SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
A Health and Human Services report compiled this summer showed that refugees contributed more than $260 billion in taxes between 2005 and 2014. (Photo: World Relief Spokane/Flickr/cc)
Trump Administration Doesn't Want to Hear About Benefits of Welcoming Refugees
The White House rejected a report showing that refugees create more goverment revenue than resettlement programs cost
Sep 19, 2017
At the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday, President Donald Trump pushed back against the United Nations' appeals to resettle refugees displaced by the civil war in Syria and other conflicts, saying in his speech, "For the cost of settling one refugee in the U.S., we could support ten in their home country." But according to a New York Times report, the White House suppressed research demonstrating that refugees contribute more to government revenues than they cost.
A report by the Health and Human Services Department, requested by the Trump administration in March, showed that refugees "contributed an estimated $269.1 billion in revenues to all levels of government" between 2005 and 2014, by paying federal, state, and local taxes --about $63 billion more than government agencies spent on services for those refugees.
The research negates the Trump administration's repeated claim that allowing refugees from Syria and other countries would cause a drain on the U.S. economy, used to bolster its argument for capping the number of refugees allowing in the U.S. at 40,000 to 50,000, or even lower.
According to the Times, the White House rejected the findings when they were submitted earlier this month. Senior policy advisor Stephen Miller, who along with former Trump strategist Steve Bannon has pushed the administration's anti-immigration agenda, apparently "requested a meeting to discuss the report" after it was sent to the White House and "personally intervened in the discussions on the refugee cap to ensure that only the costs--not any fiscal benefit--of the program were considered."
The White House claimed that the draft had been produced by "someone with an ideological agenda," and later accepted a final report that included information only about the costs associated with resettling refugees.
Other reports have shown the economic benefits associated with welcoming refugees into the country and allowing them to contribute the the economy as well. The nonprofit National Bureau of Economic Research said in a report in June that "refugees pay $21,000 more in taxes than they receive in benefits over their first 20 years in the U.S."
On social media, Trump critics denounced the White House's rejection of the data presented in its own study.
\u201cIt shouldn't matter how much revenue refugees bring to US. But WH hid study showing they added $63 billion in 10 yrs https://t.co/IbesSwPdKp\u201d— Alex Kotch (@Alex Kotch) 1505836517
\u201cWhy deal w/actual facts when it is easier to hide them? White House rejects study showing refugees bring in revenue https://t.co/2Ia2KffWFm\u201d— Amy Klobuchar (@Amy Klobuchar) 1505821589
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
At the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday, President Donald Trump pushed back against the United Nations' appeals to resettle refugees displaced by the civil war in Syria and other conflicts, saying in his speech, "For the cost of settling one refugee in the U.S., we could support ten in their home country." But according to a New York Times report, the White House suppressed research demonstrating that refugees contribute more to government revenues than they cost.
A report by the Health and Human Services Department, requested by the Trump administration in March, showed that refugees "contributed an estimated $269.1 billion in revenues to all levels of government" between 2005 and 2014, by paying federal, state, and local taxes --about $63 billion more than government agencies spent on services for those refugees.
The research negates the Trump administration's repeated claim that allowing refugees from Syria and other countries would cause a drain on the U.S. economy, used to bolster its argument for capping the number of refugees allowing in the U.S. at 40,000 to 50,000, or even lower.
According to the Times, the White House rejected the findings when they were submitted earlier this month. Senior policy advisor Stephen Miller, who along with former Trump strategist Steve Bannon has pushed the administration's anti-immigration agenda, apparently "requested a meeting to discuss the report" after it was sent to the White House and "personally intervened in the discussions on the refugee cap to ensure that only the costs--not any fiscal benefit--of the program were considered."
The White House claimed that the draft had been produced by "someone with an ideological agenda," and later accepted a final report that included information only about the costs associated with resettling refugees.
Other reports have shown the economic benefits associated with welcoming refugees into the country and allowing them to contribute the the economy as well. The nonprofit National Bureau of Economic Research said in a report in June that "refugees pay $21,000 more in taxes than they receive in benefits over their first 20 years in the U.S."
On social media, Trump critics denounced the White House's rejection of the data presented in its own study.
\u201cIt shouldn't matter how much revenue refugees bring to US. But WH hid study showing they added $63 billion in 10 yrs https://t.co/IbesSwPdKp\u201d— Alex Kotch (@Alex Kotch) 1505836517
\u201cWhy deal w/actual facts when it is easier to hide them? White House rejects study showing refugees bring in revenue https://t.co/2Ia2KffWFm\u201d— Amy Klobuchar (@Amy Klobuchar) 1505821589
At the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday, President Donald Trump pushed back against the United Nations' appeals to resettle refugees displaced by the civil war in Syria and other conflicts, saying in his speech, "For the cost of settling one refugee in the U.S., we could support ten in their home country." But according to a New York Times report, the White House suppressed research demonstrating that refugees contribute more to government revenues than they cost.
A report by the Health and Human Services Department, requested by the Trump administration in March, showed that refugees "contributed an estimated $269.1 billion in revenues to all levels of government" between 2005 and 2014, by paying federal, state, and local taxes --about $63 billion more than government agencies spent on services for those refugees.
The research negates the Trump administration's repeated claim that allowing refugees from Syria and other countries would cause a drain on the U.S. economy, used to bolster its argument for capping the number of refugees allowing in the U.S. at 40,000 to 50,000, or even lower.
According to the Times, the White House rejected the findings when they were submitted earlier this month. Senior policy advisor Stephen Miller, who along with former Trump strategist Steve Bannon has pushed the administration's anti-immigration agenda, apparently "requested a meeting to discuss the report" after it was sent to the White House and "personally intervened in the discussions on the refugee cap to ensure that only the costs--not any fiscal benefit--of the program were considered."
The White House claimed that the draft had been produced by "someone with an ideological agenda," and later accepted a final report that included information only about the costs associated with resettling refugees.
Other reports have shown the economic benefits associated with welcoming refugees into the country and allowing them to contribute the the economy as well. The nonprofit National Bureau of Economic Research said in a report in June that "refugees pay $21,000 more in taxes than they receive in benefits over their first 20 years in the U.S."
On social media, Trump critics denounced the White House's rejection of the data presented in its own study.
\u201cIt shouldn't matter how much revenue refugees bring to US. But WH hid study showing they added $63 billion in 10 yrs https://t.co/IbesSwPdKp\u201d— Alex Kotch (@Alex Kotch) 1505836517
\u201cWhy deal w/actual facts when it is easier to hide them? White House rejects study showing refugees bring in revenue https://t.co/2Ia2KffWFm\u201d— Amy Klobuchar (@Amy Klobuchar) 1505821589
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.