research on immigrant population

• Yale University
• About Yale Insights
• Privacy Policy
• Accessibility

Yale Study Finds Twice as Many Undocumented Immigrants as Previous Estimates

Generally accepted estimates put the population of undocumented immigrants in the United States at approximately 11.3 million. A new study, using mathematical modeling on a range of demographic and immigration operations data, suggests that the actual undocumented immigrant population may be more than 22 million.

• Mohammad Fazel Zarandi Senior Lecturer, MIT Sloan School of Management
• Jonathan S. Feinstein John G. Searle Professor of Economics and Management
• Edward H. Kaplan William N. and Marie A. Beach Professor of Operations Research, Professor of Public Health & Professor of Engineering

Immigration is the focus of fierce political and policy debate in the United States. Among the most contentious issues is how the country should address undocumented immigrants. Like a tornado that won’t dissipate, arguments have spun around and around for years. At the center lies a fairly stable and largely unquestioned number: 11.3 million undocumented immigrants residing in the U.S. But a paper by three Yale-affiliated researchers suggests all the perceptions and arguments based on that number may have a faulty foundation; the actual population of undocumented immigrants residing in the country is much larger than that, perhaps twice as high, and has been underestimated for decades.

Using mathematical modeling on a range of demographic and immigration operations data, the researchers estimate there are 22.1 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. Even using parameters intentionally aimed at producing an extremely conservative estimate, they found a population of 16.7 million undocumented immigrants.

The results, published in PLOS ONE , surprised the authors themselves. They started with the extremely conservative model and expected the results to be well below 11.3 million.

“Our original idea was just to do a sanity check on the existing number,” says Edward Kaplan, the William N. and Marie A. Beach Professor of Operations Research at the Yale School of Management. “Instead of a number which was smaller, we got a number that was 50% higher. That caused us to scratch our heads.”

Jonathan Feinstein, the John G. Searle Professor of Economics and Management at Yale SOM, adds, “There’s a number that everybody quotes, but when you actually dig down and say, ‘What is it based on?’ You find it’s based on one very specific survey and possibly an approach that has some difficulties. So we went in and just took a very different approach.”

The 11.3 million number is extrapolated from the Census Bureau’s annual American Community Survey . “It’s been the only method used for the last three decades,” says Mohammad Fazel‐Zarandi, a senior lecturer at the MIT Sloan School of Management and formerly a postdoctoral associate and lecturer in operations at the Yale School of Management. That made the researchers curious—could they reproduce the number using a different methodology?

The approach in the new research was based on operational data, such as deportations and visa overstays, and demographic data, including death rates and immigration rates. “We combined these data using a demographic model that follows a very simple logic,” Kaplan says. “The population today is equal to the initial population plus everyone who came in minus everyone who went out. It’s that simple.”

While the logic is simple—tally the inflows and outflows over time—actually gathering, assessing, and inserting the data appropriately into a mathematical model isn’t at all simple. Because there is significant uncertainty, the results are presented as a range. After running 1,000,000 simulations of the model, the researchers’ 95% probability range is 16 million to 29 million, with 22.1 million as the mean.

Notably, the upper bound of the traditional survey approach, which also produces a range, doesn’t overlap with the lower bound of the new modeling method. “There really is some open water between these estimates,” Kaplan says. He believes that means the differences between the approaches can’t be explained by sampling variability or annual fluctuations.

There are key areas of agreement between this paper and the existing survey numbers. Both methods found that the greatest growth of the undocumented population happened in the 1990s and early 2000s. Both found that the population size has been relatively stable since 2008. “The trajectory is the same. We see the same patterns happening, but they’re just understating the actual number of people who have made it here,” says Fazel‐Zarandi. In his view, that suggests the survey method doesn’t effectively reach a group with incentives to stay undetected. “They are capturing part of this population, but not the whole population.”

Kaplan and Feinstein have worked on this type of problem for many years. “The analysis we’ve done can be thought of as estimating the size of a hidden population,” Kaplan says. “People who are undocumented immigrants are not walking around with labels on their foreheads. Neither are populations of homeless people, neither are populations of drug users, and neither are populations of terrorists. Yet for policy, it is very important to know the size of these hidden populations because that sets the scale of the problem in each of these different policy areas.”

Invariably, such work requires scholars to find ways to work with incomplete data. Feinstein says, “I see this project a filling in the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. You’re taking the data from different places and bringing it together in a way that’s logical and helps you estimate something important, but not all those pieces have all the information you’d like.”

In fact, some of the relevant data sets have only recently become available, so this approach might not have been possible for this particular puzzle, even a few years ago. Fazel‐Zarandi notes that 2015 was the first time that data on visa overstays was collected by the Department of Homeland Security.

Bringing all the different sources of data together is arduous. “There’s a lot hidden under the hood, so to speak,” Feinstein says. The key components—inflows and outflows—are each made of numerous subcomponents. Each subcomponent must be aggregated from different sources, evaluated for its specific level of certainty, then incorporated into the mathematical model in a consistent way.

“There are very few numbers we can point to and say this is carved in stone,” Kaplan adds. “We allow for all of that variability in the modeling, which complicates everything and explains why we get such a wide range of possible outcomes.”

He continues, “How many people are actually being apprehended at the border? That’s hard data. That’s reported each year.” From there it’s possible to reverse engineer an estimate of how many people must have tried to cross the border. “This kind of ‘backwards logic’ is common in models of this form.” Kaplan notes that in the early days of the HIV/AIDS crisis, the number of new HIV infections was reverse engineered from the number of new AIDS cases.

The paper examines the years 1990 to 2016. The initial population is a key component of all subsequent years’ calculations; Fazel‐Zarandi explains that the team chose 1990 as a starting point because it fell between the amnesty President Reagan offered for undocumented immigrants in 1986 and the rapid growth of illegal immigration in the 1990s.

While the findings are startling, they aren’t describing a new situation. “We wouldn’t want people to walk away from this research thinking that suddenly there’s a large influx happening now,” says Feinstein. “It’s really something that happened in the past and maybe was not properly counted or documented.”

Kaplan adds, “What we’re saying is the number has been higher all along.”

While immigration is a hot button topic, the researchers are adamant that their aim is to provide information. “Of course, our findings will get pulled and tugged in many ways, but our purpose is just to provide better information,” Feinstein says. “This paper is not oriented towards politics or policy. I want to be very clear: this paper is about coming up with a better estimate of an important number.”

How might this research inform the debate around immigration? Some might argue that the presence of twice as many undocumented immigrants justifies tougher immigration enforcement.

“One of the most common arguments in favor of a tougher immigration policy is that undocumented immigrants are coming with a lot of criminality,” Kaplan notes. But paradoxically, the new findings may undercut that argument. He points out that previous studies, based on the widely accepted total of 11.3 million undocumented immigrants, found that the rate of serious crimes committed by these immigrants is lower than for U.S. citizens. The new findings suggest that the rate is even lower than previously believed: “You have the same number of crimes but now spread over twice as many people as was believed before, which right away means that the crime rate among undocumented immigrants is essentially half whatever was previously believed. ”

With respect to the idea that undocumented immigrants take job opportunities from citizens, Kaplan points to different possible interpretations of the new findings. “The fact that there are actually more people here than we thought before might explain that, but you can also look at it the other way: whatever job displacement there has been happened with twice as many undocumented immigrants as we thought. That causes you to rethink just how much pressure there is.”

As is typical with academic work, this finding is not an endpoint. Feinstein says, “Hopefully, these results spur further thinking.”

• Public Policy

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

The immigrant population in the U.S. is climbing again, setting a record last year

Ukrainian refugees enter the El Chaparral border crossing between Tijuana, Mexico, and San Diego in April 2022. The foreign-born share of the U.S. population, which had been roughly flat since 2017, rose to nearly 14% last year. Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images hide caption

Ukrainian refugees enter the El Chaparral border crossing between Tijuana, Mexico, and San Diego in April 2022. The foreign-born share of the U.S. population, which had been roughly flat since 2017, rose to nearly 14% last year.

The immigrant population in the U.S. is growing again.

The number of people born somewhere else climbed by nearly a million last year, reaching a record high of just over 46 million, according to new estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau.

The increase isn't huge for a country the size of the U.S. But it's significant, as growth had slowed sharply in recent years because of Trump administration policies and the pandemic.

"The foreign-born population zoomed up," said William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. "The gain in 2022 was as big as the previous four years put together."

The foreign-born share of the U.S. population, which had been roughly flat since 2017, rose to nearly 14% last year.

Experts say the renewed growth coincides with a gradual reboot of legal immigration, like processing visas and vetting refugees, which had all ground to a halt during COVID.

The Biden administration has also opened the country's doors to tens of thousands of people fleeing from Afghanistan and Ukraine. Meanwhile, the administration has struggled to respond to a record-setting influx of migrants from Central and South America arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border.

"The immigration system is functioning a little better," said Jeffrey Passel, a senior demographer at the Pew Research Center in Washington, D.C. "We're letting people in. We didn't let many people in for a while. So that's part of it."

"Some of it is people we've admitted, and some of it is people we haven't admitted," Passel said.

