Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Will Trump’s immigration crackdown be good or bad for the economy?

Will Trump’s immigration crackdown be good or bad for the economy?

Roofers on an 8-12 pitch roof laying under-layment before installing roof tile. Roofer is throwing safety line out of the way.

Getty Images//TerryJ

In his first days in office, President Donald Trump wasted no time showing he means business, announcing a crackdown on immigration. He declared a national emergency, signed a raft of executive orders, sent 1,500 active duty troops to the U.S.-Mexico border, and his Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) has initiated raids on thousands of migrants across the nation.

The issue of immigration has always been multifaceted, impacting both the economy and human rights, not to mention the expensive logistical operation necessary to deport millions of people. But my discussion below is focused specifically on this question: what will happen to the economy if many of the immigrant workers (who are also consumers and taxpayers) who fill many jobs in the construction, restaurant, health care, agriculture, and elder care industries, suddenly are whisked away?


Pros and cons: the costs to taxpayers of immigration

One study has pegged the net cost of illegal immigration at $151 billion to pay for border enforcement and services like healthcare, social agencies, and schools for immigrant children. That figure is disputed, since most unauthorized immigrants do not qualify for most government benefit programs. Nevertheless, unemployed immigrants certainly are a drain on the public coffers to some extent, so a crackdown could save some money.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Even after immigrants find employment, study after study clearly shows that large increases in immigration have a tendency to lower wages in the blue-collar jobs where many of those immigrants work. But those same studies also show that most of the negative wage or employment impacts are temporary, and over the longer term, new workers provide employers with opportunities to expand their businesses and increase production.

In fact, some of the biggest opponents of immigration crackdowns in the past have been Republican business leaders in places like Texas, Arizona, and California who need to hire lots of blue-collar workers. For them, immigrants are usually a blessing because labor shortages make it difficult to fill many positions, and immigrant workers will work at prevailing wages.

Pros and cons: the costs of deportation

Sensationalized headlines about the small number of lawbreaking immigrants will not change the fact that entire industries, from construction and health care to agriculture, restaurants, and elder care, rely on immigrant labor, which accounts for anywhere from a quarter to half of certain occupations.

For example, immigrants increasingly fill a job gap in the healthcare industry. Nearly 2.8 million immigrants account for more than 18% of that industry’s workforce. Millions of them fill critical roles for physicians and surgeons (26%), registered nurses, dental hygienists, and home health aides (the latter estimates range from 27% to almost 40%).

Immigrants make up enormous shares of the labor pool for construction jobs, from 33% of carpenters to 37% of brick masons, 47% of roofers, and 64% of plasterers. National Association of Home Builders CEO Jim Tobin warns that policies targeting working immigrants could further weaken the construction industry’s already depleted labor market. Migrant workers also represent about 40% of all crop farmworkers, according to the USDA, and their share of the workforce on dairy farms in certain states could be even higher.

All told, demographers believe roughly 8.3 million undocumented immigrants are working in the US, accounting for about 5% of the total workforce. That’s not huge, but with Americans angry about grocery prices and housing affordability, economists warn that expelling all those workers in such crucial industries will likely cause grocery prices and housing construction costs to climb. Existing staffing shortages at nursing homes and home health businesses will increase, leading to reduced services and higher costs.

Former Trump adviser Stephen Moore from the conservative Heritage Foundation says, “There is no question that having eight to 10 million people deported — many of whom are working — would put a strain on the economy. You could see an inflationary impact to getting rid of some of these workers.”

So Trump’s campaign promises for mass deportations directly conflict with his pledge to reduce inflation. Impacts will likely be felt nationwide, but particularly in states like Nebraska, Texas, and elsewhere. Nebraska is one of the top meat producers in the US, with one of the worst labor shortages in the country. For every 100 jobs, there are only 39 workers, according to the US Chamber of Commerce. "People say, 'Well, just double or triple the pay [and] you'll get United States citizens to work.' No, you won't," says Al Juhnke, executive director of the Nebraska Pork Producers Association.

More domino effects

In fact, the expulsion of these workers will likely have another domino effect – reducing the number of jobs for native-born Americans. Economist Michael Clemens from the Peterson Institute has found that unauthorized workers are critical ingredients in the overall production process, and their removal has “ripple effects for the jobs of everybody else in the sector — including authorized immigrants, including natives.” A recent study in the Journal of Labor Economics found that, for every 450,000 immigrants removed from the labor force, employment of complementary production jobs for US-born males also declined by approximately 300,000, many of them high-skilled occupations.

Immigrant workers also contribute some of their wages to Social Security and Medicare, even though they do not receive benefits from those programs. The Social Security Administration has foundthat deportations could cut annual cash flow by $20 billion. In 2022, immigrants living illegally in the US paid $25.7 billion in Social Security taxes and $6.4 billion in Medicare taxes. The loss of this tax revenue concerns many economists since the Social Security fund is already expected to experience shortfalls by the mid-2030s.

