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.
Which organizations published estimates on immigrant tax contributions (e.g., IRS, Pew Research Center, Center for Migration Studies)?
Executive summary
Multiple organizations — including the IRS, Pew Research Center, the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), the American Immigration Council, and academic or policy groups such as the Center for Migration Studies and Manhattan Institute — have published estimates or analyses about immigrants’ tax contributions and fiscal impacts (examples: ITEP’s $96.7B estimate for undocumented immigrants in 2022 and IRS data products used for migration/tax analysis) [1] [2]. Coverage is contested: advocacy groups highlight large tax contributions by immigrants [3] [4], while critics and some think tanks dispute specific estimates and methods [5] [6].
1. Who issues the headline numbers: government data versus independent analysts
The Internal Revenue Service supplies primary tax data that underpins many estimates — e.g., SOI migration tables and downloadable tax-statistics products used to measure filings and withholdings [2] [7] [8]. Independent research groups then use IRS, Census, and survey inputs to produce totals attributed to immigrant or undocumented populations; the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) is the clearest recent example, estimating undocumented immigrants paid $96.7 billion in federal, state and local taxes in 2022 [1] [9].
2. Research intermediaries and policy centers that commonly appear
Pew Research Center and the Center for Migration Studies (CMS) are frequently cited for population and labor-force baselines that feed tax calculations: Pew provides counts and demographic breakdowns of unauthorized immigrants used by analysts [10] [11], while CMS has historically produced population estimates and related migration context that other researchers reference [12] [13].
3. Advocacy organizations that produce or publicize estimates
Immigrant-advocacy groups such as the American Immigration Council and the National Immigration Forum run analyses and “Map the Impact” tools to show taxes and spending power attributable to immigrants, and publicize ITEP-style findings [3] [4] [14]. They use those figures to argue that policy changes (e.g., IRS–DHS data sharing) could reduce compliance and thus tax revenue [15] [14].
4. Academic and policy think tanks with alternative methodologies
Think tanks and academic groups publish alternative fiscal-impact studies. The Manhattan Institute produced a 2025 update modeling fiscal and tax impacts by immigrant cohorts and policy scenarios [6]. Other academic outlets and textbooks synthesize methodological approaches to the fiscal impact of immigration and stress the sensitivity of results to assumptions about wages, remittances, and program usage [16].
5. Critics and challengers: methodology and political framing
Some organizations challenge headline estimates. For example, FAIR criticized ITEP’s $97 billion-type claims, arguing the report overestimates incomes and undercounts population uncertainty [5]. The Center for Immigration Studies has published work contesting conventional interpretations of immigrant fiscal impacts, but has itself been criticized by scholars and fact-checkers for methodology and partisan framing [17] [18].
6. Common sources of disagreement in the numbers
Disputes center on inputs and assumptions: how many undocumented immigrants exist, which incomes are taxable, rates of tax filing (including ITIN filings), remittance flows, and whether to count payroll withholding like Social Security (even when beneficiaries cannot claim benefits) [1] [19] [11]. ITEP specifically notes adjustments for remittances and compliance rates; critics say those adjustments can tilt results [1] [20].
7. How recent policy changes complicate estimates and incentives
News reporting and advocacy raising alarm about IRS–DHS data-sharing arrangements argue those policies could reduce tax filing among undocumented immigrants and therefore lower revenues — a claim tied to behavioral responses rather than the arithmetic of past collections [15] [21] [14]. Whether and how much compliance would fall is debated and not resolved in the cited material [15] [21].
8. What to watch for when evaluating these estimates
Look for the underlying data source (IRS SOI, Census, CPS), the population denominator (how many undocumented immigrants), treatment of remittances and nonfilers, and whether the study separates federal from state/local taxes [2] [1] [19]. Also note who funds or publishes the work: advocacy groups and ideological think tanks often produce sharply different narratives around similar numeric inputs [4] [17] [5].
Limitations and gaps: available sources in this set document who publishes estimates and the major headline figures and disputes, but they do not provide a single reconciled estimate or an exhaustive methodological audit of every study; readers should consult the primary reports (IRS SOI pages, ITEP full report, Pew and CMS demographic analyses, and competing think-tank reports) for line-by-line methods [2] [1] [10] [12].