The survey estimates include immigrants who are living in the U.S. legally, as well as those who are not.

The data show big gains in the number of immigrants from Latin America and Asia last year, Frey said. And he notes that a substantial number of new arrivals had college or post-college degrees.

"This image about immigrants coming in, that they're low-skilled and need to have a lot of government support, is not necessarily supported by a lot of these data. Because there are a lot of immigrants coming who are well-educated and can contribute a lot to the labor force," Frey said.

At the state level, Florida saw by far the largest increase in its foreign-born population. The Sunshine State added more than 200,000 immigrants last year, according to the annual Census Bureau estimate known as the American Community Survey. That was more than twice as many as Georgia, the state with the second-largest growth.

"I love it here," said Nimota Salami of Clarkston, Georgia. She was born in Nigeria, and had been living in Chicago until she moved to Georgia last year.

Salami says she was pleasantly surprised by the diversity she found in DeKalb County, just outside Atlanta, as well as the support for the catering and food business she started, Royal Nigerian Foods.

"The weather is very, very friendly," Salami said. "And moving here to Georgia opened me to so many things because I'm able to market my products very well."

Immigrants made up 10.7% of the population in Georgia last year, according to NPR's analysis of the Census data, a gain of nearly .7% compared with 2021. Other states that saw substantial gains in the share of immigrants included Maryland (.8%), New Jersey (.5%) and Iowa (.5%).

Gabriela Rivera has lived in Iowa since 1988, when she migrated with her mother from Mexico City. Rivera says the family chose Iowa because her mother already had family in the area — the same explanation she frequently hears from new arrivals.

"I think for a lot, it's just that they already have a support system," said Rivera, who now lives in Coralville, near Iowa City. "I know of other immigrants who have come here from another state, you know in the south, Texas, California, New Mexico, because someone was already here in Iowa and told them to come."

Rivera says she knows a lot more doctors, lawyers and teachers who are immigrants. And as the Spanish-speaking community has grown, she says, so has the availability of previously hard to find items like rosaries, soccer team memorabilia, and even her favorite food from back in Mexico: cactus leaves.

"That's something I grew up eating in my area in Mexico," Rivera said. "And now it's really easy to get it. Somebody is selling it at the store."

NPR's Nicholas McMillan and Tirzah Christopher, and Iowa Public Radio's Zachary Oren Smith contributed to this story.

• U.S.-Mexico border
• Afghan refugees
• asylum seekers
• Census Bureau

A Turning Point for the Unauthorized Immigrant Population in the United States

By  Jennifer Van Hook ,  Julia Gelatt  and  Ariel G. Ruiz Soto

Approximately 11.2 million unauthorized immigrants lived in the United States in 2021, up from 11.0 million in 2019, according to new Migration Policy Institute (MPI) estimates. This represents larger annual growth in the unauthorized immigrant population than at any point since 2015. While the public, which is regularly exposed to images of chaotic arrivals at the U.S.-Mexico border, might expect an even greater jump in the size of the overall unauthorized immigrant population, it is important to note that these 2021 data do not capture the record number of border encounters witnessed in 2022 and the high levels seen this year.

These estimates also reflect the population as of mid-2021, a period when global mobility was still depressed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The size of the unauthorized immigrant population is shaped by new entries—border arrivals and visa overstays alike—but also by departures. In 2020, both arrivals and departures seemed to be at lower levels than in previous years.

The observed increase in the size of the unauthorized population between 2019 and 2021 (see Figure 1) is partially explained by increased irregular arrivals at the U.S.-Mexico border. These border arrivals represented a growing mix of nationalities from the Americas and, increasingly, from beyond the hemisphere. The growth also stems from rising numbers of Europeans who overstayed their nonimmigrant visas. Among research organizations that estimate the size of the unauthorized immigrant population, MPI is the first to publish national trends for 2021, using a methodology developed in collaboration with The Pennsylvania State University.

The estimates offered here are based on data from the 2021 American Community Survey (ACS), the latest available from the U.S. Census Bureau. Because the Census Bureau deemed that the 2020 ACS did not meet its quality standards, given the challenges of conducting surveys during the onset of the pandemic, MPI had not generated estimates of the size of the unauthorized immigrant population since the 2019 data became available.

The increase in unauthorized immigrants between 2019 and 2021, which was driven by migration from Central America and Venezuela in particular, was partially offset by emigration of large numbers of Mexican unauthorized immigrants over this period. The Mexican unauthorized immigrant population has been shrinking for more than a decade, falling about 32 percent from its 7.7 million peak just before the 2008-09 Great Recession. MPI estimates that the Mexican unauthorized immigrant population declined by roughly 200,000 people between 2019 and 2021, from 5.4 million to 5.2 million (see Figure 2), likely as a result of repatriations by U.S. immigration authorities as well as voluntary returns to reunite with family, among other factors. It is also likely that as more Mexican migrants are utilizing lawful pathways to come to the United States, including the H-2A visa for seasonal agricultural work, fewer may be inclined to migrate irregularly.

A Turning Point: Growing Diversification of Origins

While Mexico continued to be the largest origin country of unauthorized immigrants (accounting for 46 percent of the total in 2021, as compared to 63 percent in 2007), declines in the Mexican unauthorized population offset increases in irregular arrivals from other countries. The unauthorized immigrant populations from places such as Guatemala, Honduras, Venezuela, and other parts of South America grew between 2019 and 2021, as did populations from the Caribbean and Africa, among others.

In 2021, the top countries of origin of unauthorized immigrants after Mexico ranged from those in nearby northern Central America to countries such as India, the Philippines, and Colombia ( see Table 1 ).

Migrants from Latin America and the Caribbean accounted for 79 percent of all unauthorized immigrants in 2021. Eleven percent were from Asia ( see Table 2) .

Why Are the Unauthorized Immigrant Estimates Relatively Stable?

Over the last 15 years, the unauthorized immigrant population has hovered just above or below 11 million, plus or minus a few hundred thousand—with the research organizations that provide such estimates falling within a similar range despite using differing methodologies (see Figure 1).

While this stability seems to defy expectations, given the very high numbers of encounters of unauthorized immigrants by U.S. authorities at the U.S.-Mexico border in recent years, a closer look offers a logical explanation.

The new MPI estimates reflect the population as of mid-2021, the most recent year for which ACS data exist. The post-pandemic rise in migrant encounters at the Southwest border did not start until spring 2021, with peaks occurring in July and August, which are therefore not fully reflected in these estimates. Notably, border encounters in fiscal year (FY) 2022 far exceeded those in FY 2021, and with two months left in the year encounters in FY 2023 already surpassed the total in FY 2021 ( see Figure 3 ).

Although the pandemic depressed immigration to the United States, this does not explain why the unauthorized immigrant population has been stable since 2008. One key to understanding this is knowing that, under the surface, the unauthorized immigrant population has never been static. Even as new migrants enter the country, others exit. After spending time living and working in the United States, some people voluntarily leave because they cannot find employment, their money goes further in their communities of origin, they want to be closer to family and friends, or they prefer not to live with the burden of unauthorized status anymore. Still others are deported by immigration authorities ( more than 4.7 million removals  have been carried out since 2008), with their relatives sometimes electing to rejoin them. Though not easy, other unauthorized immigrants are able to obtain legal status in the United States. Finally, some die.

Beginning in 2008 and continuing through 2021, more Mexican unauthorized migrants have left the United States each year than there have been new unauthorized entrants who are from Mexico, according to the authors’ analysis. Many moved to the United States during the economic boom of the late 1990s and early 2000s to work in construction, agriculture, or service-sector jobs. The 2008-09 recession abruptly reduced job opportunities and  many immigrants moved back to Mexico . Additionally, conditions in Mexico had changed. Reductions in family size reduced the pressures on people to work abroad to support their families, and job opportunities started to increase as the Mexican economy recovered from the financial crises of the 1980s and 1990s.

Mexico’s longstanding trend of more migrant departures than arrivals is not replicated by other major sending countries. Among many other unauthorized immigrant groups, new arrivals have outpaced departures, legalizations, deaths, and deportations. Between 2008 and 2021, the unauthorized population from Africa grew by 68 percent; from the Caribbean by 67 percent; from Central America by 52 percent; Asia by 47 percent; Europe, Canada, and Oceania by 32 percent; and South America by 30 percent. But because Mexicans compose nearly half of the overall unauthorized population, their decline has offset increases among all other groups combined.

A Population Likely to Grow Beyond 2021

Trends witnessed since 2021 portend greater shifts in the unauthorized immigrant population into 2023. A combination of the easing of pandemic-era travel restrictions, increasing displacement due to global conflict and climate events, and shifts in regional migration have led to increased migration in the Americas and worldwide. Migration through the Western Hemisphere has become significantly more diverse in nationality, with growing numbers of migrants from far-away countries such as Russia, Turkey, Cameroon, and India arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Multiple factors go into whether the U.S. unauthorized immigrant population has grown since mid-2021. It is possible that the significant rise in migrant arrivals at the Southwest border since 2021—driven by interlocking factors ranging from political repression to strong U.S. labor demand and favorable perceptions of U.S. policy changes—may increase the size of the unauthorized population if large shares stay pending removal or the conclusion of their immigration court proceedings. Visa overstays could also add to this growth if more people remain beyond the duration of their visa, as global travel rebounds. At the same time, emigration could also rise, driven by migrants’ decisions to return home or by stricter enforcement policies, offsetting the increases.

The Growth of a “Twilight” Population

Looking past 2021, another trend that has strongly affected the lives of unauthorized immigrants is that a growing share hold—or even arrive with—some kind of liminal status. MPI has long included in its estimates of the unauthorized population people who  hold some sort of twilight status  such as Temporary Protected Status (TPS) or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), which grant the right to work in the United States and protection from deportation but do not offer permanent legal status. MPI estimates also include people in the process of applying for asylum.

While these groups collectively comprised a minority of unauthorized immigrants in 2019 and continue to do so, larger shares of new arrivals are now in some sort of liminal status, with many granted entry with that status. The Biden administration has expanded TPS eligibility to more than 800,000 U.S. residents, including sizable numbers of recent entrants from Haiti, Ukraine, and Afghanistan. Separately, it has allowed entry of hundreds of thousands of migrants from Afghanistan, Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, Ukraine, and Venezuela through humanitarian parole, which affords the temporary right to stay and work with authorization. And ever-larger shares of recent border crossers are asylum seekers.

As a result, migrants’ legal status composition in the United States has become more complex. While the term “unauthorized” is an imperfect descriptor for migrants the U.S. government has processed and granted the temporary right to stay, MPI estimates continue to group together these populations given their lack of a visa or other durable legal status.

Future data will reveal how the size and origins of the unauthorized immigrant population have shifted during the very dynamic period of U.S.-Mexico border arrivals in 2022 and 2023. Shifting national origins, protection needs, and migration policies have also changed what the experience of being an unauthorized immigrant in the United States is like—including more with work authorization and a somewhat expanded set of rights but without a fixed immigration status. The 2021 data offered here represent a return to estimates after the pandemic-induced lull.

Links 

• Press Release
• Data profiles at U.S., state, and top county levels
• Map in U.S. by country and region
• All of MPI's work on unauthorized migration

Related News

International migrants attracted to large urban counties, Census Bureau data shows

Population estimates show international migrants were drawn to some of the largest, most urban counties in the u.s. last year.

Homes sit on a hilltop with a view of the downtown Los Angeles skyline Thursday, June 10, 2021, in Los Angeles. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)

Jae C. Hong / AP

International migrants were attracted to some of the largest urban counties in the U.S. last year, an influx that helped some of those areas recover from the loss of local residents and businesses during the COVID-19 pandemic, U.S. Census Bureau figures show.

More than 1.1 million people moved to the U.S. last year, driving population gains at a time when immigration has become a hot-button election issue during the race for the White House and Congress. Newcomers from abroad accounted for more than two-thirds of U.S. population growth last year, according to the bureau's population estimates .

Population estimates published last month show which counties attracted international migrants last year but don't distinguish between those in the country legally or illegally. More than half of the foreign-born population in the U.S. live in just four states : California, Texas, Florida and New York. But the numbers alone only tell part of the story.

Florida's Miami-Dade County saw the arrival of more than 54,000 people last year, the most of any county in the U.S., according to the estimates.

Florida as a whole received more than 178,000 international migrants last year, 15% of the U.S. total. More than 7 in 10 went to the Sunshine State's five most populous and urban counties: Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach in South Florida; Hillsborough, which is home to Tampa, on the Gulf Coast; and Orange, in central Florida, where Orlando is located.

Related: The immigrant population in the U.S. is climbing again, setting a record last year

A good number of the international migrants in Florida have cases pending in immigration court , according to figures tracked by Syracuse University's Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. Miami and Orlando had two of the largest dockets last year for cases of migrants placed in removal proceedings, with the courts in Florida seeing concentrations of Cubans and Venezuelans.

The increases in Florida also reflect some pent-up international migration that was postponed at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, said Stefan Rayer, director of the Population Program at the University of Florida's Bureau of Economic and Business Research.

“Some international migrants who arrived in 2022–2023 probably had planned to move earlier but weren’t able to because of pandemic-related travel restrictions,” Rayer said in an email.

Detailed figures about where people came from in 2023 haven't been published yet by the Census Bureau. But according to public use microdata from the 2022 American Community Survey, the greatest share of international migrants to Florida came from Canada, Venezuela, Cuba, Brazil and Colombia, respectively.

An influx of more than 40,300 people to California’s Los Angeles County — the third-largest international migration in the U.S. in 2023 — helped to mitigate the departure of 119,000 local residents from the nation's most populous county, Census Bureau figures show.

Large numbers of international migrants also flocked to the counties that are home to San Diego, Anaheim, San Jose and Oakland, again as local residents headed for the exits because of housing costs, a rising jobless rate or other reasons.

Similar inflows of international migrants and outflows of local residents took place in the counties that include the New York City boroughs of the Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens.

The largest numbers of international migrants to California came from Mexico, China and India, respectively, according to microdata from the 2022 American Community Survey.

Related: Oregon population decline is cause for concern, say economists

District of Columbia suburbs

The District of Columbia and its surrounding counties illustrate the lure of urban cores for international migrants. Two urbanized Maryland counties just outside the district, Montgomery and Prince George's, had among the largest numbers of international migrants in the U.S. last year. The district's overall population also grew year over year.

“I think this means that these areas are becoming a bigger draw as some employment and other activities are returning to the center cities,” William Frey, a demographer at The Brookings Institution, said in an email. “While many have predicted a doomsday scenario for urban centers after the pandemic, the rise in immigration may very well be a ‘magic bullet’ for their recovery.”

Suburban counties farther from the capital, including Prince William and Fairfax counties in Virginia, also experienced an influx of international migrants, but smaller than in the previous year.

Utah and Idaho

Among counties with more than a half-million residents, Ada County, Idaho, which is home to Boise, and two Utah counties that are home to the city of Provo and Salt Lake City, respectively, had among the greatest growth rates of international migration in 2023.

Utah and Idaho both have been among the fastest-growing states in the nation during the past decade. Meanwhile, Provo, Salt Lake City and Boise have become regional tech hubs, siphoning off white-collar workers and companies from more expensive tech centers in San Francisco and Seattle.

Yet the rise in international migration here may have another explanation.

Mallory Bateman, director of demographic research at the Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute at the University of Utah, partly attributes the rise in both states to the return of Latter-day Saints missionaries from abroad. They are counted as international migrants even if they’re U.S. citizens.

During the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, the missionaries were called back stateside and didn’t get sent back out to their international posts until 2021. Last year would have marked the end of two-year missionary stints for many of them.

“It’s one of those special Utah characteristics that’s not really shared anywhere else,” Bateman said.

In Idaho, the increase also could be partially attributed to the return of military personnel and other U.S. residents who were stuck abroad because of pandemic-related travel restrictions, said Jaap Vos, a University of Idaho professor of planning and natural resources.

Related: How Oregon’s statistics on race often get misinterpreted

Just as international migration soared in other states, it dropped precipitously in Nevada. Clark County, home to the tourist-magnet city of Las Vegas, saw a decrease of 58%, the biggest among counties where a half-million or more people live, Census Bureau figures show.

The drop from more than 8,800 international migrants in 2022 to under 3,700 people in 2023 may have been driven largely by economics; Nevada had the highest unemployment rate — 5.1% — of any state last year. Other urban Western counties, including those that are home to Seattle and Portland, Oregon, had smaller increases in international migration than in 2022.

“It fluctuates every year, which doesn’t surprise me,” said Stephen Miller, director of research at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas' Center for Business and Economic Research.

Nevada’s biggest source of international migrants came from Mexico, the Philippines and China, respectively, according to microdata from the 2022 American Community Survey.

Follow Mike Schneider on X, formerly Twitter: @MikeSchneiderAP .

OPB’s First Look newsletter

Streaming Now

Morning Edition

The Majority of Immigrants in the United States Reside in Four Key States; Half Have Citizenship

A report from the U.S. Census Bureau revealed on Tuesday that over half of the immigrant population in the United States has made their homes within the borders of just four states: California, Texas, New York, and Florida. The data, derived from the American Community Survey, also indicated that immigrants have become older and more educated over the past 12 years.

The immigrant population in the US reached an estimated 46.2 million in 2022, which is nearly 14% of the total US population. Significant growth in immigrant populations has occurred across most states, with many experiencing increases in the double-digit percentages.

Foreign-born residents account for over 20% of the populations of California, New Jersey, New York, and Florida. On the opposite end of the spectrum, West Virginia holds the smallest proportion of immigrants, making up just 1.8% of its residents.

Latin America remains the largest source of the US immigrant population, though the demographic makeup has shifted; notably, there has been a decrease in Mexican immigrants by approximately 1 million and an increase from South and Central America by 2.1 million. Meanwhile, the Asian-born population has adjusted slightly and the percentage of African-born immigrants has risen from 4% to 6%.

The topic of immigration has surged to the forefront of the 2024 presidential campaign, especially with the challenges the Biden administration faces with the surge of migrants at the Southwest border. As political parties jostle for voter confidence, immigration policy is increasingly seen as pivotal in determining which party will control Congress.

