IMMIGRATION RESEARCH PAPER (FINAL)

Running head: The Economic Implications of Legalizing Citizenship to Immigrants in Queens,
NY
CHA/BUS 495 Academic Writing and Research 495
Conrad Brooks
Professor Genao
St. Joseph College

ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF IMMIGRATION
2
Table of Contents
Abstract………………………………………………………………………… 3
Chapter 1………………………………………………………………………...4
Introduction………………………………………………………………4
Chapter 2………………………………………………………………………...8
Literature Review………………………………………………………...8
Chapter 3………………………………………………………………………..14
Theoretical Framework…………………………………………………..14
Chapter 4………………………………………………………………………..16
Methodology……………………………………………………………..16
Chapter 5………………………………………………………………………...17
Findings/Discussion/Limitations………………………………………....17
Bibliography……………………………………………………………...20
Appendix………………………………………………………………….22
.

3
Abstract
Executive Summary
During recent years, the topic of immigration reform has once again resurfaced to the
forefront of most, if not all, political debates. To demonstrate, supporters of immigration reform
argue that immediate passage would increase U.S. revenue over the next ten years while
increasing U.S. competitiveness in global markets. In addition, research studies conducted by
Patrick Oakford and Robert Lynch (2013) suggest, “legal status and a road map to citizenship for
the unauthorized will bring about significant economic gains in terms of growth, earnings, tax
revenues, and jobs.” However, the opposition argues that immigration reform would only
encourage legalized amnesty and place additional socio-economic burdens on our government.
Hence, given the nature of its possible implications, finding a solution to this issue is paramount.
To understand the significance of immigration reform, one has to first acknowledge the
significance of its history to understand why it has to be reformed. Furthermore, this study
provides a historical perspective on immigration and its relativity to current immigration reform.
In addition, its purpose is to evaluate the economic advantages and disadvantages of legalizing
citizenship to immigrants in the U.S. with a specific focus on the borough of Queens. Queens is
the most culturally diverse county in the U.S. with a large immigrant population and hence, the
basis of its selection for empirical testing.
Therefore, controlling factors to estimate the economic impact that the acquisition of
legal status and citizenship has made on the nation’s economy is central to this project. This was
previously achieved through the use of Regression Analysis employed by the aforementioned
researchers, Lynch and Oakford (2013). However, the limitations of this study are centered on
certain variables omitted from previous empirical testing which could potentially exaggerate
some key findings. In addition, the mixed results from prior studies suggest that we have much
to learn about the economic implications of legalizing citizenship to immigrants. Therefore, a
more concise method of extrapolation and interpretation of quantitative data from immigration
census databases is key.
Furthermore, in conjunction with the empirical tests conducted in prior research, I expect
to find similar results in my own research efforts through quantitative analysis to further expound
on what has already been stated and perhaps, add to it.
Keywords: Economic implications of immigration, immigration, immigration reform,

4
Introduction
To underscore the significance of immigration reform, one has to first acknowledge the
significance of its history to understand why it has to be reformed. The liberalization of
immigration policy reflected in President Lyndon B. Johnson’s 1965 legislation can be
understood as part of the evolutionary trend in federal policy after World War II to end legal
discrimination based on race and ethnicity (Center for Immigration Studies, 1995). Essentially,
the immigration bill was mainly seen as an extension of the civil rights movement (Center for
Immigration Studies, 1995). At that time, legal discrimination against any specific individual or
group of individuals was seen as unconstitutional. Prior to the liberalization, there were strict
limitations on an immigrant’s entry into the United States. Under the old system first instituted
in 1921, admission largely depended on an immigrant’s country of birth, family reunification and
needed skills (Center for Immigration Studies, 1995). Seventy percent of all immigrant slots
were allotted to natives of just 3 countries-the United Kingdom, Ireland, and Germany-and went
mostly unused, while there were long waiting lists for the small number of visas available to
those born in Italy, Greece, Poland, Portugal, and elsewhere in eastern and southern Europe
(Center for Immigration Studies, 1995). In any case, the new system virtually eliminated the
various national origins quota system putting people of all nations on an equal footing for
immigration to the U.S. (Center for Immigration Studies, 1995). Thus, this new legislation
created the foundation of current immigration law which as a result, commenced a new era of
mass immigration (Center for Immigration Studies, 1995). Furthermore, this new, augmented
immigration flow came from countries in Asia and Latin America ushering in millions of both
legal and illegal immigrants to the U.S.

