40

percent re heded b persons with high school

degree or less, nd nerl one-third re heded b

college grdutes.

The current unlwul immigrnt popultion thus

contins disproportionte shre o poorl educt-

ed individuls. These individuls will tend to hve

low wges nd p comprtivel little in txes.

There is common misconception tht the loweduction levels o recent immigrnts re prt o

permnent historicl pttern nd tht the U.S.

hs lws dmitted immigrnts who were poor-

l educted reltive to the ntive-born popultion.

Historicll, this hs not been the cse. For exm-

ple, in 1960, recent immigrnts were no more likel

thn non-immigrnts to lck high school degree.

B 1998, recent immigrnts were lmost our times

more likel to lck high school degree thn were

non-immigrnts.9

HOUSEHOLDS HEADED BY:

Unlawful Immigrant Lawful Immigrant Non-Immigrant

Personswithoutahighschooldegree 50.7% 19.9% 9.6%

Personswithonlyahighschooldegree 26.6% 23.6% 29.8%

Personswithsomecollege 12.8% 20.1% 29.9%

Personswithacollegedegreeormore 9.9% 36.4% 30.7%

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

TaBLE 3

HouseholdDifferencesinEducationLevel

SourceHeritageFoundationcalculationsbasedondataromtheUSCensusBureauCurrentPopulationSurvey SR heritageorg


14/102

5


as the reltive eduction level o immigrnts ell

in recent decdes, so did their reltive wge levels. In

1960, the verge immigrnt mle in the U.S. ctu-ll erned more thn the verge non-immigrnt

mle. as the reltive eduction levels o subsequent

wves o immigrnts ell, so did reltive wges. B

1998, the verge immigrnt erned 23 percent less

thn the verge non-immigrnt erned.10

Aggregate Cost oGovernment Benets and Services

an nlsis o the distribution o benets nd

txes within the U.S. popultion must begin with

n ccurte count o the cost o ll benets nd ser-

vices provided b the government. The size nd costo government is r lrger thn mn people img-

ine. In scl er (Fy) 2010, the expenditures o the

ederl government were $3.46 trillion. In the sme

er, expenditures o stte nd locl governments

were $1.94 trillion. The combined vlue o ederl,

stte, nd locl expenditures in Fy 2010 ws $5.4

trillion.11

This sum is so lrge tht it is difcult to compre-

hend. One w to grsp the size o government more

redil is to clculte verge expenditures per

household. In 2010, there were 120.2 million house-

holds in the U.S.12 (This gure includes both multi-

person milies nd single persons living lone.)The verge cost o government spending thus

mounted to $44,932 per household cross the U.S.

popultion.13

The $5.4 trillion in government expenditure is

not ree; it must be pid or b txing or borrowing

economic resources rom americns or b borrow-

ing rom brod. In Fy 2010, ederl txes mount-

ed to $2.12 trillion. Stte nd locl txes nd relted

revenues mounted to $1.98 trillion.14 Together, ed-

erl, stte, nd locl txes mounted to $4.11 trillion.

Txes nd relted revenues cme to 75 percent o

the $5.4 trillion in expenditures. The gp betweentxes nd spending ws nnced b government

borrowing.

Types o Government Expenditureater the ull cost o government benets nd

services hs been determined, the next step in n-

lzing the distribution o benets nd txes is to

determine the beneciries o specic government

progrms. Some progrms, such s Socil Securit,

netl prcel out benets to specic individuls.

CHART 1

Source: Heritage Foundation calculations based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau,2010 Current Population Survey. See Appendix tables for more information.

Note: Figures have been rounded.

Households by Education Level of Head of Household

heritage.orgSR 133

%

%

%

%

%

%

HighSchool

Graduate

SomeCollege

CollegeGraduate

No HighSchool

Diploma

51%

27%

13%10%

HighSchool

Graduate

SomeCollege

CollegeGraduate

No HighSchool

Diploma

20%

24%

20%

36%

HighSchool

Graduate

SomeCollege

CollegeGraduate

No HighSchool

Diploma

10%

30% 30% 31%

Unlawful Immigrant Households Lawful Immigrant Households Non-Immigrant Households


15/102

6



With progrms such s these, it is reltivel es to

determine the identit o the benecir nd the

cost o the benet provided. On the other hnd, other

government unctions such s highw construc-

tion do not netl prcel out benets to individuls.

Determining the proper lloction o the benets o

tht tpe o progrm is more complex.

To determine the distribution o government

benets nd services, this stud begins b dividing

government expenditures into six ctegories: direct

benets, mens-tested benets, eductionl ser-

vices, popultion-bsed services, interest nd other

nncil obligtions resulting rom prior govern-

ment ctivit, nd pure public goods.

Direct Benets. Direct benet progrms

involve either csh trnsers or the purchse o spe-cic services or n individul. Unlike mens-tested

progrms, direct benet progrms re not limited to

low-income persons. B r the lrgest direct benet

progrms re Socil Securit nd Medicre. Other

substntil direct benet progrms re unemplo-

ment insurnce nd workers compenstion.

Direct benet progrms involve irl trnspr-

ent trnser o economic resources. The benets re

prceled out discretel to individuls in the popu-

ltion; both the recipient nd the cost o the benet

re reltivel es to determine. In the cse o Socil

Securit, the cost o the benet would equl thevlue o the Socil Securit check plus the dminis-

trtive costs involved in delivering the benet.

Clculting the cost o Medicre services is more

complex. Ordinril, government does not seek to

compute the prticulr medicl services received b

n individul. Insted, government counts the cost

o Medicre or n individul s equl to the verge

per cpit cost o Medicre services. (This number

equls the totl cost o Medicre services divided

b the totl number o recipients.15) Overll, gov-

ernment spent $1.33 trillion on direct benets in Fy

2010.Means-Tested Benets. Mens-tested pro-

grms re tpicll termed welre progrms.

Unlike direct benets, mens-tested progrms re

vilble onl to households tht ll below specic

income thresholds. Mens-tested welre progrms

provide csh, ood, housing, medicl cre, nd socil

services to poor nd low-income persons.