While the Census Bureau report did not provide specific data on undocumented immigrants, it did highlight that over half of the immigrant population has been naturalized, with Europeans and Asians having the highest rates of naturalization. Most immigrants have resided in the US since before 2010.

Over the past dozen years, the median age of the immigrant population has risen to 46.7 years, reflecting the longevity of some members in the US. Educational attainment has also improved, with three-quarters of the immigrant population holding at least a high school degree, up from two-thirds in 2010.

To keep up-to-date with Mike Schneider’s reporting, follow him on X (formerly Twitter): @MikeSchneiderAP .

FAQ About the Immigrant Population in the United States

California, Texas, Florida, and New York have the highest populations of immigrants in the United States, with each hosting over 20% of their state populations except for Texas.

More than half of all immigrants in the US are naturalized citizens, particularly among those from Europe and Asia.

There has been a decrease of about 1 million Mexican immigrants, while the number of immigrants from South America and Central America has increased by 2.1 million people.

The immigrant population has become more educated, with three-quarters now holding at least a high school degree, increased from two-thirds in 2010.

The median age of immigrants in the U.S. has increased by five years over the past dozen years, now standing at 46.7 years.

The immigrant population in the US is a dynamic and essential part of the nation’s demographic fabric. With half of this population concentrated in just four states and a significant portion achieving naturalization, the trends show a group that is growing older and more educated. These changes, alongside the evolving makeup of immigrant origins, reflect the transformative nature of immigration in America. As the country continues to tread through sensitive political terrain on immigration policies, understanding the shifts and characteristics of this demographic is crucial for informed public discourse and policy-making.

The independent source for health policy research, polling, and news.

Five Key Facts About Black Immigrants’ Experiences in the United States

Nambi Ndugga , Drishti Pillai , Samantha Artiga , Liz Hamel , Shannon Schumacher , Audrey Kearney , and Marley Presiado Published: Apr 11, 2024

Black immigrants are a growing share of the country’s population and make up 8% of all immigrants. Nearly half (47%) of Black immigrants in the U.S. are from the Caribbean, while about four in ten (43%) are from sub-Saharan Africa, with smaller shares coming from South America and Europe (3% from both regions). Most Black immigrants are U.S. citizens (68%), while one in five (21%) has a valid visa or green card and about one in ten (8%) is likely undocumented. Like immigrants overall, Black immigrants come to the U.S. seeking more opportunities for themselves and their children, and most report improved educational opportunities, employment, and financial situations as a result of moving to the U.S. However, Black immigrants report disproportionate levels of unfair treatment and discrimination in their workplaces, communities, and when seeking health care, reflecting the intersectional impacts of racism and anti-immigrant sentiment. Below are five key facts about their experiences, drawing on the 2023 KFF/LA Times Survey of Immigrants, with its sample size of 3,358 immigrant adults (18 and older), including 274 Black immigrant adults.

Three in four (76%) Black immigrants are working, and most say their situations are improved as a result of coming to the U.S.

Like immigrants overall, the primary reasons Black immigrants say they came to the U.S. are for better economic and job opportunities (87%), better educational opportunities (81%), and a better future for their children (80%), and most say that moving to the U.S. has made them better off in terms of educational opportunities for themselves and their children (85%), their financial situation (74%), and their employment situation (74%). About two thirds (65%) also say they are better off in terms of their safety (Figure 1).

Black immigrants face disproportionate financial challenges, including in paying for health care.

About four in ten (44%) Black immigrants have lower incomes (household income less than $40,000 per year), reflecting that most employed Black immigrants are working for hourly pay (69%). Reflecting these lower incomes, half (50%) of Black immigrants say they or someone in their household had trouble paying for at least one basic necessity in the past 12 months, including rent/mortgage, food, health, health care, or utilities or other bills, about twice the share of White (27%) and Asian immigrants (20%) who say the same (Figure 2). Specifically, three in ten (30%) Black immigrants report that their household had problems paying for health care in the past 12 months compared to about one in six White immigrants (17%) and about one in eight Asian immigrants (12%).

Most (56%) employed Black immigrants say they have faced at least one form of discrimination or unfair treatment at work asked about in the survey.

A majority of employed Black immigrants (56%) report experiencing at least one type of discrimination or form of unfair treatment at work, similar to the share of employed Hispanic immigrants who report this (55%), and higher than the shares of employed Asian (44%) and White immigrants (31%) who report the same. Among employed Black immigrants, about half (47%) say they were given fewer opportunities for promotions or raises than people born in the U.S., three in ten (31%) say they were paid less than people born in the U.S. for doing the same job, a quarter (25%) say that they had worse shifts or less control over their work hours or than people born in the U.S., and about one in five say they were not paid for all of the hours that they worked or not given overtime pay (22%) or were harassed or threatened by someone at their place of work because they were an immigrant (22%) (Figure 3). Beyond experiences with mistreatment, about one in three (34%) Black immigrants with less than a college education say they are overqualified for their job , saying that they have more skills and education than the job requires, with this share rising to about half (53%) of those with a college degree or higher.

Black immigrants report disproportionate levels of unfair treatment in social and police interactions.

Most (55%) Black immigrants say they have experienced worse treatment than people born in the U.S. in at least one of the following places: a store or restaurant, in interactions with the police, or when buying or renting a home, higher than the shares who report this among Hispanic (42%), Asian (36%), or White immigrants (22%). Specifically, about four in ten (38%) Black immigrants report experiencing worse treatment in police interactions, about a third (35%) report this in a store or restaurant, and about a quarter (26%) report worse treatment when buying or renting a home (Figure 4). Moreover, roughly one in three (34%) Black immigrants say they have been criticized for speaking a language other than English, and about four in ten (45%) say they have been told they should “go back to where you came from,” higher than the share of Hispanic (34%), Asian (32%), or White (25%) immigrants who report this experience.

Among those who have received health care in the U.S., Black immigrants are more likely than other immigrant groups to report being treated unfairly by a health care provider.

About four in ten (38%) Black immigrants who have received or tried to receive health care in the U.S. report being treated differently or unfairly by a health care provider, higher than the shares of Hispanic (28%), Asian (21%), and White immigrants (18%) who say this. The share of Black immigrants who report unfair treatment by a health care provider includes about a quarter (25%) who say they were treated unfairly because of their race, ethnic background, or skin color, 23% who say they were mistreated because of their health insurance or ability to pay, and about one in six (16%) who say that they were treated differently due to their accent or ability to speak English (Figure 5).

• Racial Equity and Health Policy
• Race/Ethnicity
• Access to Care

Also of Interest

• Five Key Facts About Immigrants with Limited English Proficiency
• Five Key Facts About Immigrants’ Understanding of U.S. Immigration Laws, Including Public Charge
• Key Facts on Health Coverage of Immigrants

The 'magic bullet' driving post-pandemic population revival of major US urban centers

Major cities around the country are experiencing a post-pandemic population revival , with immigrants driving much of the growth, according to a report released this week.

The analysis by The Brookings Institution, gleaned from U.S. Census Bureau national, state, county and city data released earlier this year, shows pandemic-related population losses subsiding in places like New York, Los Angeles and Chicago while in some cases – such as in San Francisco and Washington, D.C. – turning into pre-pandemic-level gains.

“The new Census Bureau numbers make the case that major metro areas and cities are showing signs of coming back ,” Brookings senior fellow William Frey wrote in the report .

The results, he said, indicate that while a full post-pandemic recovery remains years away, improvement in some of the areas hardest hit by COVID-19 is fairly widespread.

Immigration most benefited urban centers

The analysis found that 40 of 56 metro areas with populations of more than 1 million grew more from July 2022 to July 2023 than in the two previous years. That included seven of the nation’s 10 largest metro areas – New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Boston, Miami and Washington, D.C.

Births outnumbered deaths nearly everywhere, the report said, but it was changing domestic migration patterns, especially a rise in international immigration, that made the difference.

Immigration from abroad rose considerably over the last two years after nearly historically low levels in 2020-2021, with urban areas the greatest beneficiaries. The 20 metro areas with the most immigrants from 2021 to 2023 represented three fifths of total U.S. immigrant gains despite comprising just 36% of the overall U.S. population.

And 11 metro areas – including Seattle, Boston and Miami – would have lost population over that time had it not been for immigration.

“The rise in immigration from abroad was a unique and demographically welcome contributor,” the report read, noting that such growth will likely continue to drive urban economic vitality. “…. International migration appears to be the ‘magic bullet’ not previously foreseen.”

From 2020-21, it said, the 56 metro areas with populations of 1 million or more saw their first loss as a group in 30 years, driven by a pandemic-related shift to virtual work. But those areas, the data showed, grew by a collective 527,000 residents in 2022 and another 870,000 in 2023.

COVID deaths, low fertility rates also fueled population loss

Ken Johnson, a professor of sociology at the University of New Hampshire, said other forces beyond out-migration contributed to the population decrease in urban centers in the early 2020s, including natural decrease – in other words, when the number of deaths exceed births.

