The fiscal impact of EU immigration on the tax-financed welfare state: Testing the ‘welfare burden’ thesis

Abstract

The European Union’s rules on free movement of people and the right to cross-border welfare are increasingly contested and have evoked one of the most salient debates in EU politics. The assumption that EU immigrants pose a net ‘welfare burden’ on the host member state has sounded loud and wide in recent years. This calls for an empirical test. In this article, we examine the fiscal impact of EU immigration on the universalistic, tax-financed welfare state of Denmark. We analyse EU citizens’ contribution to and consumption of welfare benefits between 2002 and 2013 on the basis of a unique dataset of administrative data, consisting of repeated cross sections of 100% of the EU population residing in Denmark. We find that EU immigrants made a significant positive net contribution to the Danish welfare state over the long time span examined and thus reject the ‘welfare burden’ thesis for the crucial case of Denmark.

Keywords

European Union fiscal impact free movement of people ‘welfare burden’ thesis welfare state

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Chaloff J and Lemaitre G (2009) Managing highly-skilled labour migration – A comparative analysis of migration policies and challenges in OECD countries. OECD social, employment and migration working papers. (79) OECD Publishing, Paris.

Christensen

Malmstedt

(2000) Lex Loci Laboris versus Lex Loci Domicilii – An inquiry into the normative foundations of European Social Security Law. European Journal of Social Security 2(1): 69–111.

Cornelissen

(1996) The principle of territoriality and the community regulations on social security (Regulations 1408/71 and 574/72). Common Market Law Review 33(3): 439–471.

Cox

(2004) The path dependency of an idea: Why Scandinavian welfare states remain distinct. Social Policy & Administration 38(2): 204–219.

Dougan

(2013) The Bubble that Burst: Exploring the legitimacy of the case law on the free movement of union citizens. In: Adams

de Waele

Meeusen

et al. (eds) Judging Europes’s Judges. The Legitimacy of the Case Law of the European Court of Justice, Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 127–154.

Dustmann

Frattini

(2014) The fiscal effects of immigration to the UK. The Economic Journal 124(580): 593–643.

Dustmann

Frattini

Halls

(2010) Assessing the fiscal costs and benefits of A8 migration to the UK. Fiscal Studies 31(1): 1–41.

Esping-Andersen

(1990) The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Ferrera

(2005) The Boundaries of Welfare: European Integration and the New Spatial Politics of Social Protection, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

10.

Geddes

Hadj-Abdou

(2016) An unstable equilibrium: Freedom of movement and the welfare state in the European Union. In: Freeman

Mirilovic

(eds) Handbook on Migration and Social Policy, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, pp. 222–238.

11.

George

Bennett

(2005) Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences, London: The MIT Press.

12.

Gerring

(2007) Is there a (viable) crucial-case method? Comparative Political Studies 40(3): 231–253.

13.

Heindlmaier A and Blauberger M (2017) Enter at your own risk: Free movement of EU citizens in practice. West European Politics. Epub ahead of print 13 March 2017. DOI: 10.1080/01402382.2017.1294383.

14.

Hemerijck

(2013) Changing Welfare States, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

15.

Hjorth

(2016) Who benefits? Welfare Chauvinism and national stereotypes. European Union Politics 17(1): 3–24.

16.

Höpner

Schäfer

(2012) Embeddedness and regional integration: Waiting for Polanyi in a Hayekian setting. International Organization 66(03): 429–455.

17.

Jacobsen RH, Junge M and Skaksen JR (2011) Højtuddannede indvandreres bidrag til det danske samfund. Working paper. Available at: openarchive.cbs.dk (accessed 29 May 2017).

18.

Kvist

(2004) Does EU enlargement start a race to the bottom? Strategic interaction among EU member states in social policy. Journal of European Social Policy 14(3): 301–318.

19.

Lindbom

(2001) Dismantling the social democratic welfare model? Has the Swedish welfare state lost its defining characteristics? Scandinavian Political Studies 24(3): 171–193.

20.

Martinsen

(2005) The Europeanization of welfare the domestic impact of intra-European social security. Journal of Common Market Studies 43(5): 1027–1054.

21.

Martinsen

Vollaard

(2014) Implementing social Europe in times of crises: Re-established boundaries of welfare? West European Politics 37(4): 677–692.

22.

Reenen JV (2016) The aftermath of the Brexit Vote – The verdict from a derided expert. In: The LSE Politics and Policy blog. 2 August. Available at: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/the-aftermath-of-the-brexit-vote-a-verdict-from-those-of-those-experts-were-not-supposed-to-listen-to/ (accessed 29 May 2017).

23.

Ruhs

(2013) The Price of Rights: Regulating International Labor Migration, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

24.

Ruhs

(2015) Is unrestricted immigration compatible with inclusive welfare states? The (un) sustainability of EU exceptionalism. Oxford University Working Paper 125: 1–46.

25.

Ruist

(2014) Free immigration and welfare access: The Swedish experience. Fiscal Studies 35(1): 19–39.

26.

Scharpf

(2002) The European social model: Coping with the challenges of diversity. Journal of Common Market Studies 40(4): 645–670.

27.

Scharpf

(2010) The asymmetry of European integration, or why the EU cannot be a ‘social market economy’. Socio-Economic Review 8(2): 211–250.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.43 MB