5
The allure of Western culture had drawn multitudes of the undocumented from abroad,
each in their own pursuit of happiness, to experience the American Dream. Whatever the
catalyst was for their sudden transition into Western culture the reality of their new American
lifestyle sometimes proved harsh. One example was language alone.
For most, English was not their first language, so communication became a major
concern. Education was usually unaffordable for the undocumented so many tried to avoid its
high cost, leaving them to learn this overwhelmingly complex dialect on their own. In addition,
poverty also became an issue due to limited options to earn an income. Hence, when
opportunities for employment did arise, it was usually the most entry-level position available.
Companies illegally hired the undocumented all the time. They were usually subjugated to
unsafe work conditions and strenuous work hours for pennies on the dollar. In the business
world, the hiring of illegal immigrants was commonly used as a method of reducing labor costs.
While this method proves to be a lucrative approach for the company, where did it leave the
worker? Overworked and underpaid. Why shouldn’t these same workers be given the
opportunity to pursue their citizenship or at least a shot at temporary residency when the
economic merits of having them here are so rewarding?
Furthermore, the next paragraph will attempt to delineate the positive and negative
economic implications that immigration has had and will have on the U.S. economy through the
pathways of legalized citizenship.

6
Immigration can have either a negative or positive effect on a nation’s economy through
the pathways of legalized citizenship. It constitutes a substantial portion of our nation’s financial
resources both on a city and state level. Legalization of citizenship for immigrants can
potentially bridge the socioeconomic disparity between the lower and middleclass as suggested
by several economists. Moreover, if immigrants were granted a clearer pathway to citizenship,
the increase in their economic potential would subsequently trickle down into the economy.
According to research studies conducted by Robert Lynch and Patrick Oakford (2013),
legal status and a roadmap to citizenship for the unauthorized will bring about significant
economic gains in terms of growth, earnings, tax revenues, and jobs-all of which will not occur
in the absence of immigration reform. In addition, it also promotes investment in the education
and training of immigrants that eventually pays off in the form of higher wages and output while
granting access to a broader range of higher paying jobs (Lynch & Oakford, 2013). Generally
speaking, if an employee earns more, they are more likely to spend more and therefore, pay more
in taxes. As a result, this would become an economic incentive for the city of New York and
respectively, for the borough of Queens. Results have been confirmed through research studies
conducted by Pew Hispanic Center demographer, Jeffrey Passel and several other reputable
sources discussed in later chapters. Similarly, the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy
estimated that the income tax paid by unauthorized immigrants in 2010 amounted in billions of
revenue to state and local governments (Immigration Policy Center, 2011). In conjunction with
the findings of the aforementioned economists, Dr. Ray Perryman, President and CEO of the
Perryman Group, conducted a 2008 study that found illegal immigration was actually a boon to
the American economy (Center for Civic Policy, 2010). From the study, he estimated that illegal

7
immigrants add $245 billion in GDP to the economy and account for 2.8 million jobs (Center for
Civic Policy, 2010). Furthermore, his estimate along with other reputable economists serves as
an illustration of the potential benefits of the legalization of citizenship to immigrants in Queens,
N.Y.
Empirical tests of this proposition conducted by several economists named in the existing
literature have measured the long-term effects of legalizing citizenship to immigrants on the
economy in terms of its cumulative impact on the GDP.
However, although economists such as Lynch and Oakford (2013); Passel (2011) have
studied the economic impact of immigration extensively and achieved consensus on its effects,
there still remains a significant portion of others that refute their findings. The basis for their
opposition lies in the potential challenges the study faced when certain variables were excluded.
Nonetheless, their studies did in fact, use sufficient control measures to ascertain relevant data to
arrive at their conclusion, thereby, ruling out omitted variable bias.
Furthermore, the next chapter delineates how the legalization of citizenship for
immigrants would potentially affect New York’s economy on both a city and state level. I will
be focusing my research on New York, specifically, the borough of Queens.

