Burden of Illegal Immigration on US Taxpayers.

Jan 2007
38,881
9,093
This should help lay to rest the "pro amnesty" crowd.

full report:
http://www.fairus.org/site/DocServer/USCostStudy_2010.pdf?docID=4921



Key Findings
  • Illegal immigration costs U.S. taxpayers about $113 billion a year at the federal, state and local level. The bulk of the costs — some $84.2 billion — are absorbed by state and local governments.
  • The annual outlay that illegal aliens cost U.S. taxpayers is an average amount per native-headed household of $1,117. The fiscal impact per household varies considerably because the greatest share of the burden falls on state and local taxpayers whose burden depends on the size of the illegal alien population in that locality
  • Education for the children of illegal aliens constitutes the single largest cost to taxpayers, at an annual price tag of nearly $52 billion. Nearly all of those costs are absorbed by state and local governments.
  • At the federal level, about one-third of outlays are matched by tax collections from illegal aliens. At the state and local level, an average of less than 5 percent of the public costs associated with illegal immigration is recouped through taxes collected from illegal aliens.
  • Most illegal aliens do not pay income taxes. Among those who do, much of the revenues collected are refunded to the illegal aliens when they file tax returns. Many are also claiming tax credits resulting in payments from the U.S. Treasury.
With many state budgets in deficit, policymakers have an obligation to look for ways to reduce the fiscal burden of illegal migration. California, facing a budget deficit of $14.4 billion in 2010-2011, is hit with an estimated $21.8 billion in annual expenditures on illegal aliens. New York’s $6.8 billion deficit is smaller than its $9.5 billion in yearly illegal alien costs.
The report examines the likely consequences if an amnesty for the illegal alien population were adopted similar to the one adopted in 1986. The report notes that while tax collections from the illegal alien population would likely increase only marginally, the new legal status would make them eligible for receiving Social Security retirement benefits that would further jeopardize the future of the already shaky system. An amnesty would also result in this large population of illegal aliens becoming eligible for numerous social assistance programs available for low-income populations for which they are not now eligible. The overall result would, therefore, be an accentuation of the already enormous fiscal burden.
 
Aug 2010
325
22
Detroit, MI
Oh I don't want to hear you pasty-ass caucasians start talking about "illegal immigration". You're all illegal immigrants in this country! The least you can do is welcome others into the country to share in the land your ancestors stole.

Shit, the Mexicans that are jumping the border are the descendants of Native Americans! They have more of a right to be here than you do!
 
Last edited:

Blah

Former Staff
Jan 2007
24,935
3,694
USA
Oh I don't want to hear you pasty-ass caucasians start talking about "illegal immigration". You're all illegal immigrants in this country! The least you can do is welcome others into the country to share in the land your ancestors stole.
Indians were also immigrants, they just got here much earlier.

Shit, the Mexicans that are jumping the border are the descendants of Native Americans! They have more of a right to be here than you do!
Their also descendants of the Spanish who conquered central America and
decimated the Indians.
 
Last edited:
Aug 2010
325
22
Detroit, MI
Indians were also immigrants, they just got here much earlier.



Their also descendants of the Spanish who conquered central America and
decimated the Indians.
They were immigrants pre-history. They didn't steal it from anyone, it was free for the taking. It's the basic precept of property rights: Homesteading.

They speak Spanish, and many of them have Spanish ancestory. But most are descendants of the Aztecs, Maya, and Inca.
 
Last edited: