New study shows undocumented immigrants good for Arizona economy

We can now add Arizona to the long list of states in which recent studies prove that the current influx of immigrants, both legal and undocumented, have contributed far more in taxes than they receive in government services.

Joining studies from California, Texas, Florida, New Mexico, Washington DC, and Long Island, NY, a new report from Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy at The University of Arizona looks at the contributions and costs of Arizona's immigrant population and finds not only an overall net gain for the state, but that the loss of this population would likely cause long term economic problems.

At a time when states like Georgia, Oklahoma and Colorado, and municipalities large and small all over the country, are passing harsh legislation intended to drive off their immigrant populations, this Arizona study concludes that, in the long run, these restrictionist tactics will end up creating economic disaster for certain segments of the economy and an overall loss for all residents. These finding don't bode well for the state which already has some of the toughest anti-immigrant laws in the nation.

The study is also unique in that it breaks out the non-citizen population from the rest of the immigrant population and still comes to the same overall conclusions.

This is a important development, since one of the restrictionsts chief weapons in their war of misinformation has been the lack of information on the contributions of the undocumented versus the larger immigrant population.

This has allowed them to wrongly discount or discredit many of the previous studies by claiming that undocumented are somehow different than the broader immigrant population in their use of services or contributions.

Based on this study, the total state tax revenue attributable to immigrant workers was an estimated $2.4 billion, of which about $1.5 billion came from for non-citizens. Balanced against estimated fiscal costs of $1.4 billion (for education, health care, and law enforcement), the net 2004 fiscal impact of immigrants in Arizona was positive by about $940 million.

The 2004 total economic output attributable to immigrant workers was about $44 billion, $29 billion of that coming from non-citizens. This output included $20 billion in labor and other income and resulted in approximately 400,000 full-time-equivalent jobs.

The study also looks at what impact the removal of as little as 10-15% of the immigrant workforce would have on the state's economy. Over $.5 billion in tax revenues would be lost, 125,000 jobs and $13.5 billion of lost economic output.

Clearly, lawmakers from statehouses to city councils across the country should examine this study before they begin to contemplate the adoption of restrictionist tactics and harsh legislation when addressing this issue. …..like the old saying goes:
"Be careful what you wish for … or you just might get it."

Immigrants in Arizona: Fiscal and Economic Impacts
by Judith Gans
Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy at The University of Arizona.

Preface
Arizona’s foreign-born population has grown dramatically since 1990 when there were about 268,700 foreign-born persons in the state. By 2004, the foreign-born population had grown to 830,900. This is more than a 200 percent increase. The vast majority of these new immigrants are in the non-citizen category, which went from 163,300 to about 619,800, an increase of almost 280 percent. Most immigrants are of working age and have come to the United States seeking employment. This fact is central to their impacts in Arizona.

The likelihood that many of Arizona’s non-citizens are undocumented immigrants has fueled anger over lawlessness and made discussion of immigration in Arizona politically contentious. But Arizona’s experience is a specific case of a national problem, one that exists because large economic incentives in today’s global economy are overwhelming the U.S. immigration system – a system that is widely understood to be in need of reform. Public discourse that equates immigration and illegal immigration is narrowly focused and risks overlooking broader dimensions of the role of immigrants in the economy.

It is not the purpose of this study to address the myriad issues surrounding illegal immigration or to imply in any way that illegal immigration is not a problem. Rather, the objective of this study is to suspend, for the moment, discussion of this narrow topic and focus instead on a broader examination of all immigrants’ impacts on Arizona’s economic and fiscal health. By so doing, we hope to create a more thorough understanding of the economic costs and benefits of immigration and of the tradeoffs involved in setting and enforcing immigration policy.

In Brief

Arizona’s proximity to Mexico, the growth of its immigrant population, and the proportion of immigrants that are in the United States illegally have made immigration a contentious issue. This study is intended to step back from debates over illegal immigration and deepen our understanding of the costs and contributions of immigrants to Arizona’s economy.

Executive Summary

This report examines the costs and benefits of immigration in Arizona. It provides estimates of the of incremental fiscal cost associated with immigrants – education, health care, and law enforcement – and measures their contributions to Arizona’s economy both as consumers and as workers. The two categories of immigrants (naturalized citizens and non-citizens) are examined separately in order to disentangle the economic costs and benefits associated with each.

The bottom line

Based on this study, the total state tax revenue attributable to immigrant workers was an estimated $2.4 billion (about $860 million for naturalized citizens plus about $1.5 billion for non-citizens). Balanced against estimated fiscal costs of $1.4 billion (for education, health care, and law enforcement), the net 2004 fiscal impact of immigrants in Arizona was positive by about $940 million.

The 2004 total economic output attributable to immigrant workers was about $44 billion ($15 billion for naturalized citizens and $29 billion for non-citizens). This output included $20 billion in labor and other income and resulted in approximately 400,000 full-time-equivalent jobs.

Fiscal costs of immigration

Estimates of the incremental fiscal costs of immigration were derived from a variety of sources. In summary:

• Education: For this analysis, English Language Learner (ELL) enrollment was used as a proxy for the number of immigrant children in Arizona’s public schools. The 2004 cost of ELL education in Arizona was about $540 million of which about $350 million (65 percent) was incurred in Maricopa County.



• Health care: Total uncompensated care costs (reported as bad debt) for hospitals in Arizona was about $420 million, of which an estimated $150 million (32 percent) was incurred by immigrants. Of the $150 million in uncompensated care costs associated with immigrants, nearly $140 million was incurred by non-citizens.
  
  The total cost in 2004 of Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS), Arizona’s Medicaid program, was $4.3 billion, of which an estimated $640 million was incurred by immigrants. Of the $640 million in AHCCCS costs associated with immigrants, about $480 million was incurred by non-citizens.



• Law enforcement: In the area of law enforcement, the cost to the Arizona Department of Corrections of incarcerating immigrants in 2004 was $91 million, of which $89 million was for non-citizens.

Immigrants as consumers

As consumers, immigrants bring considerable spending power to Arizona’s economy. This spending contributes to Arizona’s overall economic performance, and, in turn, generates tax revenues for the state.

• Jobs and income: Consumer spending in 2004 by naturalized citizen households in Arizona was an estimated $6.1 billion. Approximately 39,000 full-time equivalent jobs can be attributed to this spending along with $5.9 billion of output in the state’s economy.
  
  This output included labor income of $1.2 billion, and other income (defined as rents, royalties, dividends, and corporate profits) of $900 million.
  
  Consumer spending in 2004 by non-citizen households in Arizona was an estimated $4.4 billion. Approximately 28,000 full-time equivalent jobs can be attributed to this spending along with $4.3 billion of output in the state’s economy. This output included labor income of about $930 million, and other income (defined as rents, royalties, dividends, and corporate profits) of $560 million.



• Tax revenues: Consumer spending in 2004 by Arizona’s naturalized citizens generated tax revenues of approximately $460 million, consisting of personal taxes of about $49 million, sales taxes of about $210 million, and business taxes of $190 million.
  
  Consumer spending in 2004 by Arizona’s non-citizens generated tax revenues of approximately $320 million, consisting of personal taxes of nearly $36 million, sales taxes of $150 million, and business taxes of about $130 million.
  Immigrants as workers
  
  Immigrants in 2004 were 14 percent of Arizona’s workforce, and were a larger proportion of low-skilled labor in agriculture, construction, manufacturing, and certain service industries. High-skilled immigrants were a large percent of the workers in specific areas of medicine and science.

In low-skilled occupations in Arizona:

• Agriculture: Immigrants were 59 percent of the workforce in farming occupations and 22 percent of the workforce in food-preparation-and-serving occupations.


• Construction: Immigrants were between 35 percent and 41 percent of the workforce in certain construction trades such as brick masons, flooring installers, and cement masons. They were 27 percent of the workforce in all construction trades.


• Manufacturing: Immigrants were 35 percent of the workforce in food-related manufacturing, 46 percent of the workforce in textile-related manufacturing, and 22 percent of the workforce in metal-working manufacturing.


• Service industries: Immigrants were 34 percent of the workforce in occupations providing services to buildings, 51 percent of the workforce in landscaping-services occupations, and 38 percent of the workforce in building-and-grounds maintenance. Immigrants were 26 percent of the workforce in traveler-accommodations occupations, 23 percent of the workforce in restaurant-and-food-serving occupations, and 33 percent of the workforce in private-household help.

In high-skilled occupations in Arizona:

• Medicine: Immigrants were 38 percent of medical scientists and 19 percent of physicians and surgeons.


• Science: Immigrants were 36 percent of astronomers and physicists, 16 percent of computer-hardware engineers, 18 percent of computer-software engineers, and 17 percent of electrical and electronics engineers. Immigrants were 15 percent of economists.

Economic contributions of immigrant labor

Approximately $15 billion, or four percent, of the state’s output can be attributed to naturalized citizen workers, resulting in about 120,000 full-time-equivalent jobs. This output included $4.9 billion in labor income and $1.9 billion of other income in the state. State tax revenues resulting from this economic activity were approximately $860 million.

Non-citizens, for their part, contributed about $29 billion, or eight percent of Arizona’s economic output, resulting in about 280,000 full-time-equivalent jobs. Their output included $10 billion in labor income, and $3.3 billion in other property income. The state tax revenues resulting from this economic activity were approximately $1.5 billion.

The role of immigrants as workers can be further understood by analyzing the potential consequences of this source of labor not being available. In other words, what would be the impacts if immigrant labor were removed from the economy?

To this end, this study used a series of computer simulations to examine the impacts of reduced immigrant labor on the industries that employ relatively large numbers of immigrants. The study focused on industries employing low-skilled, non-citizen workers because this is where recent growth in Arizona’s immigrant population has occurred and because we know that significant numbers of these workers are in the country without authorization. Thus, the simulations are designed to estimate the economic consequences of eliminating this segment of the workforce.

• Agriculture: A 15-percent, immigrant-workforce reduction in the agriculture sector would result in direct losses of 3,300 full-time-equivalent jobs, and losses of about $600 million in output including lost labor income of about $200 million, and lost other income of about $110 million. The lost direct state tax revenue would be approximately $25 million.


• Construction: A 15-percent, immigrant-workforce reduction in the construction sector would result in direct losses of about 56,000 full-time-equivalent jobs, and about $6.6 billion in output including lost labor income of about $2.6 billion and some $450 million in lost other income. The direct lost state tax revenue would be approximately $270 million.


• Manufacturing: A ten-percent reduction in immigrants in the manufacturing workforce would result in direct losses of about 12,000 full-time-equivalent jobs, and about $3.8 billion in output including lost labor income of about $740 million, and lost other income of nearly $290 million. The lost direct state tax revenue would be approximately $100 million.


• Service industries: In the service sectors analyzed, a 16-percent reduction in the immigrant labor force would translate to direct losses of 54,000 full-time-equivalent jobs, and lost output of $2.5 billion including reduced labor income of about $900 million, and reductions in other income of about $270 million. The lost direct state tax revenue would be nearly $160 million.

Net fiscal impacts of immigrants

Total state tax revenue attributable to immigrant workers was estimated to be about $2.4 billion ($860 million for naturalized citizens plus $1.5 billion for non-citizens). Balanced against estimated incremental fiscal costs of $1.4 billion, the net 2004 fiscal impact of immigrants in Arizona was positive, by approximately $940 million.

As 14 percent of the workforce, immigrants make significant contributions to Arizona’s economy. There are also specific fiscal costs associated with immigrants. But, by virtue of their contributions as workers to Arizona’s economic output, their overall contribution to the state’s fiscal health is positive. Certainly, these impacts are changing over time, but looking at data for one year provides a snapshot of the extent and magnitude of the role of immigrants in Arizona’s economy.

Note: We have estimated the incremental (marginal) costs of immigrants as individuals. If the immigrants were not present in Arizona, these costs would disappear. Immigrants’ impacts on costs of social services, such as fire and public safety protection, are not estimated because it is not possible to measure the incremental costs attributable to immigrants for these services.

Read complete report

UPDATE: 10/16/07: 7:30 EDT

Some questions have been raised at various other sites about two aspects of this study. One is the standard question about breaking down the numbers for just the undocumented population as oppossed to the non-citizen population as a whole.

The other questioning the extrapolations made about the economic costs of losing a portion of the undocumented workforce and the possible replacement of those workers with US-born workers.

the study answers both those questions:

How much of Arizona's immigrant population is here illegally?

We do not know. The U.S. Census does not ascertain legal presence in the United States when conducting its surveys and so the non-citizen category includes both legal and illegal non-citizen immigrants. However, there are reasonable, statistically derived estimates. Research by Jeffrey Passel at the Pew Hispanic Center indicates that, in 2002, there were between 250,000 and 350,000 unauthorized immigrants in Arizona, most of whom came from Mexico, and that by 2005 their numbers had increased to as many as 500,000.

Given these numbers it's statistically safe to estimate that somewhere around 80% of the non-citizen population is in fact undocumented in Arizona. This allows us to extrapolate the statistics given on the "non-citizen" population to see what's occurring with just the undocumented portion of that population.

As to the extrapolations made about the effects of the removal of the undocumented population on the economy and the likelihood that US-born workers would step up to fill the gap:

Our analysis to this point has focused on measuring the portion of Arizona's economic activity attributable to immigrants in its workforce. This raises the following question: would the jobs filled by immigrants be taken instead by native-born workers if immigrants were not part of the labor force in Arizona? The answer to this question is complex but largely depends on the availability of native-born workers with skills similar to Educational attainment data, both for Arizona and for the United States, indicate that immigrants and native-born workers tend to have different skills, with immigrants filling specific gaps in the native-born workforce by providing needed low-skilled and high-skilled workers. Immigrants in Arizona are an important source of low-skilled labor and of specific high-skilled labor that is relatively scarce in the native-born population and thus are vital to the total output of the industries that employ them. It is difficult to make the case that all or even most jobs filled by immigrants would, instead, be filled by native-born workers if immigrant workers were not available.

Read More...

Summary only...

Immigration News Roundup: April 2 – April 8

This week brought the formal announcement by Tom Tancrazy that he will in fact make a run for the Republican presidential nomination. ICE released some numbers on the results of "Operation Return to Sender", the nationwide crackdown intended to catch criminal undocumented immigrants. Not surprisingly, over one third of those taken into custody were not intended targets, but rather "collateral arrests" made of those who were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Census data revealed that immigration is crucial to maintaining growth in many major
US metropolitan areas.

With this years income tax filing date quickly approaching, tax preparation chains are dealing with record numbers of undocumented immigrants wishing to file tax returns.

A newly released surveillance video of a migrant shooting in Arizona by a Border Patrol Agent casts doubt on the veracity of his account of the incident. It appears that what he claimed was self defense now looks more like an execution style killing.

Lastly, we look at this past weekend's immigration march in LA.

• Tancredo Makes it Official: Announces Presidential Run


• Immigration Raids Yield Thousands of "Collateral Arrests"


• Immigration Crucial to Sustaining Metro Populations


• Undocumented Immigrants File Taxes in Record Numbers


• Video Reveals Details of Migrant Shooting by Border Patrol


• Thousands March in LA for Immigrant Rights

Tancredo Makes it Official: Announces Presidential Run

Citing a tough immigration stance, Tancredo announces presidential bid

Criticizing other GOP candidates as weak in their efforts to stop illegal immigration, Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo announced Monday he would seek the Republican presidential nomination.

‘‘The political elite in Washington have chosen to ignore this phenomenon,’’ he said.

Tancredo, a congressman who has gained prominence in recent years for his staunch stance against illegal immigration, said immigration would be the primary focus of his campaign.

He said he would not enter the race if he thought one of the leading candidates was sufficiently conservative on the issue..
Times-Republican

Tancredo campaign: more scare tactics

Call Tom Tancredo the no-chance candidate, a one-trick pony.

While he may not be a real contender, the Colorado congressman has a million dollars and a dream: to push the issue of undocumented immigration to the forefront of the 2008 presidential campaign.

It's the sole reason he's running for prez.

In many ways Tancredo is like Al Sharpton, the Democratic challenger of the '04 race who knew he couldn't win but used his platform to talk in no-nonsense fashion about civil rights issues.

You have to admire someone who is passionate about an issue, even if you disagree with him. But Tancredo borders on the obsessive. It's evident in his actions.

He's hung out along the Mexican border with gun-toting "Minutemen" vigilantes who dress in camouflage and wear night-vision goggles.

At a California rally he held up a T-shirt emblazoned with the words "America is full."

He said Miami, a city that is majority Latino, resembles a "third-world country."

And in South Carolina he didn't mind speaking in a room draped with Confederate battle flags, where men dressed in Confederate regalia sang "Dixie," an offensive song that came out of blackface minstrel shows of the 1850s, mocking freed slaves.

It's understandable why Esquire magazine called him "Tancrazy."
Denver Post

Related:
Candidate Tancredo welcomed times 2, Denver Post

Tancredo joins GOP race on immigration platform, Chicago Tribune


Immigration Raids Yield Thousands of 'Collateral Arrests'

Immigrant crackdown brings 6,696 'collateral arrests'

More than one-third of 18,000 people arrested in a nearly yearlong federal crackdown on illegal immigrants were not the people authorities had targeted, according to government figures.

The so-called collateral arrests involved people picked up by immigration agents seeking fugitives such as drug smugglers, thieves, drunken drivers and others who flouted deportation orders.

When tracking down fugitives, authorities visit a suspect's last known address and often find other immigrants, who are then asked to prove they are legally entitled to live in the United States.

Supporters of such tactics say the government is just doing its job after years of neglect.

...snip…

Critics say the campaign against fugitive illegal immigrants ensnares many hard-working people who are in the country illegally but do not pose a danger.

"They're trying to sell it as something where they target [criminals] but it's become part of a larger dragnet," said Pedro Rios, director of the American Friends Service Committee's office in San Diego.

Dubbed "Operation Return to Sender," the crackdown began last May in cities nationwide. As of Feb. 23, it had resulted in 18,149 arrests of suspected illegal immigrants, most of whom were captured at home and in Hispanic neighborhoods.

But, according to figures from Immigration and Customs Enforcement, nearly 37 percent of those cases, or 6,696 arrests, were "collateral" captives -- people who just happened to be present when agents arrived. Such arrests account for more than half the total in four cities: Dallas and El Paso, Texas (59 percent); New York (54 percent); and San Diego (57 percent).
San Diego Tribune

Related:
Crackdown on Fugitives Nets Many Arrests, Washington Post

Religious leaders want end to raids' 'collateral arrests', San Diego Union Tribune

Agents step up immigrant searches, San Diego Union Tribune

359 arrested in Calif. immigration sting, Houston Chronicle

Mount Kisco immigration raids are among many across U.S.The Journal News


Immigration Crucial to Sustaining Metro Populations

Census: Immigration Helps Big Metros Grow

Without immigrants pouring into the nation's big metro areas, places such as New York, Los Angeles and Boston would be shrinking as native-born Americans move farther out.

Many smaller areas, including Battle Creek, Mich., Ames, Iowa, and Corvallis, Ore., would shrink as well, according to population estimates to be released Thursday by the Census Bureau.

"Immigrants are filling the void as domestic migrants are seeking opportunities in other places," said Mark Mather, a demographer at the Population Reference Bureau, a private research organization.

Immigrants long have flocked to major metropolitan areas and helped them grow. But increasingly, native-born Americans are moving from those areas and leaving immigrants to provide the only source of growth.

The New York metro area, which includes the suburbs, added 1 million immigrants from 2000 to 2006. Without those immigrants, the region would have lost nearly 600,000 people.

Without immigration, the Los Angeles metro area would have lost more than 200,000, the San Francisco area would have lost 188,000 and the Boston area would have lost 101,000.

The Census Bureau estimates annual population totals as of July 1, using local records of births and deaths, Internal Revenue Service records of people moving within the United States and census statistics on immigrants. The estimates released Thursday were for metropolitan areas, which generally include cities and their surrounding suburbs.
Washington Post

Related:
Census Shows Immigration Helping St. Louis Schools, KSCK News5

Very low growth seen by census, The Republican, MA


Undocumented Immigrants File Taxes in Record Numbers

Even illegal immigrants in U.S. pay taxes

On a recent Sunday afternoon, construction workers, car washers, truck drivers and students crowded into Petra Castillo's one-room tax-preparation office in this city's South Central neighborhood. Most of those inside what was once the home of El Jefe Tacos shared something besides their need to beat this year's April 17 filing deadline: They are illegal immigrants.

…Politicians and activists campaigning for a crackdown on illegal immigration frequently complain that the nation's estimated 12 million undocumented residents violate U.S. law by not paying taxes, as well as by being in the U.S. without permission. But . Castillo's booming business shows how some of the workers who are here in defiance of one arm of the U.S. government - the Department of Homeland Security - are filing federal tax returns with the aggressive encouragement of another - the Internal Revenue Service.

"If someone is working without authorization in this country, he or she is not absolved of tax liability," IRS Commissioner Mark Everson, a former immigration official, said in testimony before Congress last year. Last week, speaking to the National Press Club, he added, "We want your money whether you are here legally or not and whether you earned it legally or not."

In 1996, the IRS created the individual taxpayer identification number, or ITIN, a nine-digit number that starts with "9," for taxpayers who didn't qualify for a Social Security number. Since then, the agency has issued about 11 million of them, and by 2003, the latest year with available figures, the number of tax returns using them had risen to nearly one million. The government doesn't know how many of those taxpayers were undocumented immigrants. Foreign nationals with tax-reporting requirements in the U.S. can also get an ITIN. But most of the people who use the number are believed to be in the U.S. illegally. All told, between 1996 and 2003, the income-tax liability for ITIN filers totaled almost $50 billion.

As part of its outreach effort, the IRS has been helping taxpayers apply for ITINs through partnerships with community groups. Last week, the Center for Economic Progress, a nonprofit group in Chicago, hosted its fourth ITIN event of the tax season at a church on the city's South Side, helping individuals apply for the number and file in one sitting.
Wall Street Journal, via Arizona Republic

Related:

Tax Prep Chains Attract Immigrants , Washington Post

Illegal immigrants filing taxes more than ever, AP


Video Reveals Details of Migrant Shooting by Border Patrol

Video of entrant's killing is released, Blurry tape fails to back account related by agent

Video taken by a surveillance camera of the fatal shooting of an illegal entrant by a Border Patrol agent appears to cast more doubt on the agent's account of the incident.

A copy of the video was released Tuesday by the Cochise County Attorney's Office. This follows Monday's release of a 300-page report on the Jan. 12 shooting.

The video shows from a distance the moments of the fatal shooting of Francisco Javier Domínguez-Rivera by Border Patrol Agent Nicholas Corbett. The incident happened in the afternoon near the border between Douglas and Bisbee.

The blurry digital video shows Corbett getting out of the driver's side of his vehicle and moving around the back before engaging a group of people, Cochise County sheriff's Sgt. Mark Genz wrote in a report given to the county attorney.

"You can see that he is very close to several subjects. It appears that one of the subjects he is near goes down partly, possibly to his knees and then goes down to the ground all the way and you lose sight of him," he wrote.

…snip…

The County Attorney's Office sent the video to the FBI to see if the bureau can enhance the quality of the footage.
Cochise County Attorney Ed Rheinheimer said he is waiting to review an enhanced version of the video before deciding whether to charge Corbett.

Corbett, 39, didn't speak to investigators during the investigation but reportedly told colleagues he fired a single shot from the front of his vehicle at a man who was at the back of his vehicle who looked like he was going to throw a rock.

An autopsy report and other forensic evidence seem to support the matching account from three witnesses, including the dead man's two brothers, who told investigators the agent fired while pushing Domínguez-Rivera to the ground.

The Cochise County Medical Examiner's Office found that a single bullet entered the left side of Domínguez-Rivera's chest and followed a downward trajectory through his heart and liver before lodging in his abdomen.
The shot was fired from between 3 inches and 2 1/2 feet away, according to Arizona Department of Public Safety lab information included in the report. The bullet casing from Corbett's gun was recovered.
Arizona Star

Related:
Border Patrol agent's account of shooting doesn't match evidence, Scipps

Agent Who Killed Immigrant Back on Duty, San Francisco Chronicle

Records contradict agent's story on entrant's slaying, Arizona Star

Witnesses: Agent shot unarmed man while pushing him to ground, Douglas Daily Dispatch


Thousands March in LA for Immigrant Rights

L.A. pro-immigrant march draws thousands

Thousands of people, many wearing red, marched peacefully Saturday through downtown Los Angeles, calling for broad amnesty for illegal immigrants.

Police estimated that about 7,000 to 10,000 people participated in the march. Two demonstrations two weeks ago, both held to commemorate last year's massive Los Angeles march, were marked by low turnout.

Organizers said Saturday's noontime event, which began at Olympic Boulevard and Broadway and ended at City Hall, was designed to rejuvenate efforts in Washington to promote reform that offers a path to citizenship to the greatest possible number of undocumented immigrants. Such efforts have stalled in Congress.

It was also intended to prove to critics that the immigrant rights movement was not dead, organizers said.

"People would like for it to go away," said Juan Jose Gutierrez of Latino Movement USA, one of the coordinators of the march. Speaking of Congress, he said, "we are not going to go away until they act responsibly.".
LA Times

tags: immigration, Tancredo , DHS raids, Nicholas Corbett, Collateral Arrests,

Read More...

Summary only...

Texas Comptroller reports undocumented immigrants good for economy

A report released this week by the Texas Comptrollers Office found that undocumented immigrants contributed $17.7 billion to that states economy and that state revenues collected from undocumented immigrants exceeded what was spent on services for them by $424.7 million.

The report found that undocumented immigrants in Texas generated more taxes and other revenue than the state spends on them. These findings run in direct contradiction to a recent report from The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), “The Cost of Illegal Immigration to Texans” which claimed that "Texas’s illegal immigrant population is costing the state’s taxpayers more than $4.7 billion per year for education, medical care and incarceration."

Comptroller, Carole Keeton Strayhorn, was quick to point out that this was the first time any state agency in the country presented "a comprehensive financial analysis of the impact of undocumented immigrants on a state’s budget and economy, looking at gross state product, revenues generated, taxes paid and the cost of state services."

The report titled "Undocumented Immigrants In Texas: A Financial Analysis of the Impact to the State Budget and Economy" found that "“the absence of the estimated 1.4 million undocumented immigrants in Texas in fiscal 2005 would have been a loss to our gross state product of $17.7 billion. Undocumented immigrants produced $1.58 billion in state revenues, which exceeded the $1.16 billion in state services they received."


tags: immigration, Texas comptroller study

Much has been written in recent months about the costs and economic benefits associated with the rising number of undocumented immigrants in Texas and the U.S. as a whole. Most reports tie the costs of the undocumented population to education, medical expenses, incarceration and the effects of low-paid workers on the salaries of legal residents. Revenue gains to governments resulting from undocumented immigrants consist primarily of taxes that cannot be avoided, such as sales taxes, various fees and user taxes on items such as gasoline and motor vehicle inspections.

This financial report focuses on the costs to the state of Texas; that is, services paid for with state revenue, including education, healthcare and incarceration. What government- sponsored services are available to undocumented immigrants is often determined by federal restrictions on spending (Exhibit 1). The report also identifies areas of costs to local governments and hospitals. Finally, it analyzes the $17.7 billion impact on the state’s economy as well as state revenues generated by undocumented immigrants.

The Comptroller’s report estimates that undocumented immigrants in Texas generate more taxes and other revenue than the state spends on them. This finding is contrary to two recent reports, FAIR’s, “The Cost of Illegal Immigration to Texans” and the Bell Policy Center’s “Costs of Federally Mandated Services to Undocumented Immigrants in Colorado”, both of which identified costs exceeding revenue.

-snip-


The immigration debate has become more heated in 2006. Congressional hearings were held across the U.S. to discuss the impact of undocumented immigrants on the economy and the culture. At the same time, two distinctly different pieces of legislation were voted out of the U.S. House and Senate.

The Comptroller’s office estimates the absence of the estimated 1.4 million undocumented immigrants in Texas in fiscal 2005 would have been a loss to our Gross State Product of $17.7 billion. Also, the Comptroller’s office estimates that state revenues collected from undocumented immigrants exceed what the state spent on services, with the difference being $424.7 million (Exhibit 18).

The largest cost factor was education, followed by incarceration and healthcare. Consumption taxes and fees, the largest of which is the sales tax, were the largest revenue generators from undocumented immigrants.

"Undocumented Immigrants In Texas: A Financial Analysis of the Impact to the State Budget and Economy"

The study did show that unlike the state, local governments and hospitals incur costs that are not reimbursed by the state or federal government.

While not the focus of this report, some local costs and revenues were estimated. State-paid health care costs are a small percentage of total health care spending for undocumented immigrants. The Comptroller estimates
cost to hospitals not reimbursed by state funds totaled $1.3 billion in 2004. Similarly, 2005 local costs for incarceration are estimated to be $141.9 million. The Comptroller estimates that undocumented immigrants paid more than $513 million in fiscal 2005 in local taxes, including city, county and special district sales and property taxes.

While state revenues exceed state expenditures for undocumented immigrants, local governments and hospitals experience the opposite, with the estimated difference being $928.9 million for 2005.

The $1.3 billion in uncompensated costs to local hospitals attributed to undocumented immigrants represents 14% of the total $9.2 billion in uncompensated care reported for uninsured and underinsured individuals who could not pay for the services they received. As healthcare professionals are quick to point out, the problem of uncompensated care is systemic and not limited to the undocumented. Studies show that the undocumented generally utilize health services at a much lower rates than legal residents and that the chief causes of increasing rates of uncompensated costs are the ever increasing numbers of uninsured coupled with limited payment schedules of government programs such as Medicaid and Medicare.

Read More...

Summary only...

Debunking the Myth: Immigrants and taxes-what they pay, what they get in return.

It's "common knowledge" in anti-immigration circles that immigrants, particularly the undocumented, don't pay taxes nearly equal to the government services they receive. From politicians like Tom Tancredo (R-Co) to pundits like Pat Buchanan and Lou Dobbs the mantra is the same; "immigrants place a burden on all American tax-payers."

Unfortunately, despite vast amounts of evidence to the contrary, most Americans believe them. But unlike many of the other subjective or unfounded claims made by the anti-immigrant right, when it comes to taxation and public services received, it's relatively easy to prove that undocumented immigrants pay far more into the system than they receive...the government keeps records.


tags: immigration, taxes , undocumented immigrants public services , cost of undocumented immigrants, social security, immigrants education costs


This past May, Republican pollster and spin-doctor, Frank Luntz released his official Republican talking points on immigration: Respect for the Law & Economic Fairness: Illegal Immigration Prevention. His polling showed that 58% of respondents believed that immigrants use more in services than they paid in taxes, and his suggestion to Republican candidates running this fall was to not only play upon the misconceptions but to encourage them.

His suggested talking points revolved around reinforcing as many fallacies as possible.

WORDS THAT WORK
“A good day’s work for a good day’s pay is a basic American principle. Accepting and abiding by the rule of law is a basic American principle. Working as hard as you can, as hard as you want to and enjoying the fruits of that labor, that’s an American principle.

But having to pay more in taxes because other people are outside the system isn’t an American principle. And having to pay more in taxes to support social services that go to illegal immigrants who aren’t paying anything in taxes isn’t the American way.”

Respect for the Law & Economic Fairness: Illegal Immigration Prevention; pg.13

Unlike some of the more subjective claims made by the anti-immigrant right, when it comes to taxation and the receipt of services, there are records kept and analysis of those records has been done. Overwhelmingly that analysis proves unequivocally that immigrants, and the undocumented in particular, pay far more into the system than they will ever take out.

Perhaps the most comprehensive analysis of the available data was published in the Harvard Latino Law Review this past spring. The report titled "The Taxation of Undocumented Immigrants:Separate, Unequal, and Without Representation" by Francine J. Lipman of the Chapman University - School of Law in Orange Calf., analyzed most of the available studies and data and found that although "Many Americans believe that undocumented immigrants are exploiting the United States' economy (and) that illegal aliens cost more in government services than they contribute to the economy. This belief is undeniably false. [E]very empirical study of illegals' economic impact demonstrates the opposite . . .: undocumenteds actually contribute more to public coffers in taxes than they cost in social services."

Eighty-five percent of eminent economists surveyed have concluded that undocumented immigrants have had a positive (seventy-four percent) or neutral (eleven percent) impact on the U.S. economy.

Undocumented immigrants, like all U.S. citizens and residents, are required to pay taxes. Despite the historic and strong American opposition to taxation without representation, undocumented immigrants (except in rare and unusual cases) have not enjoyed the right to vote on any local, state or federal tax or other matter for almost eighty years. Nevertheless, each year undocumented immigrants add billions of dollars in sales, excise, property, income and payroll taxes, including Social Security, Medicare and unemployment taxes, to federal, state and local coffers. Hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants go out of their way to file annual federal and state income tax returns.

Yet undocumented immigrants are barred from almost all government benefits, including food stamps, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Medicaid, federal housing programs, Supplemental Security Income, Unemployment Insurance, Social Security, Medicare, and the earned income tax credit (EITC). Generally, the only benefits federally required for undocumented immigrants are emergency medical care, subject to financial and category eligibility, and elementary and secondary public education. Many undocumented immigrants will not even access these few critical government services because of their ever-present fear of government officials and deportation.

Undocumented immigrants living in the United States are subject to the same income tax laws as documented immigrants and U.S. citizens. However, because of their status most unauthorized workers pay a higher effective tax rate than similarly situated documented or U.S. citizens. Yet, these workers and their families use fewer government services than similarly situated documented immigrants or U.S. citizens. Moreover, unauthorized workers have been denied remedies by the U.S. Supreme Court under the National Labor Relations Act and may be challenged to receive protection under wage and hour, anti-discrimination and workers' compensation laws. As a result, undocumented immigrants provide a fiscal windfall and may be the most fiscally beneficial of all immigrants.