The ederl government opertes over 80 mens-

tested id progrms.16 The lrgest re Medicid; the

Erned Income Tx Credit (EITC); ood stmps;

Supplementl Securit Income (SSI); Section 8

housing; public housing; Temporr assistnce or

Need Fmilies (TaNF); school lunch nd brekst

progrms; the WIC (Women, Innts, nd Children)

nutrition progrm; nd the Socil Services Block

Grnt (SSBG). Mn mens-tested progrms, such

s SSI nd the EITC, provide csh to recipients.

Others, such s public housing or SSBG, p or ser-

vices tht re provided to recipients.

The vlue o Medicid benets is usull counted

much s the vlue o Medicre benets is counted.

Government does not ttempt to itemize the specic

medicl services given to n individul; insted, it

computes n verge per cpit cost o services to

individuls in dierent benecir ctegories such

s children, elderl persons, nd disbled dults.(The verge per cpit cost or prticulr group

is determined b dividing the totl expenditures

on the group b the totl number o beneciries in

the group.) Overll, the U.S. spent $835 billion on

mens-tested id in Fy 2010.17

Public Education. Government provides prim-

r, secondr, post-secondr, nd voctionl edu-

ction to individuls. In most cses, the government

ps directl or the cost o eductionl services pro-

vided. In other cses, such s the Pell Grnt progrm,

the government in eect provides mone to n eligible

individul who then spends it on eductionl services.Eduction is the single lrgest component o stte

nd locl government spending, bsorbing roughl

third o ll stte nd locl expenditures. The verge

cost o public primr nd secondr eduction per

pupil is now round $12,300 per er. Overll, ed-

erl, stte, nd locl governments spent $758 billion

on eduction in Fy 2010.

Population-Based Services. Wheres direct

benets, mens-tested benets, nd eduction ser-

vices provide discrete benets nd services to prtic-

ulr individuls, popultion-bsed progrms gener-

ll provide services to whole group or communit.Popultion-bsed expenditures include police nd

re protection, courts, prks, snittion, nd ood

set nd helth inspections. another importnt

popultion-bsed expenditure is trnsporttion,

especill rods nd highws.

a ke eture o popultion-bsed expenditures is

tht such progrms generll need to expnd s the

popultion o communit expnds. (This qulit

seprtes them rom pure public goods.) For exm-

ple, s the popultion o communit increses, the


16/102

7


number o police nd reghters will generll need

to expnd proportionll.

In The New Americans, stud o the scl costs

o immigrtion published b the Ntionl acdem

o Sciences, the Ntionl Reserch Council (NRC)

rgued tht i service remins xed while the popu-

ltion increses, progrm will become congested,

nd the qulit o service or users will deteriorte.

Thus, the NRC uses the term congestible goods to

describe popultion-bsed services.18 Highws re

n obvious exmple. In generl, the cost o popul-

tion-bsed services cn be llocted ccording to n

individuls estimted utiliztion o the serv ice or t

t per cpit cost cross the relevnt popultion.

a subctegor o popultion-bsed services is

government dministrtive support unctions suchs tx collections nd legisltive ctivities. Few

txpers view tx collection s government ben-

et; thereore, ssigning the cost o this benet

ppers to be problemtic.

The solution to this dilemm is to conceptulize

government ctivities into two ctegories: primr

unctions nd secondr unctions.

Primary unctions provide benets directl to thepublic; the include direct nd mens-tested ben-

ets, eduction, ordinr popultion-bsed ser-

vices such s police nd prks, nd public goods.

B contrst, secondary or support unctions donot provide direct benets to the public but do

provide necessr support services tht enble

the government to perorm primr unctions.

For exmple, no one cn receive ood stmp ben-

ets unless the government rst collects txes

to und the progrm. Secondr unctions cn

thus be considered n inherent prt o the cost

o production o primr unctions, nd the ben-

ets o secondr support unctions cn be llo-

cted mong the popultion in proportion to thelloction o benets rom government primr

unctions.

Government spent $871 billion on popultion-

bsed services in Fy 2010. O this mount, some

$769.6 billion went or ordinr services such s

police nd prks, nd $101.4 billion went or dmin-

istrtive support unctions.

Interest and Other Financial Obligations

Relating to Past Government Activities. Oten,

tx revenues re insufcient to p or the ull cost o

government benets nd services. In tht cse, gov-

ernment will borrow mone nd ccumulte debt. In

subsequent ers, interest pments must be pid to

those who lent the government mone. Interest p-

ments or the government debt re in ct prtil

pments or pst government benets nd services

tht were not ull pid or t the time o deliver.

Similrl, government emploees deliver services

to the public. Prt o the cost o the service is pid

or immeditel through the emploees slr, but

government emploees re lso compensted b

uture retirement benets. To considerble degree,

expenditures o public-sector retirement re there-

ore present pments in compenstion or servic-

es delivered in the pst. The expenditure ctegorinterest nd other nncil obligtions relting to

pst government ctivities thus includes interest

nd principl pments on government debt nd

outls or government emploee retirement. Totl

government spending on these items equled $533.3

billion in Fy 2010.19

While direct benets, mens-tested benets,

public eduction, nd popultion-bsed services

will grow s more immigrnts tke up residence

in the United Sttes, this is not the cse or inter-

est pments on the debt nd relted costs. These

costs were xed b pst government spending ndborrowing nd re lrgel unected, t lest in the

intermedite term, b immigrnts entr into the

United Sttes. While n incresed inow o immi-

grnts will led to n increse in most orms o gov-

ernment spending, it will not cuse n increse in

interest pments on government debt in the short

term.

To ssess the scl impct o unlwul immi-

grnts, thereore, the present report ollows the pro-

cedures used b the Ntionl Reserch Council in

The New Americans: Tht is, it ignores the costs o

interest on the debt nd similr nncil obligtionswhen clculting the net tx burden imposed b lw-

ul nd unlwul immigrnt households.20

On the other hnd, while unlwul immigrnt

households do not increse government debt imme-

ditel, such households will, on verge, increse

government debt signicntl over the long term.

