Finance Ministries · Central Banks · OECD · Eurostat — Primary Sources Only
Net Fiscal Impact of Immigration
20-Country Official Data
Official estimates from national governments, central banks, and international organizations. Methodologies differ — direct comparisons require caution. Denmark −DKK 16bn/yr; USA +$900bn cumulative (CBO).
−DKK 16bn/yr
Denmark: net fiscal balance — all immigrants and descendants (Finance Ministry, 2023). Breakdown: Non-Western −DKK 27bn/yr; Western +DKK 11bn/yr
−€2.1bn/yr
Germany: net fiscal cost of 2015 refugee cohort (DIW/IAB)
+$900bn
USA: cumulative federal deficit reduction from immigration surge (CBO, 2024)
⚠️ Methodologies differ significantly: the Netherlands figure is a 1995–2019 cumulative lifetime present value; other figures are annual flows or specific-period cumulative totals. Direct comparison requires caution.
Fiscal Cost / Contribution: Country-by-Country Official Data
| Country | Estimated Cost / Contribution | Source Institution | Population Covered | Year / Period | Detail page |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Denmark | −DKK 16bn/year | Finance Ministry (Finansministeriet) | All immigrants & descendants (non-Western: −DKK 27bn; Western: +DKK 11bn) | 2019 data (revised Sep 2023) | |
| Sweden | +SEK 6bn/year (contribution, labour migrants only) | Konjunkturinstitutet (National Institute of Economic Research) | Labour migrants only (work permit holders). Total balance for all immigrant categories not officially published. | 2020 study (KI / Konjunkturinstitutet) | |
| Norway | −NOK 4.1m/person (Group R3) | SSB (Holmøy & Strøm, commissioned by Finance Ministry / NOU 2017:2) | Net present value cost per immigrant. R1 (Western Europe, North America, Australia): net fiscal contribution (negative cost) | 2015 additional immigrants, 2015–2100 projection | |
| Finland | No official data available | VATT (study in progress) | Research launched Feb 2025, results expected H1 2027 | Not yet published | |
| Germany | −€2.1bn/year (average) | DIW Berlin / IAB (commissioned by Federal Ministry of Labour BMAS) | 2015 refugee cohort, average through 2030. IW Köln estimate: −€2.8bn/year | 2017 study (2030 projection) | |
| Netherlands | Cumulative ~€400bn (1995–2019) | van de Beek et al. (using CBS microdata; partial Renaissance Instituut funding) | Lifetime fiscal present value. Asylum & family reunification: strongly negative. Labour & study immigration from Western countries: positive | 1995–2019 cumulative (2021 study) | |
| Belgium | +~€3bn (GDP +0.75%) | OECD (International Migration Outlook) | All immigrants. Separate NBB estimate: GDP +3.5% over 5 years | Reference year unspecified (OECD estimate) | |
| France | No official data available | — | No regular official accounting equivalent to Denmark's model. Legal restriction on ethnic origin statistics | — | |
| United Kingdom | Method-dependent (±) | CReAM (UCL) / OBR / Oxford Economics | EU migrants 2001–2011: +£22.1bn net (static). Non-EEA migrants: near neutral to slightly positive. OBR: immigrant arriving at 25 contributes +£341,000 over lifetime | 2014 / 2018 / 2025 studies | |
| Ireland | Net fiscal contribution (qualitative) | ESRI (commissioned by Dept. of Justice & Migration) | Over past 20 years, foreign-born residents contributed more on average than Irish-born (no aggregate euro figure) | June 2026 | |
| Austria | All migration forms combined: +€1.4bn (cumulative) Post-2015 asylum migrants: −€8.1bn | EcoAustria (commissioned by ÖIF) | All migration forms vs. post-2015 asylum sub-group. PuMA macro general equilibrium model | Cumulative through 2020 | |
| Italy | +€1.2bn/year | Fondazione Leone Moressa (independent research foundation) | Foreign national residents' taxes + social contributions minus social spending. 4.6m foreign taxpayers paid €10.1bn income tax (2023) | 2024 annual report | |
| Spain | +0.4 to +0.7 pp/year (per capita GDP) | Bank of Spain (Banco de España) | Direct contribution of foreign nationals to per capita GDP growth. Not a net fiscal balance — GDP growth attribution | 2022–2024 | |
| Portugal | 17.5% of social security revenue | AIMA (Agency for Integration, Migration and Asylum) | Immigrants' share of total social security contributions (~€2.2bn). Zero-immigration scenario: fiscal burden rises by ~2.8pp of GDP | 2024 | |
| Czechia | Ukraine TPS only: revenue CZK 8.2bn vs. expenditure CZK 3.9bn (quarterly) | Ministry of Labour (MPSV) model calculation | Partial estimate for Ukrainian temporary protection beneficiaries only. Not a full cost-benefit analysis | 2025 Q3 estimate | |
| Switzerland | No official data available | — | No confirmed OFS/SECO official per-immigrant net cost accounting. GDP and productivity impact analyses exist | — | |
| United States | Federal deficit reduction ~$900bn (cumulative) | CBO (Congressional Budget Office, non-partisan) | Effect of 2021–2026 immigration surge on federal finances (2024–2034 cumulative). Additional revenue: ~$1.2tr; mandatory spending increase: ~$177bn. Federal level only | July 2024 CBO report | |
| Canada | No official data available | — | No systematic official accounting equivalent to Denmark's model. Fraser Institute (private) estimate: ~CAD 6,051/immigrant/year net cost (methodology disputed by academics) | — | |
| Australia | Skilled migrants: largest positive net effect Humanitarian migrants: smallest positive net effect | Australian Treasury / Centre for Population | Lifetime fiscal impact of permanent migration program. By visa category: skilled > family > humanitarian. Age at arrival is primary determinant | December 2021 report | |
| New Zealand | No official data available | — | No confirmed aggregate fiscal cost/contribution study. Productivity Commission (2022): immigration has neutral impact on productivity | — |
What this data does not show
- Methodologies differ across countries — figures cannot be directly compared between nations.
- Net fiscal impact varies greatly by migrant profile (work, refugee, family) and length of stay.
- Fiscal cost is only one dimension of immigration's effects. Labour market, demographic, and cultural contributions are not captured here.
- Some countries have no official estimates, making comparisons partial.
Important Caveats for Comparison
- Static vs. dynamic accounting: Annual tax-minus-spending approaches (static) and lifetime present value approaches (dynamic) produce very different results. Denmark and Australia use dynamic/lifetime approaches.
- Population scope: Some countries cover all immigrants; others cover only specific cohorts (refugees, recent arrivals) or visa categories.
- Government level: The US CBO estimate is federal only and excludes state/local costs. Australia explicitly notes that fiscal benefits accrue federally while infrastructure costs fall on states.
- Commissioning body: Studies commissioned by government ministries, employer associations, and private foundations may differ in assumptions and emphasis. Funding sources are noted in each country page.