Texas paid 8.88 billion per year and california paid 22 billion per year to support illegal aliens
Executive summary
Available reporting shows widely different state estimates and third‑party studies for the fiscal cost of undocumented immigrants: several sources place California’s cost around $21.7–$22 billion per year and Texas’ cost between roughly $850 million and about $9–10 billion depending on the methodology and year cited [1] [2] [3] [4]. These figures come from different organizations (state finance offices, advocacy groups, nonprofits and media summaries) that use divergent definitions and accounting choices, so the headline numbers are not directly comparable [5] [6].
1. Headline numbers come from different studies and definitions
The $21.76–$22 billion figure for California appears in compilations such as World Population Review and FAIR‑citing reporting summarized by ABC3340 and Newsweek, which attribute multi‑billion dollar tallies to state spending on services, education and health care for undocumented immigrants [1] [2] [4]. Texas totals vary: Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office and state estimates have highlighted roughly $850–$855 million per year on selected services (education, uncompensated care, incarceration) while other secondary sources report Texas totals near $9–10 billion depending on broader net‑cost frameworks [3] [7] [4]. GAO archives and prior federal reviews warn that state estimates vary greatly because of differing scopes and methods [6] [5].
2. Methodology drives huge gaps — what’s counted and what’s omitted
State and advocacy estimates differ in whether they count only direct state/local expenditures (e.g., school and emergency Medicaid) or include indirect costs (criminal justice, long‑term public benefits), and whether they net out taxes and economic contributions. GAO work and other federal reviews note that estimates “vary considerably in the range of costs included and methodologies used,” and that some reports also estimate revenues that undocumented residents generate — which can offset costs [6] [5]. Many public figures therefore reflect selective baskets of programs rather than a universal fiscal truth [5].
3. California’s big number is driven largely by health care and education expansions
Recent California figures cited by the House Budget Committee and FAIR focus heavily on Medi‑Cal expansions and projected Medi‑Cal spending for undocumented adults, with state budget documents and watchdogs pointing to multi‑billion dollar impacts — for example, a projected $8.4 billion for Medi‑Cal coverage in a recent fiscal year [8] [9] [10]. Analyses by the state Legislative Analyst’s Office and others have previously modeled large cost increases when Medi‑Cal eligibility expands to undocumented adults, estimating nearly one million undocumented people might gain coverage under some proposals [11].
4. Texas figures come from more limited service tallies in some official estimates
Texas Attorney General releases and earlier media summaries emphasize specific lines: uncompensated care for public hospitals ($579–$717 million), costs to house criminal aliens ($152 million in one cited year), and education/labor‑related items — producing an $850–$900 million “minimum” annual cost figure in some state messaging [7] [3]. Other outlets that aggregate broader studies report higher Texas totals (around $9–10 billion) — underscoring that which programs and timeframes are included changes the headline dramatically [4].
5. Independent and partisan sources both contribute but with different aims
Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) and House Republican budget messaging highlight high costs to argue for tighter restrictions and federal reimbursement [2] [9] [10]. Media outlets like Newsweek and aggregators like World Population Review summarize available studies but do not standardize methodologies [4] [1]. GAO and historical federal reviews caution readers that state‑level estimates have “varying methodologies” and that the federal government absorbs many costs and benefits — complicating simple state‑by‑state claims [6] [5].
6. What current reporting does not say — and what remains uncertain
Available sources do not present a single, reconciled nationwide accounting that uniformly counts identical program scopes and offsets [6] [5]. They do not resolve how to net tax revenues generated by undocumented workers against public service costs in a way that every study accepts [5]. Nor do the provided sources state that any single cited number (e.g., “Texas pays $8.88 billion”) is an agreed‑upon official all‑in annual cost under a common methodology — that exact figure is not found in current reporting [1] [4] [3].
7. Bottom line for readers
Numbers such as “California $22B; Texas $8.88B” can be supported by particular studies or summaries, but they reflect differing scopes, years and policy choices. To judge fiscal impacts responsibly, compare apples‑to‑apples: identify the year, programs counted (education, health, criminal justice, local services), whether revenues and federal funding are netted, and who produced the estimate (state office, advocacy group, GAO) — because the sources themselves explicitly warn that methodology shapes the total [5] [6].