Idaho’s Great Immigration Debate

Reconciling Economic Contributions with Fiscal Costs

An Analysis of Competing Data and Perspectives on Unauthorized Workers

The February 2026 release of an economic impact study by the Idaho Alliance for a Legal Workforce has reignited debates about unauthorized immigration’s role in Idaho’s economy. While the study projects devastating economic consequences if unauthorized workers are removed, critics argue it presents an incomplete picture that omits significant fiscal costs and relies on questionable population estimates. Examining the competing claims reveals a complex reality that defies simple narratives from either advocates or opponents of immigration enforcement.

The Industry Perspective: Economic Catastrophe Looms

The February 2026 study, commissioned by major Idaho agricultural and construction interests, paints an alarming picture. According to economists Steven Peterson and Timothy Nadreau, removing 28,725 unauthorized foreign-born workers would trigger economic losses comparable to the Great Recession. The projected impacts include a $5.1 billion decline in Idaho’s gross state product (4.6%), loss of 55,818 jobs statewide (4.7% of total employment), a $2.9 billion reduction in wages and benefits, and $397.8 million in lost state tax revenues.

Industry leaders emphasize these workers’ critical role in sectors where U.S.-born workers show limited interest. Rick Naerebout of the Idaho Dairymen’s Association notes that 90% of Idaho dairy jobs are filled by foreign-born workers, with regular labor shortages despite competitive wages. Steve Martinez of the Idaho Home Builders Association argues that border security and workforce stability need not be mutually exclusive concerns, while construction CEO Tommy Ahlquist opposes additional government mandates like E-Verify that would disrupt existing operations.

However, this industry-sponsored research raises immediate questions. The study is a press release, not peer-reviewed academic research, and provides no detailed methodology. More problematically, it conflates “foreign-born” and “unauthorized foreign-born” workers without clear definitions, omits any discussion of fiscal costs, and fails to explain why legal visa programs cannot fill these positions. Most tellingly, the 28,725 figure used in the study is substantially lower than other population estimates, suggesting potential methodological issues or selective framing.

The Population Puzzle: How Many Unauthorized Immigrants Live in Idaho?

Determining Idaho’s unauthorized immigrant population proves surprisingly difficult, with estimates varying by 40% or more depending on methodology and political perspective. The University of Idaho’s McClure Center estimated approximately 35,000 unauthorized immigrants in 2024, a number that has remained relatively stable since 2005 according to their analysis of Census Bureau data. Of these, approximately 30,000 (86%) are employed—significantly higher than the 74% national employment rate for unauthorized immigrants.

Yet the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), a conservative advocacy organization, uses different methodology that produces much higher national estimates. FAIR calculates 18.6 million unauthorized immigrants nationwide in 2025, up from 16.8 million in 2023—a 28.2% increase attributed to border policies during the Biden administration. FAIR’s approach gained credibility when the Census Bureau acknowledged in 2024 that it had been undercounting unauthorized immigrants by 40-100%+ during 2021-2024.

Applying FAIR’s national growth rate to Idaho’s baseline suggests approximately 45,000 unauthorized immigrants currently reside in Idaho. However, this may overstate the impact since Idaho represents only 0.55% of the U.S. population and international migration accounts for just 13.6% of Idaho’s recent population growth—far below border states. A reasonable compromise estimate places Idaho’s current unauthorized immigrant population at 40,000-50,000, with 34,000-43,000 in the workforce.

This higher estimate matters significantly for policy analysis. If Idaho actually has 45,000 unauthorized immigrants rather than 35,000, both the economic contributions and fiscal costs scale, accordingly, potentially altering cost-benefit calculations. The discrepancy also raises questions about the February 2026 study’s 28,725 figure—why is it lower than even the conservative University of Idaho estimate?

Tax Contributions: A Surprising Reality

Independent research from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy provides important context often missing from partisan debates. Unauthorized immigrants contributed $72 million in Idaho state and local taxes in 2022, plus an estimated $31.1 million in federal taxes through payroll withholding. Their effective state tax rate of 7.2% actually exceeds the 6.4% rate paid by Idaho’s wealthiest 1% of taxpayers—a counterintuitive finding that challenges stereotypes about unauthorized immigrants as tax avoiders.

These contributions come despite unauthorized immigrants’ ineligibility for most government benefits. They cannot access Medicaid, Medicare, SNAP food assistance, TANF welfare, Supplemental Security Income, or federal housing assistance. Idaho’s 2025 passage of House Bill 135 further restricted access to state-funded services including prenatal care, immunizations, communicable disease treatment, and crisis counseling—programs previously available to low-income residents regardless of immigration status.