... Moreover, the high effective tax rate imposed on the poorest undocumented working families relative to their less unfortunate friends and neighbors is inconsistent with fundamental tax policy.

Abstract

While garden variety immigrant bashers like Pat Buchanan or the Minutemen stick firmly to their "death of the west" meme, stating that the nation has been flooded by hordes of mooching immigrants suckling on the government teat while not paying any taxes, more subtle and "respectable" anti-immigrant organizations like the Tanton group's, Center for Immigration Studies, have admitted that immigrants do in fact pay some taxes, at least at the federal level. But they are quick to point out that since many of the largest costs in social services such as education are incurred at the state and local level immigrants still do not pay their fair share.

Once again, the research does not bear out their assertions. Localized studies done in Florida, Washington DC, and New Mexico all come to the same conclusion; immigrants pay more than their fair share for the services they receive.

The Florida study, done by the University of Florida in 2002, showed that immigrants state-wide paid the same amount of taxes as native-born Americans, but paid substantially more in Social Security than natives. In Miami-Dade, the area with the largest immigrant population, they also paid more in taxes per capita than native-born residents.

The non-partisan Urban Institute looked at the same subject in the Washington DC area in their May 2006 study, "Civic Contributions: Taxes Paid by Immigrants in the Washington, DC, Metropolitan Area." They found that overall, Washington area immigrants carry their fair share of the tax burden. In 1999, the year studied, immigrants paid 17.7 percent of all taxes in the region -- a figure almost identical to their share of the total population, 17.4 percent.

The same is true in the study done in New Mexico. Released in May 2006 by the Mew Mexico Fiscal Policy Project, " Undocumented Immigrants in New Mexico: State Tax Contributions and Fiscal Concerns" looked at a broad spectrum of issues related to the taxation of immigrants and their cost to society, particularly in the area of education and found that "to assume that (immigrants) get a free ride in New Mexico is a mistake: they pay for the services they receive, and then some."

Contrary to popular belief, undocumented immigrants pay taxes and are not able to receive public benefits, except for K through 12 public education for their children and emergency health care. The taxes that these families pay through unavoidable sales and property taxes cover the state and local share of the public education costs.

In addition to paying their own way for education, undocumented immigrants often pay for Social Security
and Medicare when those taxes are deducted from their paychecks. Neither of these social programs is available
to them as they age, so in effect, they contribute to the costs of caring for the elderly who are citizens of this
country.

Undocumented Immigrants in New Mexico: State Tax Contributions and Fiscal Concerns; pg.6

Despite what the anti-immigrant right would have the American people believe, it is quite easy to document the tax contributions made by immigrants. According to a 2004 special report issued by the IRS, undocumented workers file nearly 6 million of the approximately 130 million individual tax returns filed each year.

There are 7.2 million illegal workers in the country, reports the Pew Hispanic Center, a research organization based in Washington, D.C. If the Pew numbers and the IRS numbers … are accurate, then about 83 percent of undocumented workers are filing tax returns every year.

The Social Security Administration last year estimated 75 percent of undocumented workers are paying Social Security withholding tax.

By law, anyone who makes enough money regardless of legal status must file a tax return. The IRS and the state Franchise Tax Board allow people without Social Security numbers, such as illegal immigrants, to file their taxes by providing them with a special nine-digit number. An Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN) is given to a range of people without Social Security numbers, such as foreigners who invest in U.S. stocks and people in the U.S. with work visas.

As of September 2005, the IRS reported it issued more than 8.6 million ITINs since the number was created in 1996. State tax officials have issued 3.9 million of their own taxpayer identification numbers since 1991.

Filers using ITINs have paid more than $48 billion in income taxes from 1996 to 2004, the IRS reported.

Link

When discussing undocumented immigrants' contributions to the tax base and subsequent public services they pay for, perhaps the greatest inequities arise in the Social Security system. Here the undocumented contribute millions of dollars they will never qualify to receive.

The Social Security Administration’s (SSA) chief actuary estimates that three quarters of undocumented immigrants pay Social Security tax, an estimate that makes undocumented workers responsible for about 1.5% of total wages reported to the SSA
.
Taxes paid by undocumented immigrants go into the SSA’s “suspense file,” when the Social Security number does not match SSA’s records. In 2002, the suspense file grew by $56 billion in reported earnings, with about $7 billion in Social Security tax and $1.5 billion in Medicare tax paid. This tax contribution represents about 10% of the current Social Security surplus—the difference between what is being collected in Social Security taxes and what is being paid out in benefits.

Link

As the election season heats up it's inevitable that we hear an ever increasing amount of misinformation from those wishing to use immigration as an election year wedge issue. They will undoubtedly fall back on familiar themes of fear and ignorance, hoping to distract the electorate from the pressing issues of war, corruption and incompetence. As we have seen already, their rhetoric, controlled by spin doctors and party bosses in Washington, doesn't have to rely on truth, it just has to inflame the base and get them into the voting booth. If that means spreading misinformation and fueling the flames of racism and bigotry …so be it in their minds. It's all about retaining power at any cost.

Read More...

Summary only...