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 many dollars annually do undocumented resident s cost the the federal government
Executive Summary
Undocumented residents do not show up as a single large net federal cost in available studies; instead, recent analyses highlight substantial tax contributions alongside limited federal spending lines tied to undocumented status. The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) estimated undocumented immigrants paid about $59.4 billion to the federal government in 2022, while emergency Medicaid and other narrowly defined federal outlays tied specifically to undocumented people are reported as very small shares of total federal/state programs [1] [2] [3]. Important distinctions — undocumented versus all immigrants, taxes paid versus benefits received, and federal versus state/local costs — drive divergent interpretations.
1. Tax contributions headline the debate — nearly $100 billion overall, $59.4 billion federal
Multiple analyses converge on a figure for total tax contributions: ITEP’s study places $96.7 billion in combined federal, state and local taxes paid by undocumented immigrants in 2022, with $59.4 billion attributed to federal receipts and $37.3 billion to state and local governments [1] [2]. News coverage reiterated the near-$100 billion aggregate and noted geographic tax burdens in many states [4]. These estimates are framed as tax contributions, not net fiscal impact, so they do not by themselves show whether undocumented residents cost or save federal dollars when spending is accounted for.
2. Emergency Medicaid is often cited — but it’s under 1% of Medicaid spending
Recent October 2025 analyses measuring emergency Medicaid obligations tied to undocumented immigrants report that such spending was about 0.4% of total Medicaid expenditures in 2022, equal to roughly $9.63 per resident on average, and rising to 0.9% in states with larger undocumented populations [3] [5] [6]. These studies emphasize that most Medicaid spending is unrelated to undocumented status, and emergency-only eligibility limits federal/state exposure. The figures suggest a narrow programmatic cost, not a broad federal fiscal burden, but they cover only emergency Medicaid and exclude other potential services and indirect fiscal effects.
3. Broader federal spending and benefits are complex and less directly attributable
Available pieces do not present a unified federal “cost” number that aggregates all categories — programs, enforcement, and localized services — attributable solely to undocumented residents. Studies cited focus on tax contributions or specific program lines like emergency Medicaid, while policy analyses of deportation scenarios focus on macroeconomic effects rather than a per-year federal price tag [7] [8]. The lack of a single consensus estimate reflects methodological challenges: who counts as undocumented, which programs to include, and how to value enforcement and long-term fiscal impacts.
4. Economic-counterfactual studies stress contributions and costs of enforcement
Analyses of mass deportation scenarios and policy shifts present a different angle: they quantify economic losses from removing immigrant labor and spending power rather than direct per-year federal costs of undocumented residents. Reports estimate large GDP and tax revenue declines from deportation policies and stress that immigrants (broader than the undocumented population) paid nearly $580 billion in taxes in some aggregated measures, framing immigrants as net economic contributors whose removal would impose wider fiscal damage [7] [8]. These studies illuminate opportunity costs and macroeconomic feedbacks omitted from narrow fiscal accounting.
5. What’s being left out — enforcement, localities, and indirect fiscal flows
Most summaries omit granular enforcement costs, local government spending on education and emergency services, and fiscal offsets like labor market effects and intergenerational tax contributions. The ITEP tax figures and emergency Medicaid shares provide clear, recent snapshots of two measurable areas (taxes and emergency health spending), but they do not capture enforcement budgets, state-local education costs, or dynamic economic effects documented in deportation studies [1] [3] [8]. These omissions create space for divergent policy narratives that emphasize either costs or contributions.
6. How to read competing figures — method matters and so do definitions
Differences between claims stem from definitions (undocumented vs. all immigrants), scope (federal vs. state/local), and included items (tax receipts vs. program outlays vs. enforcement). ITEP’s 2024–2025 work captures tax payments by undocumented individuals [1] [2], while October 2025 reporting isolates emergency Medicaid usage and finds small shares of overall spending [5]. Macroeconomic studies on deportation highlight much larger aggregate tax numbers for all immigrants and adverse economic impacts from enforcement policies [7] [8]. Each dataset is internally coherent but addresses different slices of the fiscal question.
7. Bottom line for policymakers and the public — evidence favors nuance, not a single dollar figure
Current evidence supports the conclusion that undocumented residents make substantial tax contributions at federal and state/local levels while generating relatively small, narrowly defined federal program costs such as emergency Medicaid as of 2022. Broader economic analyses show that harsh enforcement and deportation could reduce tax revenues and GDP, implying indirect fiscal harms from restrictive policies. To answer “how many dollars annually do undocumented residents cost the federal government” requires explicit decisions about scope, time frame, and included categories — choices that materially change the resulting number [1] [3] [8].