For exmple, i n unlwul immigrnt house-

hold generted net scl decit (benets received

minus txes pid) o $20,000 per er nd roughl

20 percent o tht mount ws nnced ech er b


17/102

8



government borrowing, then the immigrnt house-

hold would be responsible or dding roughl $4,000

to government debt ech er. ater 50 ers, the

mils contribution to growth in government debtwould be round $200,000. While these potentil

costs re signicnt, the re outside the scope o

the current pper nd re not included in the clcu-

ltions presented here.

Pure Public Goods. Economic theor distin-

guishes between privte consumption goods nd

pure public goods. Economist Pul Smuelson is

credited with rst mking this distinction. In his

seminl 1954 pper The Pure Theor o Public

Expenditure,21 Smuelson dened pure public

good (or wht he clled collective consumption

good) s good which ll enjo in common in the

sense tht ech individuls consumption o such

good leds to no subtrctions rom n other indi-viduls consumption o tht good. B contrst,

privte consumption good is good tht cn be

prceled out mong dierent individuls. Its use

b one person precludes or diminishes its use b

nother.

a clssic exmple o pure public good is light-

house: The ct tht one ship perceives the wrn-

ing becon does not diminish the useulness o the

lighthouse to other ships. another cler exmple o

governmentl pure public good would be uture

Government Expenditures

FederalExpenditures(millionsofdollars)

StateandLocalExpenditures

(millionsofdollars)TotalExpenditures(millionsofdollars)

AverageExpenditureper

Household(dollars)

Direct benets 1,185,313 147,875 1,333,188 $11,088

Means-tested benets 661,990 172,908 834,898 $6,944

Education benets 93,284 664,755 758,039 $6,304

Population-based services 249,187 622,368 871,554 $7,249

Interest and other spending due topast government services

224,403 308,943 533,347 $4,436

Pure public goods expenditures 1,049,394 22,193 1,071,586 $8,912

Total expenditures 3,463,571 1,939,041 5,402,612 $44,932

Total expenditures less public goodexpenditures and expenditures forpast services

2,189,774 1,607,905 3,797,679 $31,584

Government Revenues

FederalRevenues(millionsofdollars)

StateandLocalRevenues(millions

ofdollars)TotalRevenues

(millionsofdollars)

AverageRevenuesperHousehold

(dollars)

Taxes and ees 2,122,445 1,536,017 3,658,462 $30,427

Earnings on government assets(government employee retirement

unds, and related income)

448,555 448,555

Total government revenues 2,122,445 1,984,572 4,107,017

TaBLE 4

AggregateGovernmentExpendituresandRevenuesFY

SourceHeritageFoundationcalculationsbasedondataromtheUSCensusBureauCurrentPopulationSurveySeeAppendixTablesandormoreinormation SR heritageorg


18/102

9


cure or cncer produced b government-unded

reserch: The ct tht non-txpers would benet

rom this discover would neither diminish its ben-

et nor dd extr costs to txpers. B contrst, n

obvious exmple o privte consumption good is

hmburger: When one person ets it, it cnnot be

eten b others.

Direct benets, mens-tested benets, nd edu-

ction services re privte consumption goods in

the sense tht the use o benet or service b one

person precludes or limits the use o tht sme ben-

et b nother. (Two people cnnot csh the sme

Socil Securit check.) Popultion-bsed services

such s prks nd highws re oten mentioned s

public goods, but the re not pure public goods in

the strict sense described bove. In most cses, sthe number o persons using popultion-bsed ser-

vice (such s highws nd prks) increses, the ser-

vice must either expnd (t dded cost to txpers)

or become congested, in which cse its qulit will

be reduced. Consequentl, use o popultion-bsed

services such s police nd re deprtments b non-

txpers does impose signicnt extr costs on

txpers.

Government pure public goods re rre; the

include scientic reserch, deense, spending on vet-

erns, interntionl irs, nd some environmen-

tl protection ctivities such s the preservtion oendngered species. Ech o these unctions gener-

ll meets the criterion tht the benets received

b non-txpers do not result in loss o utilit or

txpers. Government pure public good expendi-

tures on these unctions equled $978 billion in Fy

2010. Interest pments on government debt nd

relted costs resulting rom public good spending in

previous ers dd n estimted dditionl cost o

$93.5 billion, bringing the totl public goods cost in

Fy 2010 to $1,071.5 billion.

an immigrnts entr into the countr nei-

ther increses the size nd cost o public goods nordecreses the utilit o those goods to txpers.

In contrst to direct benets, mens-tested bene-

ts, public eduction, nd popultion-bsed servic-

es, the ct tht unlwul nd low-skill immigrnt

households m benet rom public goods tht the

do not p or does not dd to the net tx burden on

other txpers.

This report thereore ollows the sme methods

emploed b the Ntionl Reserch Council in The

New Americans nd excludes public goods rom the

count o benets received b unlwul immigrnt

households.22 (For urther discussion o pure pub-

lic goods, see appendix G.)

Summary: Total Expenditures. as Tble 4

shows, overll government spending in Fy 2010

cme to $5.40 trillion. Direct benets hd n ver-

ge cost o $11,088 per household cross the whole

popultion, while mens-tested benets hd n

verge cost o $6,944 per household. Eduction

benets nd popultion-bsed services cost $6,304

nd $7,249 per household, respectivel. Interest p-

ments on government debt nd other costs relting

to pst government ctivities cost $4,436 per house-

hold. Pure public good expenditures comprised 20

percent o ll government spending nd hd n ver-

ge cost o $8,912 per household.Excluding spending on public goods, interest

on the debt, nd relted nncil obligtions, totl

spending cme to $31,584 per household cross the

entire popultion.

Taxes and RevenuesTotl txes nd revenues or ederl, stte, nd

locl governments mounted to $4.107 trillion in

Fy 2010. The ederl government received $2.12 tril-

lion in revenue, while stte nd locl governments

received $1.98 trillion.

a detiled brekdown o ederl, stte, nd locltxes is provided in appendix Tbles 6 nd 7. The big-

gest revenue genertor ws the ederl income tx,

which cost tx pers $899 billion in 2010, ollowed

b Federl Insurnce Contribution act (FICa) txes,

which rised $812 billion. Propert tx ws the big-

gest revenue producer t the stte nd locl levels,

generting $442 billion, while generl sles txes

gthered $285 billion.

