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.
What government services do undocumented immigrants use and how much do they cost?
Executive Summary
Undocumented immigrants in the United States use a limited set of government services—primarily K–12 public education, emergency medical care through Emergency Medicaid, shelter and related local services, and interactions with law enforcement and border security—while being broadly ineligible for most federal safety-net programs; estimates of the net fiscal cost to government vary from a low single-digit billion annual net cost to much larger figures depending on methodology and scope [1] [2] [3]. Analysts diverge because some studies count only direct budgetary outlays while others include non-budgetary costs (crowded classrooms, public services strain) and downstream fiscal effects, and different reports reach contrasting conclusions about whether undocumented immigrants are net recipients of government spending or net contributors via taxes and payroll contributions [1] [2] [3].
1. What services are actually used — a short inventory that matters for costs
Government services most consistently documented as used by undocumented immigrants include public primary and secondary education for U.S.-born children, emergency health care (including labor and delivery under Emergency Medicaid), local shelter and supportive services, and interactions with immigration enforcement and border security, with limited state-level programs sometimes adding coverage for certain populations [1] [2] [4]. Studies and reports confirm that undocumented immigrants are categorically ineligible for most federal programs like regular Medicaid, Medicare, and many income-support programs, thereby concentrating fiscal usage in areas that are either mandated (K–12 education) or legally compelled (emergency health care) and in local services that respond to immediate needs [2] [4]. The variation across states—some offering broader health or social supports—means usage and costs are geographically uneven, amplifying local fiscal pressures in high-immigration jurisdictions [1] [4].
2. How much do these services cost — numbers and why they diverge
Estimates diverge sharply: a Congressional Budget Office analysis focusing on state and local effects put a direct net cost of $9.2 billion in 2023, rising to $9.8 billion with broader effects while also noting undocumented immigrants paid about $10.1 billion in state and local taxes that year, emphasizing a nuanced net position [1]. Older and ideologically varied reports offer different magnitudes: the Heritage Foundation [5] estimated a much larger net fiscal burden per household and over lifetimes, while other analyses, including those tracking emergency Medicaid spending, show emergency health care spending by undocumented immigrants has been a small share of total Medicaid outlays [3] [2]. These gaps stem from methodological choices: whether to include education costs for U.S.-born children, whether to count long-term fiscal contributions like payroll taxes, whether to include non-budgetary social costs, and the point-in-time versus lifetime framing [3] [1] [2].
3. Conflicting narratives and who benefits from each framing
Scholarly and policy outlets use different frames to support divergent policy recommendations: some emphasize short-term fiscal burdens at state and local levels, focusing on education and local services to argue for stricter immigration controls or cost-shifting, while others stress taxpayer contributions and long-run net benefits—including payroll taxes, Medicare Trust Fund surpluses, and lower per-capita health expenditures among immigrants—to argue that undocumented immigrants are a fiscal asset overall [1] [2] [6]. Reports from think tanks and advocacy groups often reflect institutional priorities: fiscal-conservative analyses tend to emphasize per-household burdens and lifetime cost projections [3], while health-policy and immigration research highlights taxes paid and lower usage of routine health care to counter alarmist cost claims [2] [6]. Recognize these frames when interpreting headline cost estimates.
4. The biggest drivers of cost uncertainty — policy, demographics, and time horizon
Three factors drive most disagreement: policy changes (eligibility rules, state-level expansions or restrictions for health or social services), demographic composition (age structure, fertility leading to U.S.-born children eligible for benefits), and the time horizon used by analysts (annual budgetary impacts versus lifetime fiscal accounting), each of which can flip net-cost conclusions [1] [7] [4]. For example, including K–12 education costs for children born to undocumented parents increases near-term local expenditures, while including payroll taxes and long-term contributions to Social Security and Medicare can show net positive fiscal impacts over decades [1] [2] [7]. Pandemic-era and recent migration surges have altered flows and short-term service demands, further complicating comparisons across studies from different years [1] [6].
5. Bottom line for policymakers and the public — what to watch next
Policymakers should treat headline dollar totals cautiously and examine underlying assumptions: whether estimates are federal versus state/local, annual versus lifetime, and whether they count non-budgetary costs such as overcrowded schools. Current high-quality, recent federal analyses show modest direct net costs at state and local levels in the low billions for recent years, with substantial tax contributions offsetting some outlays, but older and alternate-method studies can yield much higher lifetime burden figures [1] [2] [3]. The most informative next steps are transparent, comparable accounting across jurisdictions that separates direct budget impacts from broader societal costs and benefits, and updates reflecting post-2023 migration patterns and any new state policy changes [1] [7].