Indeed, studies show that many children of immigrants (the second generation) go on to achieve higher education and elevated incomes, eventually contributing more in taxes than native-born Americans. Across the generations, immigrants provide a favorable net return. Indeed, the face of immigration itself has changed, with nearly half of new immigrants having college degrees.

In sum, removing millions of existing workers could very well shrink the US workforce, drive up business costs and consumer prices, reduce the economy’s productive capacity, and widen the deficit. In places where raids have been occurring, such as California, Texas, Chicago, Miami, Atlanta, and Phoenix, as many as 75% of immigrant workers, including legal ones, have stopped showing up for work, fearful of getting swept up in the ICE net. This already has been hugely disruptive to individual workplaces and the nation’s economy.

The United States is a nation of immigrants, yet immigration will always be a challenge for a modern democratic society. A country can only absorb so many newcomers so fast. At this juncture, we don’t know the extent of the deportations. Hopefully, the Trump administration will balance the pluses and minuses and factor the significant economic impacts of mass expulsion into their policy equations.


Steven Hill was policy director for the Center for Humane Technology, co-founder of FairVote and political reform director at New America. You can reach him on X @StevenHill1776.

Read More

Dictionary definition of tariff
Would replacing the income tax with higher tariffs help ‘struggling Americans’?
Devonyu/Getty Images

Could Trump’s tariffs have unintended consequences that hurt America?

The first few weeks of the Trump administration have been head-spinning. President Trump and his team were well-prepared to launch their policy agenda, signing over 50 executive orders, the most in a president's first month in more than 40 years. A major focus has been economic policy, first with immigration raids, which were quickly followed by announcements of tariffs on imports from America’s biggest trade partners.

The tariff announcements have followed a meandering and confusing course. President Trump announced the first tariffs on February 1, but within 24 hours, he suspended the tariffs on Mexico and Canada in favor of “negotiations.” Mexico and Canada agreed to enforce their borders better to stop migrants and fentanyl imports, which the Trump administration called a victory. Despite the triumphalist rhetoric, the enforcement measures were substantially the same as what both countries were already planning to do.

Keep ReadingShow less
From Silicon Valley to Capitol Hill: The Ascendancy of Indian Americans

The flag of India.

Canva Images

From Silicon Valley to Capitol Hill: The Ascendancy of Indian Americans

In the intricate landscape of global geopolitics, the ascendancy of Indian Americans stands as a quiet yet transformative force—a phenomenon that demands serious consideration. While traditional paradigms of power focus on military might or economic clout, the strategic leverage wielded by this diaspora is rewriting the rules of global influence. India’s economic trajectory reflects its ambitions on the global stage. Contributing 4% to global GDP today, the nation is poised to become the world’s third $10 trillion economy within two decades. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) predicts India will account for 18% of total global growth by decade’s end, a rise that challenges established economic hierarchies.

Trade data between India and the United States reflects the growing interdependence: In 2020, U.S. imports to India stood at $51.3 billion. This figure grew to $80.1 billion in 2024, alongside a trade deficit swelling from $24.2 billion to $41.5 billion. This trade expansion is mirrored by Indian-American professionals dominating key sectors of the U.S. economy. With a median household income of $119,000, Indian Americans outperform national averages and hold influential roles across corporate and governmental institutions. CEOs of global giants like Microsoft, Google, and Citibank exemplify this trend, along with leadership roles in companies like Apple, Intel, and Dell.

Keep ReadingShow less
Tariffs: Not a tax, and not free money

United States trade cargo container hanging against clouds background

Getty Images//Iskandar Zulkarnean

Tariffs: Not a tax, and not free money

During the recent election season, there was much talk of Trump’s plan to lay tariffs on the importation of foreign goods. Pundits, politicians, and journalists to the left of center consistently referred to them as a tax on the American people. Many of those to the right of center, especially those of the MAGA contingent, seemed to imply they are a pain-free way for the federal government to raise money.

Some correctly said that the country essentially ran on tariffs in its early history. Alexander Hamilton, the first Treasury Secretary and arguably the godfather of our initial financial system, successfully proposed and implemented a tariff system with two goals in mind. Fund the young American government and protect young American businesses against competition from established foreign companies. The second bill signed by President George Washington was a broad tariff bill.

Keep ReadingShow less
H-1B Visas, Cultural Failures, Weapons of Economic War

Illustrative picture showing application for USA H1B visa

Getty Images//Stock Photo

H-1B Visas, Cultural Failures, Weapons of Economic War

Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy both came out recently in favor of expanding the H-1B visa program. This program allows large corporations to claim they cannot find adequate skilled talent (engineers for example) and sponsor a foreign worker to enter the United States to fill the required role.

The program itself is rife with abuse and inevitably and negatively affects American citizens by adding to the supply of talent and inevitably decreasing the price of such talent (wages).

Keep ReadingShow less