8
Literature Review
Queens is the most culturally diverse county in New York with large populations of
immigrants. The borough of Queens consists primarily of East and Southern Asians, Carribean
and Hispanics (Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 2010). The total foreign-born population in
Queens, N.Y. in the year 2012 was estimated to be at 1,087,607. According to census bureau
data and city housing surveys, foreign-born households constitute increasingly large shares of
total households in the USA: at least 11% in the year 2000 (Myers, 2005). More recently, census
data obtained from Education Week editor Lesli A. Maxwell (2010) states that, of the 40 million
foreign-born residents of the U.S. last year, 17 percent were newly arrived, which means they
came between 2005-2010. As this data suggests, an increasingly large proportion of the U.S.
population are foreign-born residents. In addition, research conducted by Sarah Leiseca from the
PEW Charitable Trusts Organization confirmed that, foreign-born residents made up 13% of the
US population in 2010 (Pew Hispanic Center, 2010). That is a 2% increase from 2000.
Furthermore, the foreign-born population of the U.S. increased from 31.1 million in 2000 to 40
million in 2010 (Pew Hispanic Center, 2010). Her methodology was based on data from the Pew
Hispanic Center’s Statistical Portrait of the Foreign-Born Population in the US, 2010 (Pew
Hispanic Center, 2010).
However, these are only the households that the federal government can account for by
recorded legal immigration data. Moreover, there still remains an ever-growing increase in the
undocumented, especially in the Mexican-born population. Jeffrey Passel, a demographer with
the Pew Hispanic Center has extensively studied the issue and said, nationally 80 to 85% of all

9
Mexican immigration since 1980 was undocumented (Bernstein, 2005). This leaves only a
fraction of their total population accounted for. In addition, Passel also states that any place
that’s getting a lot of new immigration from Mexico, virtually all of it is undocumented, and that
certainly includes New York (Berenstein, 2005). Furthermore, a possible inference that could be
made is from this data is that our immigrant population, both legal and illegal, is here to stay and
their numbers are steadily rising. Hence, relative to our city’s economy, implementing a clearer
pathway towards citizenship for those undocumented living in the shadows in Queens would
have a significant long-term financial impact.
Studies conducted by Lynch and Oakford (2013), suggest that significant economic gains
are inevitable for Queens, New York with the legalization of citizenship for immigrants. One
study in particular estimated that, within 10 years from 2010, the taxes paid by undocumented
immigrants to the city of New York would be about $2,452,000,000 (Lynch & Oakford, 2013).
In addition, $109 billion would be paid in taxes to our federal government within the same time
frame (Lynch & Oakford, 2013). The study also demonstrated that, if the 11.1 million
undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States were provided legal status, then
the 10-year cumulative increase in the GDP of the US would be $832 billion (Lynch & Oakford,
2013). Their research concluded, Undocumented immigrants are currently earning far less than
their potential and therefore paying much less to the U.S. economy than they otherwise would
be. Overall, they are contributing significantly less to the U.S. economy than they potentially
could (Lynch & Oakford, 2010). Similarly, in 2010, the Institute for Taxation and Economic
Policy estimated that the income tax paid by unauthorized immigrants amounted in billions in
revenue to state and local governments (Immigration

10
Policy Center, 2011). Their methodology relied on three pieces of data: 1) an estimate of each
state’s unauthorized population; 2) the average family income for unauthorized
immigrants; and 3) state-specific tax payments. Collectively, unauthorized immigrants paid
$11.2 billion in state and local taxes in 2011 (Immigration Policy Center, 2011). That included
$1.2 billion in personal income taxes, $1.6 billion in property taxes, and $8.4 billion in sales
taxes (Immigration Policy Center, 2011). In conjunction with the findings of the economists
mentioned in the existing literature, Heidi Shierholz of the liberal Economic Policy Institute
found that, between 1994 and 2007, immigration had a small but positive impact on the relative
wages of Americans at all educational levels (Shierholz, 2010). She proceeds to state that
although immigrant workers add to the labor supply, they also consume goods and services,
creating more jobs (Shierholz, 2010). To clarify, immigrants are not only workers, but also
consumers. Whether in the form of food, clothing, or technology, a consumer will have more
purchasing power if their earning potential were to increase. Their earning potential will cause
them to spend more and, in turn, stimulate demand in the economy for more products and
services, which creates jobs and expands the economy (Lynch & Oakford, 2010). Furthermore,
the positive implications of legalizing citizenship to immigrants can be economically rewarding
both on a city and state level.
On the contrary, although there are many who support immigration reform and the
economic incentives attached to it, there still remains a significant portion of the nation that does
not. According to Christopher Muste, assistant professor of Political Science at the University of
Montana, public opinion about immigration levels, the impacts of recent immigrants, and
immigration policies demonstrated continued negativity and revealed a pattern of steep increases