Over 90 percent o the revenues shown in

appendix Tbles 6 nd 7 re conventionl t xes nd

revenues; the remining 9 percent ($449 billion) re

ernings rom government ssets, primril ssetsheld in stte nd locl government emploee pen-

sion unds. about one-qurter o these revenues

were used to und current retirement benets; the

rest were ccumulted or uture use.

Unlike generl txes, these ernings re not mn-

dtor trnsers rom the popultion to the govern-

ment, but rther represent n economic return on

ssets the government owns or controls. Becuse

the do not represent pments mde b households

to the government, these ernings re not included


19/102

10



in the scl blnce nlsis presented in the bod

o this pper. I the were included, the would lter

the scl blnce o current government retirees;

thereore, the re irrelevnt to the min topic o this

pper: the scl blnce o unlwul immigrnts.

Summary o Estimation MethodologyThe ccounting rmework used in the present

nlsis is the sme rmework emploed b the

Ntionl Reserch Council o the Ntionl acdem

o Sciences in The New Americans.23 Following thtrmework, the present stud:

1. Excludes public goods costs such s deense nd

interest pments on government debt;

2. Trets popultion-bsed or congestible services

s ull privte goods nd ssigns the cost o those

services to immigrnt households bsed either on

estimted use or on the immigrnt shre o the

popultion;24

3. Includes the welre nd eductionl costs o

immigrnt nd non-immigrnt minor children

nd ssigns those costs to the childs household;

4. assigns the welre nd eductionl costs o

minor U.S.-born children o immigrnt prents

in the immigrnt household; nd

5. assigns the cost o mens-tested nd direct ben-

ets ccording to the sel-reported use o those

benets in the CPS.

Clerl, n stud tht does not ollow this

rmework m rech ver dierent conclusions.

For exmple, n stud tht excludes the welre

benets nd eductionl services received b the

minor U.S.-born children o unlwul immigrnt

prents rom the costs ssigned to unlwul immi-

grnt households will rech ver dierent conclu-

sions bout the scl consequences o unlwul

immigrtion.

HouseholdsHeadedby

PersonsWithoutaHighSchool

Degree

HouseholdsHeadedby

PersonsWithaHighSchool

Degree

HouseholdsHeadedby

IndividualsWithSomeCollege

HouseholdsHeadedby

PersonsWithaCollegeDegreeor

More AllHouseholds

Government Benefits Received per Household

Direct benets $13,837 $13,301 $10,201 $8,713 $11,088

Educational benets $6,999 $5,847 $7,099 $5,730 $6,304

Means-tested benets $18,336 $8,070 $6,009 $2,227 $6,944

Population-based services $7,410 $6,941 $6,499 $8,169 $7,248

Total benefits and services $46,582 $34,159 $29,808 $24,839 $31,584

Taxes Paid per Household

Federal taxes paid $5,914 $10,837 $14,667 $31,533 $17,652

State and local taxes paid $5,554 $8,507 $9,455 $22,556 $12,775

Total taxes paid $11,469 $19,344 $24,122 $54,089 $30,426

Fiscal deficit or surplus perhousehold

$35,113 $14,815 $5,686 $29,250 $1,158

TaBLE 5

GovernmentBenefitsReceivedandTaxesPaidAllUSHouseholds

ALLFIGURESAREDOLLARSPERHOUSEHOLD

SourceHeritageFoundationcalculationsbasedondataromtheUSCensusBureauCurrentPopulationSurveySeeAppendixTablesormoreinormation SR heritageorg


20/102

11


an importnt principle in the nlsis is tht

receipt o mens-tested benets nd direct benets

ws not imputed or ssigned to households rbitrri-l. Rther, the cost o benets received ws bsed

on the households sel-report o benets in the U.S.

Census Bureus Current Popultion Surve.25 For

exmple, the cost o the ood stmp benets received

is bsed on the ood stmp benets dt provided

b the household. I the household stted it did not

receive ood stmps, then the vlue o ood stmps

within the household would be zero.

Dt on ttendnce in public primr nd sec-

ondr schools were lso tken rom the CPS; stu-

dents ttending public school were then ssigned

eductionl costs equl to the verge per-pupilexpenditures in their stte. Public post-secondr

eduction costs were clculted in similr mnner.

Wherever possible, the cost o popultion-bsed

services ws bsed on the estimted utiliztion o

the service b unlwul immigrnt households. For

exmple, ech households shre o public trnspor-

ttion expenditures ws ssumed to be proportionl

to its shre o spending on public trnsporttion s

reported in the Bureu o Lbor Sttistics Consumer

Expenditure Surve (CEX). When dt on utiliztion

o service were not vilble, the households shre

o popultion-bsed services ws ssumed to equl

its shre o the totl U.S. popultion.Federl nd stte income txes were clculted

bsed on dt rom the CPS. FICa txes were lso

clculted rom CPS dt; both the emploer nd

emploee shre o FICa txes were ssumed to ll

on workers. Corporte income txes were ssumed

to be borne prtl b workers nd prtl b own-

ers; the distribution o these txes ws estimted

ccording to the distribution o ernings nd prop-

ert income in the CPS.

Sles, excise, nd propert tx pments were

bsed on consumption dt rom the Consumer

Expenditure Surve.26 For exmple, i the CEXshowed tht households heded b persons without

high school degree ccounted or 10 percent o ll

sles o tobcco products in the U.S., those house-

holds were ssumed to p 10 percent o ll tobcco

excise txes.

Certin specic djustments were mde or

unlwul immigrnt households. Since 45 percent

o unlwul immigrnts re believed to work o

the books, the ederl nd stte income tx nd

FICa tx pments tht Census imputes or ech

CHART 2

Source: Heritage Foundation calculations based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau,2010 Current Population Survey, and U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2010 ConsumerExpenditure Survey. Summaries of data sets are provided in the Appendix.

