|Printable version||E-mail this to a friend|
NIESR: Lower output and higher taxes - the impact of reducing immigration
New research published recently by NIESR shows that significant reductions in immigration should the UK leave the EU would lead, in the long run, to lower GDP per capita; this in turn would necessitate higher taxes. However, although the impact is significant it is not quantitatively large and would take a considerable time to materialise.
The model used in this research brings together labour market, fiscal and other macroeconomic effects into one framework. It also adds a dynamic perspective, differentiates between natives and different categories of immigrants and captures compositional effects resulting from immigrants’ different age and qualification profiles. These features make this research the most comprehensive analysis of the long-term impacts of immigration on the UK economy to date.
The paper compares “Leave” and “Remain” scenarios for migration to the UK after the referendum, and assesses their macroeconomic impacts. “Leave” assumes that net migration from the EU countries will decline by two thirds compared to “Remain”. By 2065, in the Leave scenario, aggregate GDP and GDP per person are 9% and 1% lower respectively compared to the “Remain” scenario. Reduced migration after leaving the EU has a significant negative impact on the public finances, primarily because of a higher dependency ratio, which is the fraction of young and old people of the total population. Accordingly government spending rises as a share of GDP by 1.1 percentage points in 2065, requiring an increase in taxation of about £400 per person (2014 pounds). As a result, post-tax wages are 2% lower in the Leave scenario.
Leaving the EU would have a rage of economic consequences for the UK. This paper only looks at the effects associated with the possible change in migration policy.
Katerina Lisenkova said: "Our research shows that lower migration has an overall negative effect on the UK economy. In general EU immigrants benefit the UK economy for two main reasons – they are on average much younger and are more highly qualified than the general population."
The research paper is entitled “The long-term macroeconomic effects of lower migration to the UK”.
For a full copy of this paper, please contact the NIESR Press Office:
Luca Pieri on 020 7654 1931 / firstname.lastname@example.org
To discuss the article, please contact:
- Katerina Lisenkova: email@example.com or 020 7654 1951
NIESR aims to promote, through quantitative and qualitative research, a deeper understanding of the interaction of economic and social forces that affect people's lives, and the ways in which policies can improve them.
Latest News from
Demos - Peer pressure means alcohol remains ‘social glue’ and ‘rite of passage’ for students and young workers22/09/2016 13:35:00
New Demos research finds that despite an overall declining trend in youth alcohol consumption, harmful drinking remains rife in both offices and campuses.
JRF - Inclusive Growth Commission: Economic growth must reach our small towns and cities22/09/2016 12:35:00
Responding to the RSA Inclusive Growth Commission interim report, Julia Unwin, chief executive of the independent Joseph Rowntree Foundation and a member of the Commission, said the UK must promote economic growth benefiting everyone:
Kings Fund - Clear and credible plan needed for digital health22/09/2016 11:35:00
Government ministers and NHS leaders should set out a definitive plan for expanding the use of digital technology in the health service, according to a new briefing published by The King’s Fund.
Policy Exchange - Government will miss its housing target unless Housing Associations are given more freedoms to build22/09/2016 10:35:00
Government will miss its housing target unless Housing Associations are given more freedoms to build
Civitas - The Real Sterling Crisis: Why the UK needs a policy to keep the exchange rate down20/09/2016 10:25:00
The fall in the value of sterling since the vote for Brexit has had commentators wringing their hands with concern. But why are so many so quick to assume that a cheaper pound is a bad thing?