The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has issued a report titled “Welfare Use by Immigrants and the U.S.-Born, 2024: Comparing program use by foreign- and U.S.-born-headed households,” authored by Steven A. Camarota and Karen Zeigler.
This analysis uses data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2024 Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), which measures welfare receipts primarily in 2023. It focuses on means-tested anti-poverty programs (e.g., cash assistance like EITC and SSI, food programs like SNAP, school lunch/breakfast, WIC, Medicaid, and subsidized housing) and excludes non-means-tested social insurance programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
Findings
- Overall: 52.7 percent of households headed by immigrants (foreign-born, including naturalized citizens, legal residents, and illegal immigrants) used at least one major welfare program, compared with 37.3 percent of U.S.-born-headed households—a statistically significant gap of about 15 percentage points.
- Immigrant-headed households showed higher use in most categories: food programs (35 percent vs. 22 percent), Medicaid (39 percent vs. 27 percent), and EITC (15 percent vs. 10 percent).
- The report emphasizes that restrictions on new legal immigrants and illegal immigrants have limited impact because benefits often go to U.S.-born citizen children in these households, state programs sometimes fill gaps, and many immigrants qualify after time or naturalization.
Breakdown by Legal Status (Estimates)
- Legal immigrants (including naturalized): Around 51 percent use at least one program.
- Non-citizens (legal permanent residents/green card holders + illegal): 58.6 percent to 59 percent.
- Illegal immigrants (imputed/estimated): About 61 percent.
Illegal immigrant-headed households had particularly high use of Medicaid, food programs, EITC, and school meals, but lower use of SSI and housing.
Other Details
Gaps persist across subgroups: households with children (74.6 percent immigrant vs. 64.3 percent U.S.-born), working households, different education levels, and even higher-income groups.
- State-level examples (limited by sample size) show higher immigrant use in places such as California, New York, Florida, and Texas.
- Policy conclusion from authors: To reduce future welfare use, prioritize skills-based legal immigration and reduce illegal immigration.
This CIS report aligns with their prior analyses (e.g., similar 2022/2023 versions showed comparable patterns, like 54 percent immigrant vs. 39 percent U.S.-born).
For more, see the CIS website.