Government Benefits Received and Taxes Paid: All U.S. Households, 2010BY EDUCATION OF HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD

heritage.orgSR 133

BenefitsReceived

TaxesPaid

BenefitsReceived

TaxesPaid

BenefitsReceived

TaxesPaid

BenefitsReceived

TaxesPaid

No High SchoolDiploma

High SchoolGraduate

Some College College Graduate

Deficit:$35,113

Deficit:$14,815

Deficit:$5,686

Surplus:$29,250

$46,582

$11,469

$34,159

$19,344

$29,808

$24,122 $24,839

$54,089


21/102

12



NON-IMMIGRANT HOUSEHOLDS

ALLMONETARYFIGURESAREDOLLARSPERHOUSEHOLD

HouseholdsHeadedby


Degree

HouseholdsHeadedby


Degree

HouseholdsHeadedby


HouseholdsHeadedby


More AllHouseholds

Number o households 10,083,618 31,099,306 30,986,396 31,857,640 104,026,960

Percentage o households 9.7% 29.9% 29.8% 30.6% 100.0%


Direct benets $16,461 $13,884 $10,454 $9,004 $11,617



Population-based services $6,408 $6,740 $6,490 $8,333 $7,121Totalbenefitsandservices




Totaltaxespaid


$36,053 $14,642 $5,722 $30,255 $310

LAWFUL IMMIGRANT HOUSEHOLDS


HouseholdsHeadedby


Degree

HouseholdsHeadedby


Degree

HouseholdsHeadedby


HouseholdsHeadedby


More

AllHouseholdsWithLawful

ImmigrantHeads

Number o households 2,558,106 3,015,088 2,561,737 4,631,877 12,766,808

Percentage o households 20.0% 23.6% 20.1% 36.3% 100.0%


Direct benets $12,212 $10,639 $9,094 $7,204 $9,398



Population-based services $8,439 $8,030 $7,487 $9,017 $8,361

Totalbenefitsandservices




Totaltaxespaid


$36,993 $18,327 $7,489 $24,529 $4,344

TaBLE 6

GovernmentBenefitsReceivedandTaxesPaidperHousehold(Pageof)

SR heritageorg


22/102

13


UNLAWFUL IMMIGRANT HOUSEHOLDS


HouseholdsHeadedby


Degree

HouseholdsHeadedby


Degree

HouseholdsHeadedby


HouseholdsHeadedby


More

AllHouseholdsWithUnlawful

ImmigrantHeads

Number o households 1,746,857 916,231 440,179 341,688 3,444,955

Percentage o households 51% 27% 13% 10% 100%


Direct benets $45 $50 $47 $19 $44


Means-tested benets $6,235 $3,755 $2,006 $815 $4,497

Population-based services $7,554 $6,033 $5,039 $4,783 $6,553Totalbenefitsandservices




Totaltaxespaid


$20,485 $13,794 $6,564 $5,115 $14,387

TaBLE 6

GovernmentBenefitsReceivedandTaxesPaidperHousehold(Pageof)

NoteThecountohouseholdsincludeshouseholdsintheCurrentPopulationSurveyandasmallnumberopersonsresidinginnursinghomesSourceHeritageFoundationcalculationsbasedondataromtheUSCensusBureauCurrentPopulationSurveySeeAppendixtablesormoreinormation

SR heritageorg

household were reduced b 45 percent mong

unlwul immigrnt households. The vlues o the

Erned Income Tx Credit nd additionl Child Tx

Credit tht Census imputes bsed on mil income

were reduced to zero or unlw ul immigrnt m-

ilies since the re not eligible or those benets.

Immigrnt children enrolled in government medicl

progrms were ssumed to hve hl the ctul cost

o non-immigrnt children.27 and unlwul immi-grnt milies were ssumed to use prks, highws,

nd librries less thn lwul households with the

sme income.

Finll, bout 9 percent o the persons in unlw-

ul immigrnt households re dult lwul immi-

grnts or U.S. citizens. The benets received nd

txes pid b these individuls hve been excluded

rom the nlsis. The overll methodolog o the

stud is described in detil in the appendices.

Distribution o Government Benetsand Taxes in the U.S. Population

Tble 5 shows government benets received nd

txes pid b the verge household in the whole

U.S. popultion. In Fy 2010, the verge household

received totl o $31,584 in government direct ben-

ets, mens-tested benets, eduction, nd popu-

ltion-bsed services. The household pid $30,426

in ederl, stte, nd locl txes. Since the benetsreceived exceeded txes pid, the verge household

hd scl decit o $1,158 tht hd to be nnced b

government borrowing.

I ernings in government emploee retirement

unds were included in the nlsis, this smll

verge household decit would be lrgel ersed.

Nonetheless, these gures show tht the txes pid

b U.S. households overll brel cover the cost

o immedite services received (direct benets,

mens-tested id, eduction, nd popultion-bsed


23/102

14



services).28 Public goods such s deense nd inter-

est on government debt re unded b government

borrowing.

However, these verge household gures msk

gret dierences between dierent tpes o house-

holds. Individul households hve dierent scl

blnces. Mn households renet tax contributors:

The txes the p exceed the direct nd mens-

tested benets, eduction, nd popultion-bsed

services the receive. These households generte

scl surplus tht government uses to nnce ben-

ets nd services or other households. B contrst,

other households re net tx consumers: The govern-

ment benets nd services received b these house-

holds exceed txes pid. These households generte

scl decit tht must be nnced b txes rom

other households or b government borrowing.

Tble 5 shows tht criticl ctor in determin-

ing the scl blnce o household is the eduction

o the hed o household. Individuls with higher

eduction levels ern more, p more in txes, nd

receive ewer government benets. Less-educted

individuls tend to receive more in government ben-

ets nd p less in txes.

Chrt 2 shows the verge scl blnce or llU.S. households bsed on the eduction level o the

hed o household. at one extreme re households

with college-educted heds; on verge, these

households receive $24,839 in government benets

while ping $54,089 in txes. The verge college-

educted household thus genertes scl surplus o

$29,250 tht government uses to nnce benets or

other households.

at the other extreme re households heded b

persons without high school degree. On verge,

these households receive $46,582 in government

benets (direct, mens-tested, eduction, nd pop-ultion-bsed services) while ping onl $11,469 in

txes. This genertes n verge scl decit (ben-

ets received minus txes pid) o $35,113.