“Some 75% of all U.S. counties experienced natural decrease between 2020-2023,” Johnson said. “This far exceeds any historical period.”

Though much of that was a result of COVID-related deaths, Johnson noted that fertility rates have also been historically low , particularly among women under 30.

“Without significant natural increase, the growth or decline of a place depends increasingly on migration – both domestic and international,” he said. “Whether these young women are delaying these births or will forgo them entirely remains to be seen, but many are reaching the end of their prime childbearing years.”

The 2010s saw cities and urban cores experience growth spurts in the wake of the Great Recession of 2007-2009 as economically strapped and jobless young adults moved to suburban and urban areas. That growth slowed as the economy and the suburban housing market picked up, prompting migration to the inner and then outer suburbs.

The trend was hastened by the pandemic and remote work technologies, with San Francisco and New York as prime examples of emptying cities. However, the data shows those cities bouncing back and places like Cook County (Chicago), Denver County, Milwaukee County and Washington, D.C., turning their losses into gains.

Immigration also key to Chinatowns' survival

Gary McDonogh, Helen Herrman Professor and Chair of the Growth and Structure of Cities program at Bryn Mawr College in Pennsylvania, said the Brookings analysis was important “because it focuses us on the 600,000 to one million legal immigrants who arrive each year who are highly vetted and bring skills, capital and often family ties that revitalize cities and suburbs.”

McDonogh, who studies Chinatowns, said such neighborhoods depend on immigrants to stay vital. They often absorb Latino immigrants as employees to stay afloat and also more easily absorb Chinese immigrants who arrive as refugees, he said.

“These new immigrants may settle in suburban areas or participate in the gentrification of older downtown Chinatowns,” McDonogh said. “Together, they revitalize Chinatowns as service hubs.”

Additionally, he said, they can attract domestic migrants as well by making big cities more cosmopolitan and global.

Migration to non-metropolitan areas drives growth

The Brookings report also found high levels of domestic migration contributing to positive ongoing demographic shifts in non-metropolitan areas – even more so than immigration from abroad. The growth reflected a sharp reversal of negative or miniscule gains for those areas in the 2010s, more than offsetting pandemic-related natural decrease – in other words, more deaths than births.

Johnson, of the University of New Hampshire, said nonmetropolitan growth is heavily concentrated in recreational and retirement areas that have traditionally received migrants from urban ones, as well as nonmetro areas just beyond metropolitan outer edges.

“A key question to be resolved is how many domestic migrants from metro areas who might have been able to move there because of remote work will choose to stay in these areas,” he said.

Morning Edition

Listen live.

BBC Newshour

In-depth analysis and commentary on today's biggest news stories as only the BBC can deliver. BBC "Newshour" covers everything from the growth of democracy to the threat of terrorism with a fresh, clear perspective from across the globe.

• Immigration
• Philadelphia

Pew State of the City: Immigrants make up the largest percentage of Philly’s population since the 1940s, report finds

As a “reemerging gateway,” immigrants have driven philadelphia’s overall population growth in recent decades..

Shown is the Benjamin Franklin Bridge and the Philadelphia skyline as seen from the Cramer Hill Waterfront Park in Camden, N.J., Wednesday, April 20, 2022. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)

Related Content

A year of transition: Philly sees drop in poverty, violent crime, but deep-seated issues remain, Pew report says

The 2024 State of The City report outlined Philadelphia’s improving economic metrics — and ever-present factors that threaten future progress.

Get daily updates from WHYY News!

The free WHYY News Daily newsletter delivers the most important local stories to your inbox.

WHYY is your source for fact-based, in-depth journalism and information. As a nonprofit organization, we rely on financial support from readers like you. Please give today.

You may also like

Pew State of the City: Philadelphia’s workforce is more educated than ever, but poverty divide lingers

Philadelphia adults are more likely to have a college degree than the national average but less likely than some peer cities.

Bridging Blocks has Philadelphians focused on dispelling myths around immigration

Context and understanding was at the heart of Bridging Blocks’ latest talk, which addressed border policy and immigration during an election year.

Pew gives $1 million to the Free Library of Philadelphia to plan its future

The Pew Charitable Trusts also gave $850,000 to Drexel University to conserve Philadelphia's historical archive and make it accessible.

9 months ago

About Emily Neil

Emily Neil is a WHYY News reporter covering Bucks and Montgomery counties.

Want a digest of WHYY’s programs, events & stories? Sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Together we can reach 100% of WHYY’s fiscal year goal

New research shows immigrants across Texas are driving population growth and helping metros meet their rising labor needs

Immigrants in Arlington, Fort Worth, Katy, Lubbock, Odessa, Waco, and Tarrant County collectively pay more than $1 billion in state and local taxes

Date: October 19, 2021

AUSTIN, TX – New research released today by Texans for Economic Growth , a statewide 110-member business coalition powered by New American Economy (NAE), underscores the critical role immigrants across Texas play in population growth, business creation, and reviving the manufacturing sector. A series of seven reports found that in all regions of the state, immigrants and refugees punch above their weight, filling critical workforce gaps and contributing to their local economies. The new research finds that the combined foreign-born populations of Arlington, Fort Worth, Katy, Lubbock, Odessa, and Waco pay more than $1.4 billion in state and local taxes annually.

The new reports were released in partnership with the Texas Association of Business , Greater Arlington Chamber of Commerce , Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce , Katy Area Chamber of Commerce , and Odessa Chamber of Commerce , members of the Global Talent Chamber Network which brings together chambers of commerce from across the country who see immigrant integration as an economic growth strategy. The reports were released at a virtual roundtable that brought together 40 chambers of commerce for a moderated discussion with Glenn Hamer, President and CEO of the Texas Association of Business.

“Our employers and workers are the heart behind Texas’ economic success, and this research proves we would not be the powerhouse that we are without the immigrants who contribute to our state and local communities,” said Glenn Hamer, President and CEO of the Texas Association of Business . 

“Immigration has been critical to Texas’ past economic success and will continue to be the cornerstone for our future,” said Chelsie Kramer, Texas State Organizer for New American Economy . “From driving population growth in Katy, Texas at a remarkable 38.4 percent, to accounting for 16.6 percent of Tarrant County’s GDP, it is clear immigrants are integral members of all Texas communities, big or small.” 

Key Findings: 

• Immigrants are driving population growth. Between 2014 and 2019, the population in the city increased by 6.5 percent, and the immigrant population increased by 11.2 percent. Growth in the foreign-born population accounted for 33.6 percent of the overall population growth during that period.
• Immigrants are filling critical workforce gaps. Although foreign-born residents made up 20.5 percent of the city’s overall population, they represented 22.7 percent of its STEM workers in 2019.
• Immigrants are helping the city meet its growing labor needs. Immigrants had an outsize impact on key industries vital to the economic stability of Arlington. Despite making up 20.5 percent of the overall population, immigrants accounted for 45.9 percent of construction workers, 32 percent of manufacturing workers, and 27.7 percent of hospitality workers. 
• Immigrants play an outsize role in entrepreneurship. Despite making up 15.8 percent of the overall population, immigrants made up 24.7 percent of the entrepreneurs in the city in 2019. 
• Immigrants are responsible for a considerable contribution to the social safety net. In 2019, they contributed $374 million to Social Security and $94.1 million to Medicare. 
• Immigrants are helping the city meet its growing labor needs. Immigrants had an outsize impact on key industries vital to the economic stability of Fort Worth. Despite making up 15.8 percent of the overall population, immigrants accounted for 46.7 percent of construction workers, 29.1 percent of manufacturing workers, and 22.9 percent of hospitality workers. 
• Immigrants are driving population growth. Between 2014 and 2019, the population in the region increased by 16.5 percent, and the immigrant population increased by 24.6 percent. Growth in the foreign-born population accounted for 38.4 percent of the overall population growth during that period.
• Immigrants are filling critical workforce gaps. Although foreign-born residents made up 27.6 percent of the region’s overall population, they represented 42.8 percent of its STEM workers in 2019.
• Immigrants are helping the region meet its growing labor needs. Immigrants had an outsize impact on key industries vital to the economic stability of the Katy region. Despite making up 27.6 percent of the overall population, immigrants accounted for 44 percent of construction workers, 41.1 percent of mining, quarrying and oil and gas extraction workers, and 40.5 percent of manufacturing workers. 
• Immigrants play an outsize role in entrepreneurship. Despite making up 13.5 percent of the overall population, immigrants made up 28.2 percent of the entrepreneurs in the metro area in 2019. 
• Immigrants are responsible for a considerable contribution to the social safety net. In 2019, they contributed $72.3 million to Social Security and $19.6 million to Medicare.
• Immigrants are helping the metro area meet its growing labor needs. Immigrants had an outsize impact on key industries vital to the economic stability of Odessa. Despite making up 13.5 percent of the overall population, immigrants accounted for 30.7 percent of construction workers, 21.5 percent of healthcare and social assistance workers, and 20.2 percent of hospitality workers. 
• Immigrants are driving population growth. Between 2014 and 2019, the population in the county increased by 8.8 percent, and the immigrant population increased by 13.1 percent. Growth in the foreign-born population accounted for 23.1 percent of the overall population growth during that period.
• Immigrants play an outsize role in entrepreneurship. Despite making up 16.1 percent of the overall population, immigrants made up 25 percent of the entrepreneurs in the county in 2019. 
• Immigrants are helping the county meet its growing labor needs. Immigrants had an outsize impact on key industries vital to the economic stability of Tarrant County. Despite making up 16.1 percent of the overall population, immigrants accounted for 24.3 percent of construction workers, 19.8 percent of general services workers, and 18.4 percent of STEM workers. 
• Immigrants are driving population growth. Between 2014 and 2019, the population in the metro area increased by 5.8 percent, and the immigrant population increased by 13.8 percent. Growth in the foreign-born population accounted for 14.2 percent of the overall population growth during that period.
• Immigrants play an outsize role in entrepreneurship. Despite making up 6.4 percent of the overall population, immigrants made up 7.7 percent of the entrepreneurs in the metro area in 2019. 
• Immigrants are helping the metro area meet its growing labor needs. Immigrants had an outsize impact on key industries vital to the economic stability of the Lubbock Metro Area. Despite making up 6.4 percent of the overall population, immigrants accounted for 26.7 percent of general services workers, 16.3 percent of construction workers, and 11.6 percent of education workers. 
• Immigrants are driving population growth. Between 2014 and 2019, the population in the metro area increased by 4.6 percent, and the immigrant population increased by 7.9 percent. Growth in the foreign-born population accounted for 14.5 percent of the overall population growth during that period.
• Immigrants play an outsize role in entrepreneurship. Despite making up 8.7 percent of the overall population, immigrants made up 14.4 percent of the entrepreneurs in the metro area in 2019. 
• Immigrants are helping the metro area meet its growing labor needs. Immigrants had an outsize impact on key industries vital to the economic stability of the Waco Metro Area. Despite making up 8.7 percent of the overall population, immigrants accounted for 37 percent of construction workers, 17.4 percent of manufacturing workers, and 14.9 percent of hospitality workers.

