Immigrants have made a higher fiscal contribution than Irish-born residents over the past two decades, according to a new report from the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
An analysis of existing studies found that while migrants typically have a small but positive impact on public finances, research “consistently finds that immigrants in Ireland have more positive fiscal impacts than natives, even during the downturn”.
Some research reviewed by the ESRI noted that during the crash, when the fiscal impact of both groups was negative, Irish-born residents’ negative impact was “much more so than migrants”, according to a new report published on Wednesday.
“This indicates that migrants entirely finance their own share of public goods, while also contributing to financing pure public goods which the state would need to pay for regardless of the presence of migrants in the country,” the report notes.
READ MORE
While fiscal impact varied by subgroup, with work-related migration generally having the most positive fiscal impact, foreign-born residents have made a higher fiscal contribution than Irish-born on average over the past 20 years, the ESRI concluded.
The State think tank reviewed several studies on the topic, including those by the OECD and the Joint Research Centre. The review focused solely on the impact of migrants on public finances, rather than their impact on the economy.
The report notes that migrants in Ireland are younger and more likely to be employed than the non-migrant population, contributing to their positive impact on public finances.
Non-EU migrants in Ireland in particular were found to have “very high employment” and third-level education rates.
In “many” other EU countries, the report notes, the opposite is true, where non-EU migrants have a lower fiscal impact than non-migrants.
Most estimates of the fiscal impact of migration vary from between -1 per cent and +2 per cent of GDP.
However, in the Irish case, the fiscal impact of migration is “consistently” found to be positive.
Welfare
A separate study by the ESRI, also published on Wednesday, found “no general pattern” of immigrants being more likely to be in receipt of welfare payments than Irish-born residents.
Noting that the debate on immigration has “intensified” in recent years, the ESRI said the analysis’s objective was to explore “one dimension” of the debate.
That was whether immigrants were more or less likely to receive welfare payments compared to native-born Irish.
It used data from the Central Statistics Office collated from 2014 to 2024, focusing on the receipt of unemployment, sickness/disability, and family/children-related welfare payments.
The picture that emerged from the analysis was “complex”, the ESRI said, adding: “There is no single answer as to whether rates of welfare receipt are higher among immigrants.”
It noted that a “significant limitation” of the study related to the omission of international protection applicants.
However, some findings included that 61 per cent of immigrants received at least one welfare payment in 2024, compared to 56 per cent of the Irish-born population.
When looking at specific payments, it found no difference between immigrants and the native-born in receipt of unemployment-related payments, with 9 per cent of both groups receiving such payments.
The rate of immigrants in receipt of disability-related payments (4 per cent), meanwhile, was lower than that for Irish natives (6 per cent).
A “more complicated picture” emerged when immigrants were separated by global regions of birth.
For example, the rate of receipt of unemployment-related payments from 2014 to 2024 for the Irish-born population was 16 per cent.
This compared to a lower rate for immigrants from western Europe (13 per cent) and Asia (12 per cent).
The rate was higher among immigrants from eastern Europe and Africa, both at 21 per cent.
Both studies were funded by the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration.