The lrge verge scl decit o less-educt-

ed households hs bering on the immigrtion

debte becuse immigrnt milies (both lwul

nd unlwul) hve, on verge, r lower eduction

levels thn non-immigrnts. For exmple, s Tble 3

shows, hl o unlwul immigrnt household heds

do not hve high school degree, nd nother 27 per-

cent hve onl high school diplom.

Household Fiscal Balancesand Immigration

Tble 6 shows the scl blnce or non-immi-

grnt, lwul immigrnt, nd unlwul immigrnt

households. Unlwul immigrnt households hve

the lrgest nnul scl decits t $14,387 per house-

hold. Lwul immigrnt households hve n verge

nnul scl decit o $4,344, nd non-immigrnt

households hve decit o $310, mening tht txes

pid roughl equl benets received.29

CHART 3

Source: Heritage Foundation calculations based on data from theU.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Current Population Survey, and U.S.Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2010 Consumer Expenditure Survey.Summaries of data sets are provided in the Appendices.

Government Expenditures for

Benefits and Services for UnlawfulImmigrant Households

heritage.orgSR 133

AVERAGEEXPENDITUREPERHOUSEHOLD

Total: $24,721

Education

Means-Tested Welfare

Police, Fire, and PublicSafety

Direct Benefits

Administrative Support

Transportation

Other Population-Based


24/102

15


Lwul i mmigrnt households hve higher scl

decits thn non-immigrnts or two resons. The

rst is lower eduction levels; 20 percent o lw-

ul immigrnt households re heded b individu-

ls without high school diplom, compred to 10

percent mong non-immigrnt households. The

second reson is high levels o welre use. There

is populr misconception tht immigrnts use

little welre. The opposite is true. In ct, lwul

immigrnts receive the highest level o welre

benets.

at $9,040, lwul immigrnts nnul welre

benets re third higher thn non-immigrnts

benets. This seems prdoxicl becuse lwul

immigrnts re brred rom receiving nerl ll

mens-tested welre during their rst ve ers in

the U.S. as Tble 6 shows, this temporr bn hs

virtull no impct on the overll use o welre

becuse () the bn does not ppl to children born

inside the U.S. nd (b) receipt o welre occurs con-

tinull throughout lietime nd thereore is little

ected b ve- or 10-er mortorium on receipt

o id.

The lck o eectiveness o the ve-er bn on

welre receipt in controlling totl welre costs hs direct bering on the debte bout mnest legisl-

tion. It is noteworth tht the highest level o welre

use shown in Tble 6 is $19,762 per household per

er mong lwul immigrnt households heded

b individuls without high school diplom. This

gure is importnt becuse similr levels o welre

use cn be expected mong unlwul immigrnt

households receiving mnest.

another importnt point is tht the level o wel-

re benets received b unlwul immigrnt house-

holds is signicnt, despite the ct tht unlwul

immigrnts themselves re ineligible or nerl llwelre id. The welre benets received b unlw-

ul immigrnt households go to U.S.-born children

within these homes. I undocumented dults within

these households re given ccess to mens-tested

welre progrms, per-household benets will rech

ver high levels.

Cost o Government Benets andServices Received by UnlawulImmigrant Households

as noted, in 2010, some 3.44 million unlwul

immigrnt households ppered in Census surves.appendix Tble 8 shows the estimted costs o gov-

ernment benets nd services received b these

households in 73 seprte expenditure ctegories.

The results re summrized in Chrt 3.

Overll, households heded b n unlwul immi-

grnt received n verge o $24,721 per household

in direct benets, mens-tested benets, eduction,

nd popultion-bsed services in Fy 2010. Eduction

spending on behl o these households verged

$13,627, nd mens-tested id (going minl to the

CHART 4

Source: Heritage Foundations calculations based on data fromthe U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Current Population Survey, andU.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2010 Consumer ExpenditureSurvey. Summaries of data sets are provided in the Appendix.

Taxes Paid by Households

Headed by Persons Without aHigh School Diploma

heritage.orgSR 133

AVERAGEANNUALTAXESPERHOUSEHOLD

Total: $10,334

Federal InsuranceContribution Act(FICA) Taxes

Federal Individual IncomeTaxes

State and Local PropertyTaxes

Miscellaneous Taxes

Corporate Income Tax(Federal and State)

Labor Taxes

Federal Excise Taxes andCustoms Duties

State Lottery Purchases

State Individual Income Tax

State and Local Sales andConsumption Taxes


25/102

16



U.S.-born children in the mil) verged $4,497.

Spending on police, re, nd public set cme to

$3,656 per household. Trnsporttion dded noth-

er $662, nd dministrtive support services cost

$958. Direct benets cme to $44. Miscellneous

popultion-bsed services dded nl $1,277.Taxes and Revenues Paid by Unlawul

Immigrant Households. appendix Tble 9 detils

the estimted txes nd revenues pid b unlwul

immigrnt households in 34 ctegories. The results

re summrized in Chrt 4.

Totl ederl, stte, nd locl txes pid b

unlwul immigrnt households verged $10,334

per household in 2010. Federl nd stte individu-

l income txes comprised less thn th o totl

txes pid. Insted, txes on consumption nd

emploment (FICa) produced nerl hl o the tx

revenue or unlwul immigrnt households. (The

nlsis ssumes tht workers p both the emplo-

er nd emploee shre o FICa tx.) Propert txes

(shited to renters) nd corporte prot txes (shit-

ed to workers) lso orm signicnt prt o the tx

burden.

It is worth noting tht FICa nd income txes

reported in Chrt 4 hve been reduced becusethe nlsis ssumes tht 45 percent o unlwul

immigrnt erners work o the books. I ll unlw-

ul immigrnt workers were emploed on the books,

these tx pments would increse signicntl.

Balance o Taxes and Benets. On verge,

unlwul immigrnt households received $24,721

per household in government benets nd serv ices in

Fy 2010. This gure includes direct benets, mens-

tested benets, eduction, nd popultion-bsed

services received b the household but excludes the

CHART 5

Notes: All figures are for 2010. The figures for unlawfulimmigrant households exclude 1.1 million adult U.S. citizens and

adult lawful immigrants who resided in the household.Sources: Heritage Foundation calculations based on data fromthe U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Current Population Survey, andU.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2010 Consumer ExpenditureSurvey. Summaries of data sets are provided in the Appendix.