Related Posts

Mar 15, 2022 new report shows immigrants in montgomery county paid over $219 million in taxes and held over $562 million in spending power in 2019.

Mar 2, 2022 New Report Shows Immigrants in Southwest Kansas Paid Over $192 Million in Taxes and Held More than $595 Million in Spending Power in 2019

Feb 3, 2022 new report shows immigrants in passaic county paid over $1.3 billion in taxes and held $3.6 billion in spending power in 2019, most popular.

• February 17, 2020 Power of the Purse: The Contributions of Hispanic Americans
• March 8, 2021 Examining the Economic Contributions of Undocumented Immigrants by Country of Origin
• May 21, 2020 Asian Americans and Pacific Islander Americans on the Frontlines
• February 7, 2017 Is There a Link Between Refugees and U.S. Crime Rates?
• March 19, 2020 Power of the Purse: The Contributions of Black Immigrants in the United States

Posts without images: 0

New American Economy is a bipartisan research and advocacy organization fighting for smart federal, state, and local immigration policies that help grow our economy and create jobs for all Americans. More…

March 15, 2022

New Report Shows Immigrants in Montgomery County Paid Over $219 Million in Taxes and Held Over $562 Million in Spending Power in 2019

March 2, 2022

New Report Shows Immigrants in Southwest Kansas Paid Over $192 Million in Taxes and Held More than $595 Million in Spending Power in 2019

February 3, 2022

New Report Shows Immigrants in Passaic County Paid Over $1.3 Billion in Taxes and Held $3.6 Billion in Spending Power in 2019

How does NAE define an immigrant? Learn More

Do Immigrants and Immigration Help the Economy?

With immigration dominating politics and voter concerns, bu economist’s research shows immigration boosts local wages and that having neighbors of foreign descent can reduce prejudice.

Tarek Hassan, a BU College of Arts & Sciences professor of economics, has found that an influx of immigrants can energize local economies and wages—but that not everyone benefits equally.

Andrew Thurston

Jackie ricciardi.

When Americans mark their presidential election ballots later this year, immigration will be top of mind—it’s the nation’s number one issue, according to pollster Gallup . And one of the toughest talkers on the topic is former president and presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump. He’s built his political career on calls to secure the border and defend America against what he says are immigration’s dangers, warning of shrinking wages and stretched benefits programs . “When you have millions of people coming in,” he recently told a crowd in Michigan , “they’re going to take your jobs.” 

Immigrants stealing work from existing residents is a well-worn contention—with a history stretching back at least 100 years right up to present-day accusations that Tyson Foods could replace American workers with immigrant labor. But it’s also a false one, according to Boston University economist Tarek Hassan , whose recent studies have shown immigrants actually help fuel local economies by sparking innovation and driving up wages. The effects of a migrant influx can last for decades, too, enhancing a region’s attractiveness to foreign investors and opening long-term export opportunities, even 100 years later. Oftentimes, when immigrants move into an area, so do native workers, drawn by the promise of an invigorated economy. 

In one recent paper, Hassan, a BU College of Arts & Sciences professor of economics, also showed that living near people from other countries can shift native views on people of foreign descent, decreasing hostility and prejudice, while boosting empathy and knowledge. Residents who live alongside those people may also be less likely to vote for political candidates who demonize them.

But there are important details that complicate the picture—at least from an economics perspective. Hassan’s research has shown that not everyone benefits the same way from a rush of migration, and that may strike a chord with some of the millions of voters who want to stem the tide. Despite the overall positive effects to a community, the flow of new residents does nothing to boost the wages of existing workers who don’t have a high school diploma. And the education and skill level of migrants matters, too: more education equals a more positive economic effect.

“The headline finding is that immigrants are good for local economic growth and, in particular, educated migrants are doing a lot of that,” says Hassan. “At the same time, the data point to why some people might have problems with this. It’s a lopsided story where the immigration we’ve experienced in the last 40 years has been disproportionately benefiting the more educated local population. We’re trying to add some facts to the debate.”

Immigration’s Impact on Economic Growth

Hassan’s family story is one of migration—of crossing borders and navigating shifting national boundaries. “I come from a family with a rather complex migration history,” says Hassan. His father was an immigrant to Germany from Egypt, his mother a refugee from East to West Germany. Hassan was raised in Germany, but moved to the United States for graduate school and has now lived here for nearly 20 years. “You have to go back many generations to find somebody who was actually born in the same country they died in,” he says of his family. “But I think that’s true for a large chunk of the population.”

He admits he finds the national debate on immigration frustrating. “There’s very little interest in nuanced information—on both sides of the debate. There’s this view among some people that all immigration is good and should be encouraged, and there’s this other view that all immigration is terrible. There’s not much interest in listening to each other.”

With his research, he hopes to foster a more informed conversation.

In a working paper for the National Bureau of Economic Research , Hassan and his colleagues examined decades of US migration data to look at the impact of new arrivals on economic growth, wage levels, and innovation, which they measured through the number of new patents filed in a particular area. More new ideas, he says, generally means more new businesses and products: “We find that when you have 10,000 extra immigrants arriving in a given US county, the number of patents filed per capita in that county dramatically increases, by something like 25 percent.” It was an effect that rippled out as far as 150 miles. The research team also estimated that, since 1965, migration of foreign nationals to the US may have contributed to an additional 5 percent growth in wages. They’re currently preparing the findings for journal publication.

“More immigrants creates more economic growth,” says Hassan. “And because it creates more economic growth locally, it raises the wages of the people who are already there.”

More immigrants creates more economic growth. And because it creates more economic growth locally, it raises the wages of the people who are already there. Tarek Hassan

In an earlier paper , Hassan had looked at migration’s impact over an even longer term: 100 years or more. With an international research team, he studied how the pull of one area for migrants from the same country could help attract foreign investment to that region for years afterward.

“You can still see today that places where Germans settled within the Midwest 100 years ago are much better at attracting foreign investment from Germany than places that didn’t see that migration,” says Hassan. The same is true for communities that had a concentration of Chinese or Polish migration, for example. “Ethnic diversity in that sense is really good for the ability of local firms to conduct business abroad, to both receive and make foreign investments.”

Immigration Fears

But what about those whose wages aren’t getting an upgrade or who— to quote Trump —fear a wave of immigrants may threaten their way of life, bringing in “languages that nobody in this country has ever heard of” or “poisoning the blood of our country”?

“On average, the people who are most scared of immigration are typically the people who don’t actually live in very ethnically diverse places,” says Hassan.

In a study published in the American Economic Review in February, Hassan and his fellow researchers investigated how having neighbors of foreign descent, specifically Arab Muslims, shaped prejudices and attitudes. They surveyed more than 5,000 Americans about their contact with Arab Muslims and knowledge of Islam, and sifted through data on migration, charitable donations, implicit prejudice, and support for Trump and the so-called “Muslim ban.” Hassan and his colleagues found that living among a large Arab Muslim population decreased prejudice, reduced support for policies targeting Arab Muslims, and increased knowledge of Islam and Arab Muslims—it even resulted in people making more donations to charities supporting their neighbors’ ancestral countries.

