본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기
22대 대한민국 국회 국회정보길라잡이 국회의원검색
회원가입 로그인
HOME

정보검색

소장정보 검색

국회도서관 홈으로 정보검색 소장정보 검색

결과 내 검색

동의어 포함

고급검색

인명/단체명

저자정보 상세정보
인명/단체명을 입력하세요.

키워드

  • 대표어

  • 외국어

-

목차보기

Title page 1

Contents 4

Executive Summary 5

Introduction 6

Why Immigrants Were Fiscally Positive 9

IMMIGRANT PUBLIC REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES 9

IMMIGRANTS' NET EFFECT ON GOVERNMENT REVENUE AND SPENDING 16

Why Noncitizens Are Fiscally Positive 22

Why Low-Skilled Immigrants Are Fiscally Positive 26

THE LOWEST-EDUCATED IMMIGRANTS CAN BE FISCALLY BENEFICIAL 32

Why Illegal Immigrants Were Fiscally Positive 38

Why Immigrants Are Fiscally Positive in the Long Term 40

The Children of Immigrants Will Be Fiscally Positive 43

How Immigration Has Prevented a Debt Crisis 46

Conclusion 48

Appendix 49

METHODOLOGY AND DATA 49

LIST OF VARIABLES IN THE FISCAL EFFECTS MODEL 64

NEW NON-NASEM VARIABLES 73

Notes 85

Tables 7

Table 1. Fiscal flows for immigrants by citizenship status and educational attainment, 1994-2023 7

Table 2. Immigrants generate 17 percent more in taxes per capita than the US-born 19

Table 3. Immigrants cost governments less per capita than the US-born 20

Table 4. Immigrants' tax revenues exceed their benefits received at both the federal and state levels 21

Table 5. Naturalized citizens and noncitizens' tax revenues exceed their benefits received at both the federal and state levels 22

Table 6. Immigrants were as likely to be high skilled as the US-born and more likely to be very low skilled 26

Table 7. Low-skilled immigrants paid more in taxes than they received in benefits 27

Table 8. Low-skilled immigrants paid $11.5 trillion in taxes 28

Table 9. Immigrants of all educational attainment lowered debt-to-GDP 37

Table 10. Illegal immigrants likely reduced deficits by $1.7 trillion 39

Table 11. The 1990-1993 immigrant cohort has reduced deficits by trillions 40

Table 12. The 1990-1993 cohort lowered debt-to-GDP regardless of education 42

Table 13. Immigrants are fiscally positive even when including second-generation-immigrant children 43

Figures 7

Figure 1. Immigrants' fiscal surplus has grown even as deficits have exploded 7

Figure 2. The average US person pays more in taxes than they receive in benefits 9

Figure 3. Immigrants generate more income and taxes than the average person 10

Figure 4. Immigrants are much more likely to be employed 11

Figure 5. Immigrants are much more likely to be of working age 11

Figure 6. Immigrants consume fewer government services 12

Figure 7. Immigrants cost less per capita than the average for the US population 13

Figure 8. Immigrants use old-age benefits less frequently because fewer public pensions are available to them, and because of legal status rules,... 13

Figure 9. Immigrants are much more likely to be in poverty but not more likely to be receiving welfare 14

Figure 10. Immigrants are less likely to be in school, imposing fewer education costs 15

Figure 11. Immigrants are less likely to commit and be incarcerated for crimes and other offenses 15

Figure 12. Immigrants pay more in taxes than they receive in benefits 16

Figure 13. Immigrants reduce government deficits 17

Figure 14. Spending on immigrants does not cause government deficits 18

Figure 15. The fiscal surplus generated by immigrants cut US deficits by a third from 1994 to 2023 18

Figure 16. Noncitizens cost less per capita than the average for the US population 23

Figure 17. Noncitizens use fewer old-age benefits because they hold fewer government jobs, are younger, and face status eligibility limits 23

Figure 18. Noncitizens are much more often in poverty but are not more likely to be receiving needs-based benefits 24

Figure 19. Noncitizens are less likely to be in school, imposing fewer costs on the education system 25

Figure 20. Taxes paid by noncitizens have exceeded benefits received every year since 1994 25

Figure 21. Low-skilled immigrants pay more taxes per capita than the low-skilled US-born 29

Figure 22. Low-skilled immigrants are much more likely to work than the low-skilled US-born 29

Figure 23. Low-skilled immigrants cost less per capita across most categories than the average US-born 30

Figure 24. Low-skilled immigrants use fewer old-age benefits even though they are just as likely to be old 30

Figure 25. Low-skilled immigrants receive fewer needs-based funds than their poverty rate predicts 31

Figure 26. Low-skilled immigrants are dramatically less costly to schools than the average person 32

Figure 27. Low-skilled immigrants were fiscally positive almost every year 33

Figure 28. Immigrants were fiscally positive throughout their working years, regardless of educational attainment 33

Figure 29. Low-skilled immigrants are much more likely to be of working age 34

Figure 30. Immigrants who dropped out of high school only received more benefits than taxes because of their retirement population 35

Figure 31. Noncitizen high school dropouts generated more taxes than benefit costs most years 35

Figure 32. Even the lowest-skilled immigrants reduce the deficit to GDP compared with the US population without immigrants 36

Figure 33. Immigrant arrivals from 1990 to 1993 are still fiscally positive 30 years on 41

Figure 34. Low-skilled immigrant arrivals from 1990 to 1993 are still fiscally positive 30 years on 41

Figure 35. Immigrants and their children generated more tax revenue than costs every year 44

Figure 36. Second-generation immigrants (children of immigrants) have the most fiscal upside 45

Figure 37. US-born children of immigrants are the most educated generation of Americans 45

Figure 38. US public debt would have reached unsustainable levels without immigrants 46

Boxes 8

Box 1. Immigrant definitions 8

Appendix Tables 59

Table A1. Nontax revenues account for one-third of the net fiscal effect from low-skilled immigrants 59

Table A2. Effects of immigration on housing values and property tax revenues 60

Table A3. Inaccurate modeling and presentation choices drive the NASEM's fiscal impact results 62

Table A4. Spending and tax classifications in the Cato fiscal effects model 78

Table A5. Fiscal flows and GDP effect by citizenship and education, cumulative, 1994-2023 80

Table A6. Fiscal flows and GDP effect by citizenship and education, averages, 2022-2023 83

Appendix Figures 52

Figure A1. Most government spending is for pure public goods or old-age benefits 52

Figure A2. Interest on past debt and military spending dominates pure public goods spending 54

Figure A3. Defense spending has fallen over the past 70 years 55

Figure A4. Defense spending doesn't respond to population growth like other public goods 56

추천서가 (다양한 추천 자료를 만나보세요)

권호기사보기

권호기사 목록 테이블로 기사명, 저자명, 페이지, 원문, 기사목차 순으로 되어있습니다.
기사명 저자명 페이지 원문 기사목차

권호

기사명 원문보기 기사목차
닫기