Unlawful Immigrant Households:

Earnings, Government Benefits,and Taxes

heritage.orgSR 133

AnnualHousehold

Earnings

AnnualGovernment

BenefitsReceived

AnnualGovernmentTaxes Paid

$38,988

$24,721

$10,334

CHART 6

Note: Figures are averages per household.Source: Heritage Foundation calculations based on data fromthe U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Current Population Survey, andU.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2010 Consumer Expenditure

Survey. Summaries of data sets are provided in the Appendix.

* Direct benefits, means-tested benefits, education, andpopulation-based services.

Unlawful Immigrant Households:

Average Fiscal Deficit perHousehold Equals $14,387

heritage.orgSR 133

AverageTaxes Paid

AverageBenefits*Received

Net FiscalDeficit

$10,344

$24,721

$14,387


26/102

17


cost o public goods, interest on the government debt,

nd other pments or prior government unctions.

B contrst, unlwul immigrnt households onverge pid onl $10,334 in txes. Thus, unlwul

immigrnt households received $2.40 in benets

nd services or ech dollr pid in txes.

Mn politicins believe tht households tht

mintin sted emploment re invribl net tx

contributors, ping more in txes thn the receive

in government benets. Chrt 5 shows wh this is

not the cse. as Tble 2 shows, unlwul immigrnt

households hve high levels o emploment, with 1.6

erners per household nd verge nnul ernings

o round $39,000 or ll workers in the household.

But with verge government benets t $24,721,unlwul immigrnt households ctull receive

63 cents in government benets or ever dollr o

ernings.

To chieve scl blnce, with txes equl to ben-

ets, the verge unlwul immigrnt household

would hve to p nerl two-thirds o its income in

txes. Given this simple ct, it is obvious tht unlw-

ul immigrnt households cn never p enough

txes to cover the cost o their current government

benets nd services.

Net Annual Fiscal Decit. The net scl de-

cit o household equls the cost o benets nd ser-

vices received minus txes pid. as Chrt 6 shows,when the costs o direct nd mens-tested benets,

eduction, nd popultion-bsed services re count-

ed, the verge unlwul immigrnt household hd

scl decit o $14,387 (government expenditures o

$24,721 minus $10,334 in txes) in 2010.

For the verge unlwul immigrnt household

to become scll solvent, with txes pid equling

immedite benets received, it would be necessr

to increse the households tx pments to 240 per-

cent o current levels. alterntivel, unlwul immi-

grnt households could become solvent onl i ll

mens-tested welre nd nerl ll public educ-tion benets were eliminted.

Age Distribution o Benets and Taxes

Among Unlawul Immigrant Households. Mn

politicl decision mkers believe tht becuse

unlwul immigrnt workers re comprtivel

oung, the cn help to relieve the scl strins o n

ging societ. Chrts 7 nd 8 show wh this is not the

cse. These chrts seprte the 3.44 million unlw-

ul immigrnt households into ve ctegories bsed

on the ge o the hed o household.

CHART 7

Note: Benefits include direct and means-tested benefits, public education, and population-based services. Lawful residentsare included in these figures.Source: Heritage Foundation calculations based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Current Population Survey, andU.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2010 Consumer Expenditure Survey. Summaries of data sets are provided in the Appendix.

AGE OF HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD

Benefits Received and Taxes Paid by Unlawful ImmigrantHouseholds, by Age of Head of Household

heritage.orgSR 133

Under 25 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64

$12,335$11,112

$13,045

$9,978$11,524

$24,726

$27,082$28,345

$29,361

$21,123

Taxes PaidImmediate Benefitsand Services Received


27/102

18



The benets levels in Chrt 7 gin include

direct benets, mens-tested benets, public educ-tion, nd popultion-bsed services. These benets

strt t $24,726 or households heded b immi-

grnts under 25 ers o ge nd rise to $28,000 to

$29,000 per er s the heds o household rech

their 30s nd 40s. The increse is driven b rise in

the number o children in ech home. as the ge o

the hed o household reches the lte 50s, the num-

ber o children in the home lls, nd benets dip to

round $21,000 per er. annul tx pments vr

little b the ge o the householder, verging round

$12,000 per er in ech ge brcket.

The criticl ct shown in Chrt 7 nd Chrt 8 istht, or ech ge ctegor, the benets received b

unlwul immigrnt households exceed the txes pid.

at no point in the lie ccle does the verge unlwul

immigrnt household p more in txes thn it tkes

out in benets. In ech ge ctegor, unlwul immi-

grnt households receive roughl $2.00 in govern-

ment benets or ech dollr pid in txes. Between

ges 45 nd 54 (generll considered prime erning

ers), unlwul immigrnts ctull receive nerl

$3.00 in benets or ech dollr pid in txes.

These gures belie the notion tht government

cn relieve nncil strins in Socil Securitnd other progrms simpl b importing ounger

unlwul immigrnt workers. The scl impct o n

immigrnt worker is determined r more b educ-

tion nd skill level thn b ge. Low-skill immigrnt

workers (whether lwul or unlwul) impose net

drin on government nnce s soon s the enter

the countr nd dd signicntl to those costs

ever er the remin.

Chrt 8 shows the net scl decits (benets

minus txes) or ech ge ctegor. The scl de-

cits rech pek o over $19,000 per er or house-

holds with heds between 45 nd 54 ers old. Theverge decit then lls to round $10,000 per er

or households with heds between 55 nd 64 ers

old. The number o unlwul immigrnt households

declines shrpl with ge. There re ver ew unlw-

ul immigrnt households with heds over ge 65.

Aggregate Annual Net Fiscal Costs. In 2010,

3.44 million unlwul immigrnt households

ppered in the Current Popultion Surve. The

verge net scl decit per household ws $14,387.

Most experts believe tht t lest 350,000 more

CHART 8

Notes: Fiscal deficit equals benefits and services received minus taxes paid. Benefits include direct and means-tested benefits, public education, and population-based services. Lawful residents are included in these figures.Source: Heritage Foundation calculations based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Current PopulationSurvey, and U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2010 Consumer Expenditure Survey. Summaries of data sets areprovided in the Appendices.

