In America’s endless immigration debate, emotion often drowns out evidence. But what happens when you strip away politics and ask the simplest question of all: Do immigrants cost the U.S. money—or do they help pay the bills?

That’s the question Daniel Di Martino, Manhattan Institute fellow and Columbia University PhD candidate, set out to answer in his new report on the fiscal impact of immigration. He joined Breaking Battlegrounds hosts Chuck Warren and Sam Stone to unpack his findings—some of which might surprise even immigration policy veterans.

Following the Money: Who Pays More Than They Receive

Di Martino’s research examines how much immigrants from different countries contribute in taxes versus how much they receive in government benefits. His goal: to help policymakers understand whether certain immigration policies strengthen or strain the federal budget.

The standout finding?
Indian immigrants are by far the most fiscally positive group in America.

“They’re almost twice as beneficial to the budget as Chinese immigrants,” Di Martino explained. “And that gap surprised me.”

While Chinese immigrants also tend to have high education levels and strong work ethics, the data shows that the average Indian immigrant generates significantly higher fiscal value. The reason, Di Martino notes, lies not in the countries themselves—but in who comes to America and how.

Selection, Not Stereotypes

The difference between immigrant groups, Di Martino says, comes down to selection mechanisms.

  • Indian immigrants are overwhelmingly skilled professionals, many coming through H-1B visas sponsored by major companies. “You won’t find an Indian immigrant who’s a high school dropout,” he noted.

  • Chinese immigrants tend to arrive through family reunification, leading to an older and less workforce-oriented demographic on average.

  • Mexican and Central American immigrants, particularly from El Salvador, are more likely to arrive through chain migration or illegally, and fewer than 10% have college degrees.

The result? A fiscal gap that mirrors education levels and legal pathways:

  • Indians: ~70%+ hold college or graduate degrees.

  • Mexicans: Nearly half are high school dropouts.

“It’s just math,” Di Martino said plainly. “Earnings are low, welfare use is higher. Education explains almost all of it.”

Entrepreneurship and Impact

Host Sam Stone suggested that entrepreneurship could also explain part of the difference between Indian and Chinese immigrants. Di Martino agreed that culture matters—but said the bigger factor is how U.S. immigration policy filters who gets in.

“The average Indian in India is not more educated than the average Mexican,” he explained. “But the average Indian who immigrates to the U.S. absolutely is.”

That selection effect, Di Martino argues, is what turns immigration from a cost into a national asset.

Policy Takeaway

The lesson from Di Martino’s research isn’t anti-immigrant—it’s pro-smart immigration.
By favoring high-skilled immigration pathways and employment-based visas, the U.S. could dramatically increase the fiscal benefits of immigration while reducing long-term strain on public programs.

As Chuck Warren summed it up: “That’s the kind of data lawmakers should actually be debating.”

Transcript

Chuck Warren: All right, let’s get into the main event here. You have a piece that came out, we’re with Daniel Di Martino, he’s with the Manhattan Institute and he’s a PhD candidate of economics at Columbia. And you have released a report on the fiscal impact of immigration. Please tell our audience about what this report is and what surprised you.

Which there should always be when a researcher’s doing something, something that surprises them, what surprised you in your findings?

Daniel Di Martino: Yes. So essentially what I did is what is, how much taxes do immigrants of different characteristics pay versus government benefits they receive so that our immigrants are burdened or immigrants an asset to the rest of the country. That’s the question I sought to answer and provide a tool for legislators to evaluate different immigration policies. Is this going to increase the debt, decrease the debt, GDP, all that. And well, the thing that surprised me is that if you look at country of origin of immigrants.

Indian immigrants are by far the best. And I actually thought it would be kind of close between Indians and Chinese immigrants because the Chinese tend to be highly educated. You know, they’re similar work ethic and turns out that, you know, the average Indian immigrant is almost twice as beneficial to the budget as the average Chinese immigrants. And then the rest are very far away. The worst.

Sam Stone: Entrepreneurship.

Daniel Di Martino: Yeah, the worst immigrant group when it comes to fiscal impact, and there are very few groups by country that were negative, but the most negative one was people from El Salvador and then slightly less people from Mexico.

Chuck Warren: Really? Why do you think that is?

Daniel Di Martino: Just because they have very low levels of education you know only about ten percent of less or Mexican Americans or just Mexican immigrants in America have a college degree so that earnings are very low they receive a lot of welfare so it’s just a math. I think compared to Indians seventy percent of Indians have a college or graduate degree.

**Chuck Warren: **70 % of Indians who come to America have a college or graduate degree. Is that what you’re saying?

Daniel Di Martino: That is not the total population. Of the more recent Indian immigrants it’s even more than 70%.

Sam Stone: Wow.

Chuck Warren: You know what?

Daniel Di Martino: You will just not find an Indian immigrant who is a high school dropout. On the other hand, almost half of Mexican immigrants are high school dropouts.

Sam Stone: With the Indians, do you think the difference between them and the Chinese comes down to entrepreneurship? I would think that is, I mean, you’re talking about populations with similar levels of academic achievement, mathematics, learning, all those type of things, but one culture is highly entrepreneurial and the other is highly structured.

Daniel Di Martino: So I actually think that the differences have not even anything to do with the country they come from it’s all to do with that selection of the people from those countries that come to America the average Indian in India is much less educated in the average Indian in America you know only five to ten percent of Indians in India have college degree right it’s probably from picture it’s it’s like a Mexican here.

And that is because the Indians who come to America are sponsored by companies, usually through H1B visas, and they come with highly paid job offers. The Mexicans, a lot of them come here illegally, and the rest, almost all of them come because of chain migration, because they have a relative who was born here. The Chinese, the reason they don’t have as much of a positive economic impact is that they tend to be older than the Indians because there are more Chinese that come through family ties than employment relative to the Indians.

Chuck Warren: Interesting.

Listen to the full episode of Breaking Battlegrounds anywhere you stream your podcasts!