Remittances hit a new record high of $33 billion in 2018

US News & Politics Immigration
1

Published on Saturday, February 2, 2019

The fear of deportation fed by United States President Donald Trump’s hardline rhetoric on immigration and a strong U.S. labor market and economy drove remittances from Mexicans outside the country to an all-time high in 2018.

Mexicans working abroad, mainly in the United States, sent US $33.48 billion to Mexico last year, an increase of 10.5% over the 2017 figure, according to the Bank of México (Banxico).

The remittances were sent in 103.9 million separate transactions, a 6% increase on the 2017 figure, and each one was on average $322 compared to $309 the year before, Banxico data shows.

Almost 98% of remittances were sent by electronic means and just over 94% came from the United States.

The total dollar amount sent to Mexico made remittances the country’s second largest foreign currency earner after auto exports, which totaled around $142 billion.

Just seven states received half of all remittances sent.

Michoacán took in just under $3.4 billion followed by Jalisco, with almost $3.3 billion; Guanajuato, with just over $3 billion; México state, with $1.9 billion; Oaxaca, with $1.7 billion; Puebla, with $1.7 billion; and Guerrero, with $1.6 billion.

Financial analysts say that Trump’s tough stance on illegal immigration has encouraged Mexicans in the United States to send more money home.

The Mexican government estimates that around 12 million Mexicans live in the United States and about half that number are there illegally.

Analysts at the Mexican bank Banorte say they expect the flow of remittances from the United States to remain strong in 2019 because the fundamentals of the U.S. economy are strong.

However, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is predicting growth in that country will slow to 2.5% this year compared to 2.9% in 2018, which could slow the growth of remittances to below the double-digit spike seen in 2018.

But anti-immigration rhetoric is likely to continue to encourage remittances, Banorte said, provided that no measures are taken to limit them.

While a candidate for president, Trump threatened to cut off remittances to Mexico, proclaiming that such a move would pressure the Mexican government to cough up “a one-time payment of $5-$10 billion” for his border wall.

However, the United States government has never tried to put the plan into place and, according to a migration expert, it would likely backfire on the U.S. president.

1 Like
2

There needs to be at a minimum a very heavy tax put on those remittances and arguably we should find a way to cut them off completely unless they are going to US citizens and families of same abroad.

1 Like
3

What about people living in the US legally and sending money to family and relatives? Good luck on getting legislation passed that is going to penalize legal residents. Practically speaking There is no way to determine who the money is going to.

These days you dont even need to transfer money. Give someone a pre paid debit card. Load it up online and it can be spent anywhere in the world.

4

Key word, “illegally”. We already have a whole lot of laws designed specifically to penalize illegals living in the US so of course we can.

Every remittance has to have a destination and a named person receiving it.

5

You said

Please tell me what system can be implemented so that money transfers can be verified to be going to US citizens abroad?

I notice you also chose to ignore that there are easy ways around sending a money transfer.

Ultimately people could send cash through the mail. Risky i know and slow but just shows there are ways around everything.

6

That is actually pretty easy, such as Western Union and is the most common preferred method of remittances by illegals.

The problem is that the US has not reformed this system to which taxes are collected. A large portion of these remittances make up for a large percentage of the economies to which these payments are going to such as Mexico.

Most money transfers do require personal ID such as a drivers license and most also have a MTCN or ID stamp whenever a payment is transmitted.

That is true, very rare given the risks, but it could happen.

Here is the reason why illegal immigration is happening and why these payment remittances are important to many, as they are using these earnings to build houses for their families back home. Of course it does not make it right that they are in the country illegally, but also not paying taxes on the income that they are earning as well as taking advantage of taxpayer paid entitlements is something that is raising the ire of ordinary average American citizens.

7

But TWR talked about the recipient having to be a US citizen. There is no way to monitor that.

At the senders end the only way you could ensure they are US citizens would be for them to show their US passport. This type of legislation would never get passed.

I agree currently Moneygram and Western Union Are most popular for physical sends but digital transfers are becoming more popular and a quick google search showed that they are not the first choice for digital transfers.

Introducing a new across the board tax or fee on all physical and digital transfers originating in the US is feasible but again do we really think that type of legislation would ever get passed?

Our efforts are better spent at focusing on allowing those here illegally being given the opportunity to change the status to a legal one but remove a path to citizenship. By doing this you allow them to come in from the cold but removing any chance of citizenship then eliminates political parties pandering to that demographic.

Combine this with a new system of allowing migrant workers to easily and quickly get the visas they need and you go a long way to fixing the problem.

Illegal immigration will never be stamped out but it can be minimized and done so humanely and with compassion.

8

That is something that doesn’t need to be passed, because that falls in the purview and jurisdictions of the Treasury dept. They can without cause at anytime introduce a mechanism for Tax enforcement. The reason it’s not happening is probably because of the USMC deal as well as an agreement with those countries to contribute to immigration enforcement which has happened significantly reducing the flow of caravans trying to enter the US.

I disagree. You are basically trying to advocate rewarding those who willingly broke the law and that simply will not work, especially considering that there are people waiting who went through the system legally and it would not be fair to them. I say to those who want to work in the US is to go back to their country of origin then apply legally.

Also we need to have a merit based system where any immigrant that wants to come here needs to prove that they will be able to support themselves instead of taking advantage of public benefits! (This latter point is moot because today the public charge law goes into effect removing that loop hole for illegals.) Also there needs to be a system where any immigrant applying for a job, the employer first has to offer that job to an American legal citizen. Canada has a similar system and the US needs to adopt it too.

There is not going to be any kind of immigration reform until anchor babies and chain migration is abolished, removing any incentives for illegal aliens entering the country. The only way “Dreamers” will be given a path to citizenship, is if this issue is addressed. Furthermore, illegals wishing to stay will also have to reconcile the public money they have stolen at taxpayers expense as well as paying back taxes, and so far without any of these issues not included in a bipartisan deal then immigration reform will not get done.

Also I don’t buy the humane heart strings argument, the US is not the worlds welfare office to which we are suppose to take every soul in, it’s simply not a sustainable outcome no matter how idealistic this argument is presented by the bleeding hearts. People should stay in their own countries and work to improve their own problems with their own political systems. Most of these illegals are not refugees fleeing failed states and or war ravaged countries, they are for most part economic migrants coming to the US and taking jobs away from American citizens and therefore don’t qualify for asylum status. This latter point is a contributing factor in driving wages down and the economic impact has been quite noticeable across every state and is why immigration reform is on the minds of many Americans who support immigration reform to not only improve the economic periphery of the standard of living but to put an end to the entitlement abuses happening at the state level.

1 Like
9

Well leave it to the dummycrats to complete the transfer of wealth from middle class America to illegals and turd world 1st graders .

10

I recall watching a Muslim in full grab pull out $9700 from her purse to buy a money order to send back to her homeland , then 10 minutes later use her SNAP card to buy groceries . There is NO awareness of the blatant abuse , these turds know not to sent over $10,000 to avoid authorities . Sickening !!!

1 Like
11

Perhaps a better solution is deportation for illegals.

1 Like
12

Cash through the mail can be intercepted.

The whole point of the discussion is remittances sent home by illegals.

All electronic transfers are tracked already so tweaking security and citizenship requirements to work within the system would not be at all difficult.

One of the simplest solutions would be adding a requirement that the sender provide proof they are in the US legally and eligible to work legally.

1 Like
13

In other threads on other boards, I have been a strong advocate for beefing up our e-verify system, and requiring it for a plethora of activities. (Not just employment.)

In the future when I enumerate examples in a list of activities, I’ll surely add remittances.

I don’t know if we can insist the recipient be a US citizen (or other legal entity), but we sure as hell could require an e-verify approval of the sender for wire transfers.

1 Like
14

Wouldn’t be that difficult. Every recipient has to be named, provide address etc.

Setting up such a system just really poses no significant issues.