University of Idaho research also challenges claims that unauthorized workers suppress wages for U.S.-born workers. Their February 2024 report concluded that unauthorized immigration “probably does not hurt salaries in Idaho” because businesses compete more intensely for workers than workers compete for jobs—a characteristic of tight labor markets. Research shows that across skill levels, immigrants and U.S.-born workers aren’t crowding each other out, partly because they often fill complementary rather than competing roles.

The Cost Side: What the Industry Study Omits

While unauthorized immigrants clearly contribute to Idaho’s economy and tax base, they also consume public services that create fiscal costs. The Idaho Freedom Foundation, a conservative policy organization, compiled data showing emergency medical services for unauthorized immigrants totaled over $19 million in Fiscal Year 2025 according to Idaho Department of Health and Welfare records. K-12 education represents an even larger expense at over $11,000 per student annually, funded primarily by state and local property taxes.

Using FAIR methodology, the Idaho Freedom Foundation estimates unauthorized immigrants account for approximately $60 million in state tax receipts but generate $303 million in costs, or $405 million when including services for their U.S.-born children. This net fiscal burden of $243-345 million annually encompasses education, emergency healthcare, law enforcement, incarceration, and government administration costs.

Critics argue FAIR’s methodology overstates costs by attributing the full cost of educating U.S. citizen children to their parents’ unauthorized status, double-counting some expenses, and ignoring long-term economic benefits of educating future workers and taxpayers. Nevertheless, even more conservative estimates suggest fiscal costs likely exceed direct tax contributions—a reality the February 2026 industry study completely ignores.

A More Complete Picture

Synthesizing these competing analyses reveals a nuanced reality. Unauthorized immigrants clearly make substantial economic contributions to Idaho through their labor, consumption, and tax payments. Their sudden mass removal would indeed trigger significant economic disruption, particularly in agriculture, construction, and food service sectors heavily dependent on this workforce. The February 2026 study’s projections of job losses and GDP decline, while possibly overstated, point to real economic vulnerabilities.

Simultaneously, unauthorized immigrants generate fiscal costs that appear to exceed their direct tax contributions. Education and emergency healthcare alone likely consume most or all of their $60-72 million in annual state tax payments, before accounting for other government services. These costs fall primarily on state and local taxpayers, creating legitimate concerns about fiscal sustainability.

What makes Idaho’s situation particularly complex is that unauthorized workers aren’t displacing U.S.-born workers or suppressing wages in tight labor markets. Instead, they’re filling positions that would otherwise remain vacant, enabling economic activity that wouldn’t occur in their absence. The 90% foreign-born composition of Idaho’s dairy workforce—despite regular labor shortages and competitive wages—demonstrates that legal alternatives have failed to provide sufficient workers.

The Path Forward

Idaho’s experience illustrates the national failure to create functional immigration policies that balance economic needs with rule of law. Industry groups correctly identify that state-level restrictions worsen conditions without addressing root causes, but their opposition to enforcement mechanisms like E-Verify while relying on unauthorized labor is equally unsustainable.

A comprehensive solution requires federal action to expand legal guest worker programs, provide earned legalization for long-term residents (particularly those here 16+ years), implement effective employment verification, and secure borders against future unauthorized immigration. Until Congress acts, Idaho will remain trapped between economic dependence on unauthorized labor and fiscal costs that burden taxpayers.

The competing estimates of 35,000 versus 40,000-50,000 unauthorized immigrants in Idaho matter less than acknowledging both their economic contributions and fiscal costs. Neither the industry study’s economic catastrophe scenario nor conservative groups’ fiscal burden calculations tell the complete story. Idaho needs honest accounting of both realities to develop sustainable policies—something the February 2026 study, despite its useful data on economic contributions, conspicuously fails to provide.

The immigration debate in Idaho, like nationally, suffers from advocacy groups presenting partial truths that advance their interests while ignoring inconvenient facts. Only by acknowledging the full complexity—economic contributions, fiscal costs, labor market realities, and policy failures—can Idaho and the nation move toward immigration policies that serve economic needs, protect taxpayers, and uphold the rule of law.

I urge everyone to click on this link and read Senator Brian Lenney’s dissertation titled, “Idaho Built an Ag Empire on Modern Day Slavery.”

The IALW did not do their homework. This is the heavy hand of big business trying to keep Idaho from instituting E-Verify. For more information on this contact bob@gemstatepatriot.com.

“We Get the Government We Deserve”.