AGE OF HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD

Annual Fiscal Deficit per Unlawful Immigrant Household,by Age of Head of Household

heritage.orgSR 133

Under 25 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64

$12,391

$15,970$15,299

$19,383

$9,599


28/102

19


unlwul immigrnt households resided in the U.S.

but were not reported in the CPS.

assuming tht the scl decit or these unre-

ported households ws the sme s the scl decit

or the unlwul immigrnt households in the CPS,

the totl nnul scl decit (totl benets received

minus totl txes pid) or ll 3.79 million unlwulimmigrnt households together equled $54.5 billion

(the decit o $14,387 per household times 3.79 million

households). This sum includes direct nd mens-test-

ed benets, eduction, nd popultion-bsed services.

Adjusting Future Decit Estimates orthe Potential Impact o the 2010Recession

In 2010, the econom ws in recession. In

recession, overll income nd tx revenue will be

lower; some benets such s unemploment insur-

nce will be drmticll higher. The recession

m thereore hve incresed the scl decit o

unlwul immigrnt households reltive to non-

recession ers. However, the impct o reces-

sion will not be uniorm cross ll socioeconomic

groups.Evidence suggests tht the recession hd t best

modest impct on the scl sttus o unlwul

immigrnt households. For exmple, while incomes

dropped signicntl during the recession, most o

the drop occurred in propert income; the Ntionl

Income nd Product accounts (which mesure the

whole econom) show tht totl nominl wges ell

b onl 2.3 percent rom 2008 to 2010. Some 95 per-

cent o the income o unlwul immigrnt house-

holds comes rom wges.

CHART 9

Note: Figures show total federal and state means-tested welfare spending on cash, food, housing, medical care, and social services.Source: The Heritage Foundation, from current and previous Oce of Management and Budget documents and other ocial government sources.

IN BILLIONS OF CONSTANT 2011 DOLLARS

Total Federal and State Means-Tested Welfare Spending, 19652011

heritage.orgSR 133

2011: $927 billion

1965:$64 billion


29/102

20



as mesured in the CPS, the constnt-dollr

income o the verge unlwul immigrnt house-

hold ws the sme in 2010 s in 2006. The mesured

income o unlwul immigrnts m be compr-

tivel stble during recession becuse unemploed

unlwul immigrnts return to their countr o

origin nd thereb dispper rom Census records.

I the verge unlwul immigrnt household lost

income during the recession, the drop ws modest.

Wht bout welre spending? There is popu-

lr conception tht welre spending is like roller

coster, rising shrpl during recession nd lling

when the recession ends. This pttern pplies some-

wht to ood stmps but not to mens-tested welre

in generl. Historicll, overll mens-tested spend-

ing does rise during recession but does not llnoticebl when the recession ends.

This pttern is shown in Chrt 9, which shows

totl mens-tested spending over time djusted or

intion. The chrt shows drmtic rise in costs

over time. Periods o rpid increse re ollowed b

spending plteus, but there re no signicnt dips

in post-recession periods. Following this pttern,

the Obm budget shows tht constnt-dollr per

cpit mens-tested spending will not decline over

the next decde.30

Despite these cvets, the estimtes o uture s-

cl decits in the rest o this pper will be djustedor the potentil eects o the recession on the 2010

dt. Specicll, the nlsis reduces uture unem-

ploment benets nd ood stmp benets b 66 per-

cent nd 25 percent below 2010 levels, respectivel.

These djustments re rml bcked b evidence nd

included in ll o the gures on uture-er decits.

In ddition, the nlsis increses uture tx p-

ments b unlwul immigrnts upwrd b 5 per-

cent nd reduces uture overll mens-tested wel-

re benets downwrd b 5 percent to compenste

or the impct o the recession on 2010 dt. These

djustments re more specultive; their impct isshown seprtel in Tble 7 nd in subsequent tbles.

The ltter djustments reduce projected uture s-

cl decits mong unlwul immigrnt households

b bout 5 percent.

Fiscal Impact o Amnestyor Earned Citizenship

In recent ers, Congress hs considered vri-

ous comprehensive immigrtion reorm proposls.

One ke eture o these proposls hs been tht

ll or most current unlwul immigrnts would be

llowed to st in the U.S. nd become U.S. citizens.

In most legisltive proposls, mnest or erned

citizenship would hve three phses. First, unlw-

ul immigrnts would be plced in provisionl st-

tus tht would llow them to remin in the U.S. lw-

ull. ater ve to 10 ers in this provisionl sttus,

most ormer unlwul immigrnts would be grnted

legl permnent resident (LPR) sttus. ater ve

ers in LPR sttus, the individuls would be llowed

to become U.S. citizens. The intervl between initil

mnest nd citizenships would thus stretch or 10

to 15 ers or longer.

The scl impct o mnest would vr gretl

depending on the time period exmined. The pres-

ent pper will nlze the scl consequences omnest in our phses.

Phase 1: Current Law or Status Quo. This is thescl sttus t the present time prior to mnest.

Phase 2: The Interim Phase. This phse wouldinclude the period in which mnest recipients

were in provisionl sttus ollowed b the rst ve

ers o legl permnent residence. During the

interim phse, tx revenues would go up s more

ormer unlwul immigrnts begn to work on

the books but would remin brred rom receiv-ing mens-tested welre nd probbl Obmcre

helth cre subsidies. The overll net scl cost o

the ormer unlwul immigrnt popultion could

be expected to decline slightl during this period.

The length nd progrmmtic boundries o the

interim phse would obviousl vr in dierent

bills, but ve to 15 ers would be tpicl.

Phase 3: Full Implementation o Amnesty. atthe end o the interim phse, ll mnest bills

would provide the mnest recipients (ormer

unlwul immigrnts) with ull eligibilit ormore thn 80 mens-tested welre progrms s

well s helth cre subsidies under the aordble

Cre act (aCa, or Obmcre). The resulting

increse in outls would be substntil.

Phase 4: Retirement Years. Under cur-rent lw, unlwul immigrnts re not eligible

or Socil Securit nd Medicre benets. all

mnest legisltion would llow recipients o

mnest to obtin eligibilit or these progrms.

illegal immigration-amnesty costs to us taxpayer

Documents