About Me

My photo
Beverly Hills, California, United States
Eli Kantor is a labor, employment and immigration law attorney. He has been practicing labor, employment and immigration law for more than 36 years. He has been featured in articles about labor, employment and immigration law in the L.A. Times, Business Week.com and Daily Variety. He is a regular columnist for the Daily Journal. Telephone (310)274-8216; eli@elikantorlaw.com. For more information, visit beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com and and beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com

Translate

Tuesday, August 18, 2015

Donald Trump's imaginary immigration haul

Politico
By Danny Vinik
August 17, 2015

Donald Trump’s immigration plan has a number of basic features: He wants to triple the number of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, create a nationwide e-verify system and build a wall across the U.S.-Mexico border.

But the billionaire businessman turned Republican presidential frontrunner also includes an idea rarely, if ever, discussed on the national stage: a vague proposal to “impound” the remittances of undocumented immigrants. Mexico, he writes, “relies heavily on the billions of dollars in remittances sent from illegal immigrants in the United States back to Mexico ($22 billion in 2013 alone).”

If a Trump Administration “impounded” that money, it could gain significant leverage in its efforts to get Mexico to play ball with its other schemes, like building the wall.

Except he’s getting that number wrong. In 2013, Mexican immigrants—both legal and illegal—sent $22 billion back to their home country. Considering that around half of Mexican immigrants are here legally and that legal immigrants earn more money than undocumented ones, it’s likely that a large percentage of that $22 billion is derived from legal wages, not illegal ones.

So far less money is available than Trump is claiming—meaning he’d have less leverage for his plan.

Perhaps more importantly, immigration experts aren’t sure how his idea could actually work—or even what exactly “impounding” means. Trump doesn’t have any specifics on how he intends to “impound remittances payments derived from illegal wages.” In fact, those eight words are the only explanation of the proposal. His campaign did not return a request for comment asking for more details.

Reached for comment, immigration specialists weren’t really able to clear things up. “Nothing like this has ever been proposed by any serious presidential candidate,” said David Leopold, an immigration lawyer in Cleveland.

“I’ve never heard of impounding them,” Daniel Costa, an immigration expert at the Economic Policy Institute, wrote in an email. He added, “You’d probably have to pass a law requiring the person to prove that they were a citizen or otherwise in a lawful immigration status, and if they couldn’t prove it, then they probably wouldn’t hand over the money in the first place. Otherwise how would you know what to impound?”

If by “impound” Trump means “tax,” then his plan may be technically feasible, depending on how it’s structured. The government could pass a law requiring any person sending money to Mexico to prove their immigration status; those who didn’t prove they were in the U.S. legally would have to pay a tax. But that plan faces multiple issues. “[It] turn Western Union cashiers into de facto immigration officials,” Costa noted.

Beyond that, it might not even be legal. Leopold suggested it would be susceptible to an equal protections challenge. “Why for example would wages earned from Canadian or European nationals not be subject to the same treatment?” he said. “Why are wages earned by undocumented [immigrants] subject to specific targeting?”

Trump could also follow Oklahoma’s lead and withhold a percentage of all remittances—Oklahoma’s tax is 1 percent—and then give it back as a tax refund to those who file a state income tax. This targets those who earn income but don’t pay a state income tax—mostly undocumented immigrants. “I don’t see why you couldn’t pass a law like this at the federal level too,” Costa wrote. Still, this scheme isn’t foolproof. Many undocumented immigrants pay taxes with a TaxID number, allowing them to collect their refund.

If Trump did devise a workable tax plan, there are ways to circumvent it, especially for people who aren’t on the government’s radar to start with. Electronic currencies like Bitcoin can offer anonymous cash-transfers (and if that seems like a big technical obstacle, consider that immigrants have long been among the most sophisticated users of long-distance phone schemes). Or they would take the risk of using old fashioned snail mail. Either way, it’s hard to see how the plan would rack up the Trump-like pile of cash the candidate promises.

For more information, go to:  www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com

No comments: