January 23, 2007
Illegal Immigration Pays—For Them, Not Us
Illegals pay more in taxes than they receive in
benefits.
(Oh really?)
Well, at least that’s the conclusion of a report
issued by outgoing Texas state comptroller
Carole Strayhorn. [Undocumented Immigrants
in Texas, Special Report, Texas Comptroller,
December 2006.
PDF]
Trumpeted as "…the first time
any state has done a comprehensive financial
analysis of the impact of undocumented immigrants on a
state’s budget and economy…", Ms. Strayhorn’s
report claims that illegals pay $1.58 billion in state
taxes while receiving $1.16 billion in state services.
This implies a $420 million net transfer from
illegal immigrants to the state of Texas.
Not surprisingly, this happy result is achieved by
ignoring several large fiscal negatives:
If, say, one-quarter of the
children of immigrants are in ESL, and ESL
costs are 25 percent above the per-pupil average, the
average cost of educating an illegal alien’s child in
Texas would be $7,528—or $443 more than the statewide
average.
Our conclusion: Comptroller Strayhorn underestimates
the cost of educating children of illegal immigrants by
about $3.1 billion. This amount reflects her low-balling
the costs of educating foreign-born students ($443 times
135,000) plus her much larger gaffe of ignoring the
costs of educating
U.S.-born children of illegals ($7,528 times
395,000).
Bottom line: After accounting for all K-12 expenses,
the $420 million subsidy allegedly paid by illegal
aliens to the state of Texas becomes a $2.7 billion
subsidy from
Texas taxpayers to the illegals.
And we haven’t even discussed Medicaid.
Texas is not the first state to low-ball immigration
costs. In his
analysis of the fiscal impact of immigration
in Florida released in 2005, David Denslow—an economist
at the University of Florida’s Bureau of Economic and
Business Research— critiques
an earlier study on the subject:
"The short run effects of
immigration on
Florida’s public finances have been addressed in a
thorough study by Thomas Boswell and others. Published
in 2001, the Boswell Report quantifies the contribution
of immigrants to taxes and their use of welfare and
public education. With respect to revenue, the
report concludes ‘There is no question that immigrants
are carrying their fair share of the tax burdens in
Florida and
Miami.’ It also finds that per capita spending on
public services is about the same for immigrants as for
natives."
By contrast, Denslow estimates that immigrant
households receive $1,800 more in state services (mainly
education and
Medicaid) than they pay in taxes. He explains the
discrepancy between his results and those of the earlier
study:
"Because the Boswell
Report is professional and methodical, we wish we could
use its results off the rack, with minor updating, for
the short-run section of this chapter. But the authors
choose the individual immigrant, not the household, as
their unit of analysis. They are well aware that most
studies focus on households because ‘the household is a
functioning socioeconomic unit.’ But they use the
individual instead, saying ‘the basic problem with using
households is that they tend to overestimate the costs
of providing social services to immigrants because many
immigrant households include native U.S. born
children.’"
"By the Boswell Report’s
definition, immigrants were 16% of Florida’s population
in the 1996–99 data but only 7% of its K–12 students. In
view of the
high fertility and relative youth of immigrant
families, counting children in immigrant households
raises the K–12 share above the household share. Using
data for the years 2000 through 2004, we find that the
immigrant share of households in Florida is 20% and the
immigrant share of children is 26%. Since K–12 education
takes the largest share of state-and-local spending, the
difference matters."
In
Florida, as in
Texas, immigrants pay their "fair share" only
when their U.S.-born children are left out of the
calculation.
Edwin S. Rubenstein (email
him) is President of
ESR Research Economic Consultants in Indianapolis.