Economic benefits of admitting refugees outweigh costs

Although working-age adult refugees who enter the United States often initially rely on public assistance programs, a study by researchers at the University of Notre Dame indicates that the long-term economic benefit of admitting refugees outweighs the initial costs.

The study, published as a National Bureau of Economic Research working paper this week, was conducted by William Evans, Keough-Hesburgh Professor of Economics, and Daniel Fitzgerald, undergraduate research assistant at Notre Dame’s Wilson Sheehan Lab for Economic Opportunities, or LEO. The study is a comprehensive assessment of the fiscal costs and benefits of refugee resettlement in the United States.

Using data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, Evans and Fitzgerald analyzed the costs and benefits of resettling an average refugee who entered the United States between 1990 and 2014.

They estimate the average cost of resettling a refugee in the United States during that timeframe at $15,000, including background checks, housing, English lessons and job training. However, the study indicates that within eight years of their arrival, adult refugees begin paying more in taxes than they receive in benefits.

Moreover, by the time adult refugees have lived in the United States for 20 years, the evidence suggests they will have paid an average of $21,000 more in taxes than in benefits received from all levels of government since arrival.

“There has been considerable discussion about the fiscal costs of resettling refugees to the United States,” said Evans, chair of Notre Dame’s Department of Economics. “However, the evidence indicates that refugees who enter the United States as working-age adults provide a fiscal benefit over the long term. The benefits are even greater for refugees who enter the United States as children.”

The study also provided surprising evidence about how well refugees who arrive as children do in the United States. Those who arrived before the age of 15 graduated from high school and entered college at the same rate as their U.S.-born counterparts. However, those who entered the country in their later teen years did not fare as well, which the researchers attribute to language barriers and the fact that many of these children start their lives here in the foster care network.

The material in this press release comes from the originating research organization. Content may be edited for style and length. Want more? Sign up for our daily email.

3 thoughts on “Economic benefits of admitting refugees outweigh costs”

  1. Lowest quintile: received £10,153 more in benefits than paid in taxes
    Second quintile: received £9,655 more in benefits than paid in taxes
    Middle quintile: received £4,589 more in benefits than paid in taxes
    Fourth quintile: paid £4,113 more in taxes than received in benefits
    Highest quintile: paid £20,125 more in taxes than received in benefits


    Min wage migrants don’t pay their way.

  2. Doesn’t add up.

    1. The US has a deficit. That means the average income doesn’t generate the taxes needed to pay for the services. That excludes future costs hidden off the books accrueing now like pensions.

    2. Way more than 50% of the population earn less than average. Look it up, the distributions of incomes is not symmetric

    3. Your average refugee is going to be working in low paid jobs . They don’t have the skills

    So the average refugee doesn’t pay their way.

    Pure and simple.

    paid an average of $21,000 more in taxes than in benefits

    What’s in the benefit bucket? Unemployment benefits? Probably. Being defended by the military? I bet you that benefit is left off. Along with lots of other costs.

    What we have here is someone trying to skew the arguments by omit the costs and hoping people don’t question the costs assumptions

  3. For every mouth that arrives, it brings a pair of hands! There is no doubt that this cause of increase in the population is more useful than it is demanding on the long-term finances of the national economy.

Comments are closed.