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: Do migrant crime rates in the UK differ significantly from those of native-born citizens since Brexit?
Executive Summary
Since Brexit, publicly available, rigorous analyses do not show a clear, sustained increase in migrant crime rates relative to native-born citizens in the UK, while recent administrative and advocacy reports claim higher arrest or representation for some foreign national groups; the truth is that data quality gaps and shifting government reporting plans mean the question remains partially unanswered [1] [2] [3] [4]. Independent academic studies find little or no causal link between immigration and crime in England and Wales, and the Home Office acknowledges limitations in current recording of foreign national offender data and is promising more detailed statistics by the end of 2025, which will be critical to settle contested claims [1] [2] [4].
1. Academic analyses push back on the simple narrative that migrants drive crime
Robust academic work across several studies finds no consistent causal effect of immigration on crime rates in the UK, with researchers reporting migrants are often underrepresented in prison populations and that labor-market attachment mediates criminal risk; these conclusions come from multi-country European analysis and targeted studies of England and Wales, published most recently in 2024 and 2025 [1] [2]. These peer-style analyses use statistical designs intended to control for confounders and conclude that, on average, immigration is not a primary driver of rising crime — a finding that contradicts claims that migration has materially increased crime since Brexit. The academic evidence emphasizes economic integration and context-specific factors, not mere immigration status, as the better predictor of criminal involvement.
2. Government sources acknowledge data limits and promise more transparency
The Home Office and other UK agencies currently do not publish comprehensive, routinely accessible statistics comparing migrant and native crime rates, and multiple official notes point to quality issues in administrative systems that record foreign national offenders; the Home Office has publicly committed to improved recording and pledged more detailed reports on foreign national offenders and deportations by the end of 2025 [4] [5]. The Office for National Statistics redirects requests about migrant-specific crime to the Ministry of Justice and Home Office, underscoring institutional fragmentation in data responsibilities [6]. The government’s plan to publish nationality-level league tables and deportation statistics aims to increase transparency but raises methodological concerns about denominator choice and comparability that will matter for interpretation [7] [4].
3. Advocacy and campaign reports present countervailing figures that need careful scrutiny
Non-government reports, such as the Centre for Migration Control’s 2025 report, state that foreign nationals were arrested at nearly double the rate of native-born citizens and at 3.5 times the rate for sexual offences in a 10-month window of 2024; these alarming figures come from advocacy-oriented analysis that relies on administrative arrest counts and may not adjust for population denominators, residency status, or policing patterns [3]. Such reports can influence public debate by foregrounding absolute arrest counts or select offence types, but without standardized metrics and transparent methods the figures risk overstating differences or reflecting enforcement focus rather than underlying offending rates. The existence of these reports explains political pressure for league tables and more granular Home Office outputs [7] [3].
4. Methodological pitfalls make direct comparisons hazardous without new data
Comparing crime rates between migrants and native-born citizens requires consistent denominators, clear definitions of 'migrant' and 'foreign national', and adjustment for age, gender, socioeconomic status, and policing intensity; current sources explicitly note deficiencies in administrative systems and gaps in public data that prevent confident assertions about post-Brexit trends [4] [6]. Existing academic studies mitigate these issues using econometric controls and find little effect, while recent advocacy claims often use raw arrest or administrative counts that can be biased by enforcement priorities or the composition of temporary resident populations [1] [3]. The Home Office’s forthcoming releases could resolve some measurement issues but will need methodological transparency to be definitive.
5. What to watch next: new Home Office outputs and independent scrutiny
The near-term evidence landscape will shift when the Home Office publishes more detailed statistics on foreign national offenders, deportations, and returns as promised by the end of 2025; these datasets will be decisive only if accompanied by clear methodology, population denominators, and independent peer review [4]. Meanwhile, the contrast between peer-reviewed academic findings (no clear causal link) and advocacy statistics (higher arrest rates for some foreign nationals) highlights why independent researchers, statisticians, and journalists must scrutinize the forthcoming data for selection bias or policy-driven reporting choices [1] [3] [7]. Until then, definitive claims that migrant crime rates have risen significantly relative to native-born citizens since Brexit remain unsupported by the best current academic evidence and constrained by official data gaps [2] [4].