Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: How does the salary for ICE special agents compare to other federal law enforcement agencies, such as the FBI or DEA?
Executive Summary
The available analyses show conflicting published salary figures for ICE special agents, with one source listing a lower entry-to-midrange pay band ($49,739–$89,528) and other salary-aggregators reporting higher averages and ranges (average $110,853; range $96,199–$134,483), creating ambiguity about how ICE pay stacks against peers. Comparing across agencies, the DEA’s reported average of $108,362 is close to the higher ICE estimates, while FBI base starting figures cited by salary write-ups suggest FBI agents often begin at higher base pay but variations hinge on GS grade, locality, and bonuses [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. What the different sources actually claim and why that matters
The sources present two distinct narratives: one places ICE special agents at a relatively lower pay bracket ($49,739–$89,528) and describes overtime and locality pay as supplemental, while salary-aggregator summaries list ICE average pay above $110,000 with ranges up to $134,483, signaling a higher earning potential [1] [2]. This divergence matters because readers can draw opposite conclusions about competitiveness versus FBI and DEA pay depending on which figure they accept. Reconciling these numbers requires attention to data methods—whether figures reflect base GS pay only, include locality/step/overtime, or come from self-reported employer aggregates [5] [6].
2. Comparing ICE to DEA: closely matched averages but overlapping ranges
Salary-aggregator data places ICE and DEA averages in the same neighborhood, with ICE at about $110,853 and DEA at $108,362 and overlapping ranges (ICE $96,199–$134,483; DEA $94,062–$131,418) implying comparable total compensation for many agents [2] [3]. The earlier lower ICE range complicates this picture by implying ICE starts lower; however, if the higher aggregator measures include locality pay, overtime, and experience steps, that explains parity with DEA. Both agencies offer similar benefits and incentives that further reduce meaningful differences for mid-career agents [1] [7].
3. Where the FBI fits: higher starting base but overall comparisons depend on locality
Reported FBI special agent starting base pay cited in mid-2025 discussions sits near $80,985 as a base, with potential for advancement and locality adjustments that can make total compensation competitive with ICE and DEA at higher steps [4]. The contrast arises because the FBI’s initial grade and step structure may yield a higher guaranteed base relative to some ICE listings, but final take-home depends on locality pay, overtime eligibility, and agency-specific bonuses. Thus, FBI often shows stronger guaranteed starting pay, while ICE/DEA parity appears more contingent on step progression and supplemental pay [4] [6].
4. Why GS pay tables, locality, and overtime change the headline numbers
Official pay frameworks—the GS grade and step system plus locality pay—are central to interpreting disparities; analyses note that pay differences hinge on GS level, step, locality percentage, and overtime rather than an immutable agency premium [5] [6]. Aggregator averages that report six-figure ICE salaries likely fold in locality and overtime or reflect experienced agents at higher GS steps, whereas lower cited ICE ranges probably represent entry-level base pay before locality enhancements. Therefore, direct agency-to-agency comparisons must specify whether they reflect base GS only or total compensation [5] [6] [1].
5. Benefits, signing bonuses, and recruitment incentives that blur pure salary comparisons
Beyond base pay, ICE and HSI recruitment materials emphasize signing bonuses, student loan repayment, and enhanced retirement benefits, and ICE has reported heavy applicant interest tied to incentives—factors that shift effective compensation and retention calculus [7] [8]. These non-salary elements are material when comparing agencies: an agency with lower base pay but generous signing bonuses or loan repayment can be more attractive than a higher-base pay job without those incentives. Claims about competitiveness must include these programmatic incentives to be meaningful [1] [8].
6. Reconciling conflicting data and understanding potential agendas
The analytical landscape suggests methodological divergence and possible agenda framing: government pay tables and GS explanations present mechanistic factors (GS/locality), aggregator sites present averages from self-reported or employer-supplied data, and agency recruitment messaging highlights incentives to attract applicants [5] [2] [8]. Each source can be biased by selection: aggregator databases skew toward respondents who report higher pay; recruitment statements emphasize perks; and summary articles may conflate base and total pay. Critical comparison requires matching the same compensation components across sources [1] [2] [7].
7. Bottom line, caveats, and what readers should verify next
On balance, ICE pay can appear lower or comparable to DEA and somewhat lower than FBI starting bases depending on the metric used: base GS pay alone yields one conclusion, while totals that include locality, overtime, and incentives yield another [1] [2] [3] [4]. Readers should verify the component definitions—base vs. total compensation, GS grade and step, locality percentage, and bonus programs—when comparing agencies. For definitive comparisons, consult current OPM locality tables, agency-specific recruiting pages, and recent aggregated payroll reports to match apples-to-apples figures [5] [7].