“Long-term exposure to people with a given ethnic background makes you more informed about them, maybe makes you like them more,” says Hassan. “It also increases political support for concerns these minorities might have. It traces a lot of xenophobia to people who don’t interact with people with foreign ancestry.”

But he says his findings on which immigrants spark the biggest economic impact, and which domestic workers benefit from that boost, should perhaps prompt a discussion about where to focus immigration policies. President Joe Biden has suggested expanding access to family-based immigration , for example, but that might not be the best economic choice, according to Hassan.

“One thing to think about, particularly given our findings about the effects of high- versus low-skilled migration,” he says, “is whether it’s worth having a debate about how much of migration should be family-based versus skill-based.”

Hassan’s National Bureau of Economic Research working paper was published with Konrad Burchardi of Stockholm University, Thomas Chaney of University of Southern California, Stephen Terry of University of Michigan, and Lisa Tarquinio (CAS’11, Pardee’11, GRS’21) of Western University; the paper on migrants and foreign investment was published with Burchardi and Chaney; and the American Economic Review paper was published with Leonardo Bursztyn of University of Chicago, Chaney, and Aakaash Rao of Harvard University.

Explore Related Topics:

• Government & Law
• Public Policy
• Share this story
• 6 Comments Add

Editor, The Brink Twitter Profile

Andrew Thurston is originally from England, but has grown to appreciate the serial comma and the Red Sox, while keeping his accent (mostly) and love of West Ham United. He joined BU in 2007, and is the editor of the University’s research news site, The Brink ; he was formerly director of alumni publications. Before joining BU, he edited consumer and business magazines, including for corporations, nonprofits, and the UK government. His work has won awards from the Council for Advancement and Support of Education, the In-House Agency Forum, Folio: , and the British Association of Communicators in Business. Andrew has a bachelor’s degree in English and related literature from the University of York. Profile

Staff photojournalist

Jackie Ricciardi is a staff photojournalist at BU Today and Bostonia  magazine. She has worked as a staff photographer at newspapers that include the Augusta Chronicle  in Augusta, Ga., and at Seacoast Media Group in Portsmouth, N.H., where she was twice named New Hampshire Press Photographer of the Year. Profile

Comments & Discussion

Boston University moderates comments to facilitate an informed, substantive, civil conversation. Abusive, profane, self-promotional, misleading, incoherent or off-topic comments will be rejected. Moderators are staffed during regular business hours (EST) and can only accept comments written in English. Statistics or facts must include a citation or a link to the citation.

There are 6 comments on Do Immigrants and Immigration Help the Economy?

This article misses the point of what the problem with immigration is.

Whatever one may think of legal immigration – in a democracy we can debate the pros and cons of different immigration policies regarding legal immigration – the thing that really angers people – the actual tax paying citizens of every color and ethnicity, who are already here – is the blatant violation of US immigration law by the US government itself and thew massive problems that violation is creating! Specifically by the Biden administration which has out done every other presidency in the amount of lawlessness it has facilitated regarding this issue.

This administration violates the core principle of democracy where supposedly the citizens of the country consent to what the government does. That contract is being grossly violated by definition when the Biden administration not only does not enforce BUT blatantly subverts immigration law on a scale never seen in US history. The numbers speak for themselves – 6 -8 million have illegally come here since Biden took over, easily a record.

The incredible numbers of people walking across the border is causing massive problems in this country with human trafficking, illegal drugs like fentanyl coming through the border which has caused unprecedented number of overdose deaths to the tune of about 100k per year and a huge strain on resources in communities all across the country – many of them with large homeless and low income populations as it is. That is a total outrage.

To talk about immigration without distinguishing between lawful immigration and the 6 -8 million who have illegally jumped the border since Biden took over is gaslighting at its finest.

It is no wonder this issue has become one of the top issues in US politics. It is the gaslighting by Biden and the media that tells people: “The problems you’re seeing with your own eyes, are made up by racist conservatives”, “the border is secure”, “immigrants built this country”, “diversity is our strength” and on and on with the dumb slogans – that totally dismisses the very real problems that unlimited illegal immigration is creating, that is what infuriates people.

I also believe that this article and the research in question misses the point, but exactly what point is missed is where we differ. While everyone is entitled to their opinion on legal immigration policies, it’s crucial to ensure that arguments are grounded in accurate information and logical reasoning. Let’s break down your commentary point by point:

-Blaming the Biden Administration for Record Illegal Immigration: ~The claim that the Biden administration facilitated record levels of illegal immigration lacks context. Immigration trends are influenced by various factors, including global events, economic conditions, and policies that precede the current administration. ~ It’s important to consider the historical context of immigration patterns and the complexities of migration, rather than solely attributing them to one administration.

-Violation of Democracy and Government Consent: ~While it’s valid to expect a government to uphold and enforce laws, it’s an oversimplification to equate every immigration issue as a violation of democratic principles. ~Immigration policies often involve a balance between national security, humanitarian considerations (such as the prima facie asylum cases many immigrants have), and economic factors. This requires nuanced decision-making rather than blanket assertions of lawlessness such as the ones you have made. ~Democracies also have mechanisms for legal challenges and policy adjustments, reflecting ongoing debates and evolving perspectives within society. ~The underlying assumption that all immigration laws are benign and just, and should therefore be enforced, is blatantly incorrect. because immigration laws, like any other set of laws, can vary widely in their fairness, efficacy, and ethical considerations. Furthermore, what if their enforcement denies the dignity of immigrants? I hope we can agree that treating human beings with dignity is never up for debate.

-Human Trafficking, Drug Smuggling, and Overdose Deaths: ~The connection between illegal immigration and specific criminal activities like human trafficking and drug smuggling is a complex issue that requires evidence-based analysis, none of which you provide. ~While border security is an understandable concern of those affected by narco cartels, attributing all societal problems to illegal immigration oversimplifies the root causes and potential solutions. ~Addressing issues such as drug overdoses requires a comprehensive approach that includes healthcare, fair and unbiased law enforcement, addiction treatment, and international cooperation on drug control.

-Gaslighting and Media Narratives: ~Ah yes, “gaslighting,” the most overused word of our modern age…Accusations of gaslighting by the Biden administration and the media should be supported by specific examples and evidence of deliberate deception. You provide none. ~Public discourse on immigration should encourage factual discussions, respectful dialogue, and acknowledgment of diverse perspectives rather than resorting to labeling or dismissing opposing views as gaslighting.

-Focusing on a boogie-man instead of the systems that cause inequality. ~Your comments focus on the so-called negative impacts of “illegal” immigration on existing working-class communities, such as strain on resources and economic competition. However, a proper analysis would also consider the structural factors that contribute to these issues. ~Capitalist systems often benefit from a vulnerable and easily exploitable labor force, which can be perpetuated by irregular migration patterns. This creates a divide among workers, where immigrants are often pitted against native workers, leading to tensions and resentment. ~Instead of solely blaming immigrants for economic challenges, we should highlight the systemic inequalities and capitalist dynamics that drive these conditions. Issues like wage suppression and job insecurity are rooted in the profit-driven logic of capitalism, not solely immigration status.

Listen Sam, it’s essential to approach discussions on contentious topics with accuracy, nuance, and a commitment to constructive dialogue rather than rhetoric that may inflame tensions or distort realities. Think before you post bad takes on the internet.

Quite the essay… Your rebuttal of Sam’s comments above clearly seem to be coming from a particular political viewpoint. Although his frustration with this topic is evident, Sam’s comments reflect factual events that can easily be verified through CBP operational statistics, DHS data, or even the various news outlets. Despite of the fact that there is some merit in your comments that there is no “accurate information” presented, or lack of “context”, or “evidenced-based analysis”, “complexities”, “root causes” etc., given the limited scope of this exchange seems like an attempt to deflect the immediate reality that everyone can see if they look truthfully. The author’s attempt at reflecting only on some perceived benefits of immigration is certainly incomplete with regard to immigration as a whole. Again, given the limited scope of the article, a full understanding of the subject matter is not possible. Anyway, your denouncing of capitalism as an economic system clearly illustrates the position from which your comments are derived (“Marxist” – as you have explicitly stated in some of your other BU Today comments – on April 12, 2024 for example). Considering the effects of Marxism or communism wherever it has been implemented in the world, it would be interesting to hear someone, perhaps you, explain why the vast majority of migrants flock to capitalist countries…

Rex, I very much appreciate your response.

First: I am not convinced that Sam’s perspective is entirely grounded in facts. There is additional misinformation that around immigration enforcement that needed to be addressed. While I acknowledge the limitations of our current exchange in the comments of an article, fully delving into every aspect of the immigration debate, I believe that providing a nuanced and evidence-based analysis is essential in fostering a deeper understanding of the issue, especially given the fact that this is a piece of public media. Rather than deflecting from reality, my intention is to engage in constructive dialogue that encourages critical thinking, informed perspectives, and respectful exchanges of ideas.

Moreover, addressing the misinformation around immigration enforcement is essential. There are instances where narratives about immigration enforcement may not fully reflect the realities on the ground. For example, claims about the Biden administration’s “record levels of illegal immigration” need to be contextualized within broader immigration trends, historical patterns, and global factors influencing migration flows. Simply attributing all immigration issues to one president’s administration oversimplifies a complex issue.

