How much did the us spend on illegal immigration in the last 5 years?
Executive summary
Estimates of U.S. spending “on illegal immigration” vary widely across analyses and advocates: FAIR and like-minded groups put annual costs at roughly $150–182 billion per year (FAIR reported $151–182 billion figures) while government watchdogs and House Republicans have highlighted more limited tallies such as $22.6 billion in federal assistance from 2020–2024 or $16.2 billion in emergency Medicaid costs cited from a CBO-focused review (FAIR/FAIRUS [1]; White House citing FAIR [7]; CT Senate GOP/OpenTheBooks [3]; House Budget Committee on Medicaid p1_s1). Different definitions and timeframes drive these divergent numbers [1] [2].
1. Numbers diverge because “cost of illegal immigration” is not a single line item
There is no single official national figure in these sources; researchers, advocacy groups, Congress committees and think tanks count different things. FAIR’s 2023 study aggregates federal, state and local services and produces annual estimates around $151–182 billion [1]. House Republican analyses and watchdog OpenTheBooks focus on narrower categories—federal assistance totals of $22.6 billion for 2020–2024 (reported by CT Senate Republicans citing OpenTheBooks) [3]. A House Budget Committee summary emphasizes $16.2 billion in emergency Medicaid payments identified in a CBO analysis request [4]. The variation traces to differing inclusions (federal vs. state vs. local; emergency vs. full Medicaid; enforcement vs. benefits) [1] [4].
2. Enforcement and detention spending is a separate, fast-rising budget line
Spending on immigration enforcement and detention has grown substantially and is tracked separately from benefit estimates; ICE funding more than doubled since DHS’s creation in some accounts, and FY2024 ICE funding was reported near $9.6 billion with total immigration-and-border appropriations reaching roughly $33–34 billion before new legislative proposals [2] [5]. Advocacy groups note proposals to add large sums for detention and deportation—one report cites $45 billion for new detention centers and a multiyear enforcement package that could push enforcement-related spending into the tens or hundreds of billions depending on legislative design [6] [5]. Those enforcement costs are often not included in FAIR’s benefit-centered totals [1] [5].
3. Who counts as “illegal immigrant” and what period matters
Estimates depend on population assumptions and legal status definitions. FAIR’s calculations incorporate broad cohorts including unauthorized immigrants and their US-born children and produce per-capita and aggregate annual cost figures [1]. Other analyses focus on specific cohorts—paroled populations, recent arrivals, or service recipients—which changes the base population and thus the totals [7] [8]. Timeframe choices matter: FAIR’s cited annual estimates differ from multi-year tallies like OpenTheBooks’ $22.6 billion between 2020–2024 [1] [3].
4. Tax contributions and offsetting fiscal effects are treated differently
Sources dispute whether and how to deduct taxes paid by undocumented households. The American Immigration Council emphasizes tax contributions—undocumented households paid $89.8 billion in 2023 in one analysis—arguing net fiscal impacts are smaller once taxes and economic contributions are counted [9]. By contrast, FAIR and like-minded studies tend to emphasize spending obligations and estimate net costs using different tax-offset assumptions, producing higher net-cost figures [1] [7]. The methodological choice on taxes materially changes headline numbers [9] [1].
5. Political context and implicit agendas shape headline claims
Many of the sources are advocacy or partisan: FAIR and the House Budget Committee/Republican communications push higher cost estimates to make a political case for stricter immigration policy and reduced benefits [1] [4]. Conversely, the American Immigration Council highlights taxes paid and economic contributions to argue against massive enforcement expenditures [9]. The White House fact sheet cites FAIR figures to justify policy actions, showing how administrations selectively use studies that support their priorities [7]. Readers must treat headline numbers as policy arguments as much as neutral accounting [7] [4] [9].
6. What journalists and policymakers should do to clarify
To answer “how much the U.S. spent on illegal immigration in the last five years,” reporters should demand clear scope: specify years, whether totals include federal/state/local, benefits vs. enforcement, and whether tax offsets are applied. Use multiple sources: the FAIR study for comprehensive annual cost claims [1], House GOP analyses for certain federal spending categories and Medicaid emergency costs [3] [4], and American Immigration Council work for tax-contribution/contextual counters [9] [2]. Available sources do not provide a single, universally accepted five‑year total that reconciles these different methods; the published figures reflect competing methodologies and policy aims [1] [4] [9].
Limitations: this briefing uses only the provided documents; official Treasury or OMB reconciliations for a five‑year consolidated total are not found in these sources (not found in current reporting).