Additionally, discussions on immigration should consider the humanitarian aspects, including asylum seekers and refugees fleeing persecution and violence. It’s crucial to uphold human rights and dignity in immigration policies and enforcement practices, which may not always align with blanket assertions of lawlessness or gaslighting.

Regarding your point about factual events and statistics from CBP, DHS, and news outlets, I fully acknowledge the validity of data-driven analysis. I conduct it regularly in my scholarship. However, it’s crucial to note that statistics can sometimes be interpreted in various ways, and the complexities of immigration dynamics go beyond raw numbers. Nuance is key in understanding the multifaceted nature of immigration issues.

As for my own perspective, yes, I have explicitly stated a Marxist viewpoint in some of my previous comments, as you mentioned. While it’s true that I approach certain discussions from a Marxist viewpoint, it’s essential to recognize that Marxism critiques capitalist systems based on historical materialist analysis and class struggle dynamics. This perspective doesn’t negate the importance of acknowledging immigration challenges or addressing issues related to migration in capitalist societies. My area of research happens to be Marxist economics, philosophy, and history and it deeply informs much of my own worldview and politics. I do not believe there’s anything incorrect or flawed with taking a certain political perspective, though it does have its shortcomings, I will admit.

While it’s important to consider the immediate realities and challenges related to immigration, it’s also crucial to recognize that discussions around immigration are multifaceted and require nuanced analysis. The focus of my comments was on highlighting additional aspects of the immigration discourse that are often overlooked or underrepresented. This doesn’t discount the validity of the concerns raised by Sam or others regarding immigration’s impacts and complexities, though there are corrigible aspects of Sam’s assumptions that I felt needed addressing.

As for why migrants sometimes choose capitalist countries, it’s a multifaceted issue influenced by economic opportunities, the effect of climate change, geopolitical factors, historical ties, and global migration patterns. The assumption that migrants primarily flock to capitalist countries because of the supposed superiority of capitalism over Marxism or communism is oversimplified and ignores several key factors. People migrate for various reasons, including seeking better economic prospects, political stability that has been interrupted by internal and external forces, and social opportunities (such as being less likely to be persecuted for one’s sexuality or religious affiliation), which can be found in BOTH capitalist and non-capitalist countries. Perception also plays a role. Large capitalist countries such as the United States often offer perceived economic advantages and opportunities that attract migrants seeking better livelihoods. However, this does not mean that migrants are endorsing or preferring capitalism as an ideology or economic structure. In fact, 2 of the 5 (China and Vietnam) are mixed economies. In conclusion, the decision-making process behind migration is intricate and influenced by a multitude of factors beyond economic ideologies alone. While economic opportunities do play a significant role, migrants also consider political stability, social freedoms, safety, and quality of life when choosing their destination. It’s essential to recognize that migrants’ choices are not necessarily endorsements of specific economic systems but rather pragmatic decisions based on their unique circumstances and aspirations for a better future (assuming their displacement is not forced).

I appreciate your input and encourage continued dialogue.

Stephen Humphries wrote a similar story on this subject for the Christian Science Monitor: “Do immigrants help or hurt the US economy? The answer might surprise you.” You can find it here: https://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2024/0409/immigrants-us-economy-labor-shortage His basic point is immigration and the economy are top concerns of voters ahead of the 2024 U.S. election. But political talking points don’t tell the whole story.

The problem with U.S. immigration includes the significant backlogs and underfunded USCIS. Additionally, the lack of a clear pathway to a green card for foreign students who attend U.S. universities is also troubling. These students must navigate the H-1B visa lottery, administrative processing (for students with certain STEM backgrounds), and the lengthy green card application process. Even the family-based immigration process is not free of obstacles. Some individuals have to wait years before receiving a response to their initial application.

Unfortunately, there’s no incentive for Congress to address this issue anytime soon, and the majority of voters are not directly affected by it. However, the U.S. is losing a huge talent pool due to the lack of immigration reform. The most recent major immigration reform enacted in the United States was in 1986.

Post a comment. Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Latest from The Brink

Secrets of ancient egyptian nile valley settlements, found in forgotten treasure, bu electrical engineer vivek goyal named a 2024 guggenheim fellow, not having job flexibility or security can leave workers feeling depressed, anxious, and hopeless, can the bias in algorithms help us see our own, how do people carry such heavy loads on their heads, do alcohol ads promote underage drinking, how worried should we be about us measles outbreaks, stunning new image shows black hole’s immensely powerful magnetic field, it’s not just a pharmacy—walgreens and cvs closures can exacerbate health inequities, how does science misinformation affect americans from underrepresented communities, what causes osteoarthritis bu researchers win $46 million grant to pursue answers and find new treatments, how to be a better mentor, how the design of hospitals impacts patient treatment and recovery, all americans deserve a healthy diet. here’s one way to help make that happen, bu cte center: lewiston, maine, mass shooter had traumatic brain injury, can cleaner classroom air help kids do better at school, carb-x funds 100th project—a milestone for bu-based nonprofit leading antimicrobial-resistance fightback, is covid-19 still a pandemic, what is language and how does it evolve.

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.

The US's newest immigrants are more likely than native-born Americans to have a college degree, per Goldman Sachs

• The number of foreign-born workers in the US has surged in recent years. 
• Supporters said they've provided the economy a boost — critics have pointed to the border crisis . 
• Recent immigrants typically work in construction or food services and earn less than $40,000 a year.

Nearly three million more Americans are working than they were in January 2020, but the number of US-born workers has barely budged .

That means immigrants, specifically foreign-born workers, are responsible for most of the US job growth of recent years. Foreign-born workers' share of the US workforce rose from 16.8% in January 2020 to 19.3% in March 2024, according to a Business Insider analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

Supporters of immigration say these newcomers have provided the US economy a huge boost and not taken Americans' jobs — a common argument made by those against immigration. With many boomers reaching retirement age and young people having fewer children than they used to, immigration might be the best way for US labor force levels to sustain and grow .

However, some people have argued that immigrants are, in fact, taking Americans' jobs, in addition to reducing wages and contributing to high housing prices . Many also have broader concerns about how some immigrants are coming to the US. Last December, illegal border crossings from Mexico resulted in a record number of arrests, and cities like New York and Chicago are struggling to accommodate the influx of migrants to their cities.

Who are these immigrant workers who have come to the US in recent years? They're likely to be young, male, working in one of three industries, making less than $40,000 a year, and living in one of four states, according to a Goldman Sachs report published in April and based on an analysis of government data.

The typical recent immigrant is more likely than the US-born population to have a college degree

The Goldman Sachs report said much of the recent uptick in immigration to the US has been tied to a rise in " unauthorized immigration " — foreign-born people coming into the US who aren't legal US residents.

The report said many of these people came from South America, Central America, and Mexico — and that the number of immigrants from these regions likely tripled in 2023 compared to its pre-pandemic average.

Related stories

In recent years, over half of immigrants settled in one of four states: Florida, California, Texas, and New York. The next most popular states were New Jersey, Illinois, Massachusetts, and Georgia. Accommodative policies toward immigrants and proximity to the Southern border have both impacted their destinations.

Among immigrants aged 16 and older who came to the US within the last three years, nearly 90% of them were between the ages of 16 and 54, compared to 62% of the US-born population aged 16 and older.

Roughly 64% of these recent immigrants were working or looking for work, compared to 62% of US-born workers. Recent immigrants had an unemployment rate of 6.3%, compared to 3.8% for US-born workers.

Among recent immigrants aged 16 and older, about 55% were male, compared to 46% of US-born individuals in the same age group.

Recent immigrants were much less likely than the US-born population to have graduated from high school. Nearly a quarter of recent immigrants aged 16 or older had less than a high school education, compared to 10% of the US-born population.

However, recent immigrants were more likely than US-born Americans to have a college degree. Over 39% of recent immigrants aged 16 or older had a bachelor's or advanced degree, compared to 34% of the US-born population. The biggest disparity was in the share of workers with only "some college" education: about 13% of recent immigrants and 28% of the US-born population.

The typical recent immigrant is likely to make less than $40,000 a year

The most common industries for recent immigrant workers were construction, professional and business, and accommodation and food services.

Over 16% of recent immigrants worked in the construction industry, compared to 6.4% of US-born workers. Among the most common jobs in this industry are construction laborers, carpenters, and electricians, per the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Roughly 17% of immigrants worked in the professional and business industry, compared to 12% of US-born workers. Among the most common jobs in this industry are janitors, security guards, and landscaping and groundskeeping workers.

About 12% of recent immigrants worked in the accommodation and food services industry, compared to 7% of US-born workers. Among the most common jobs in this industry are "food preparation and serving workers," waiters and waitresses, cooks, and hotel desk clerks.

Per Goldman Sachs, the typical recent immigrant worker made about $39,000 a year in 2023, compared to $54,000 for the typical US-born worker.

Have you recently moved to the US and found work? If so, reach out to this reporter at [email protected] .

Watch: Nearly 50,000 tech workers have been laid off — but there's a hack to avoid layoffs

• Main content