11
in anti-immigrant sentiment in response to events such as the 1994 election and 9/11(Muste,
2013). The survey also illustrated that concerns about job competition and border enforcement
are still high (Muste, 2013). However, declines in anti-immigrant sentiment have followed over
several years since 2001, and has recently stabilized at lower levels (Muste, 2013). Still, there
remains a substantial portion of our population who do not support immigration. Public opinion
data was obtained by integrating trend data from ANES, GSS, Gallup, and Pew, and media
surveys from 1992 to 2012.
For instance, in 1995, the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform reported, it is not in
the national interest to admit unskilled workers because the U.S. economy is showing difficulty
in absorbing disadvantaged workers (Federation for American Immigration Reform, 2009). Their
report contained the following findings:
 In 2009, less than 6 percent of legal immigrants were admitted because they possessed skills
deemed essential to the U.S. economy.
 Studies that find minimal or no negative effects on native workers from low-skill
immigration are based upon flawed assumptions and skewed economic models, not upon
observations of actual labor market conditions.
 There is no such thing as an “immigrant job.” The reality is that immigrants and natives
compete for the same jobs and native workers are increasingly at a disadvantage because
employers have access to a steady supply of low-wage foreign workers.
 Low-skilled immigrants are more likely than their native-born counterparts to live in poverty,
lack health insurance, and to utilize welfare programs. Immigrants and their children made
up 32 percent of those in the United States without health insurance in

12
2009.
 Research done by the Center for American Progress has found that reducing the illegal alien
population in the United States by one-third would raise the income of unskilled workers by
$400 a year.
 Defenders of illegal immigration often tout the findings of the so-called Perryman Report to
argue that illegal aliens are responsible for job creation in the United States; yet, if one
accepts the Perryman findings as true, that would mean that only one job is created in the
United States for every three illegal workers in the workforce.
 It is true that if the illegal alien population decreased the overall number of jobs in the U.S.
would be reduced, but there would be many more jobs available to native workers — jobs
that paid higher wages and offered better working conditions.
The Commission’s report was based on the notion that immigration contributes to an
already-existing surplus of low-skilled workers, increasing job competition and driving down
wages and conditions to the detriment of American workers (Federation For American
Immigration Reform, 2009).
In conjunction with the findings of the U.S. Commission on Immigration, Steven A.
Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies, confirms that there is
significant research showing that immigration has reduced employment and wages for less-
educated natives (Camarota, S.A. & Zeigler, K., 2009). Similarly, a 2006 study conducted by
Andrew Sum and his colleagues at Northeastern University found that the arrival of new
immigrants (legal and illegal) in a state results in a decline in

13
employment among young native-born workers in that state (Center for Immigration Studies,
2009). Their findings indicate that young native-born workers are being displaced in the labor
market by the arrival of new immigrants (Center for Immigration Studies, 2009). Camarota’s
findings conclude that the overall impact of immigration is almost certainly very small
(Camarota, S.A. & Zeigler, K., 2009). In addition, immigration benefits the immigrants
themselves and not so much our labor market. Furthermore, the studies of Camarota, the U.S.
Commission on Immigration, Andrew Sum, and others refute the studies of Lynch & Oakford
and the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy.
Furthermore, I find the results from the research conducted inconclusive. However, there
are both positive and negative economic implications of legalizing citizenship to immigrants in
Queens, N.Y. The mixed results of this study suggest that we have much to learn about the
economic implications of legalizing citizenship to immigrants. Lastly, the next chapter will
delineate the theoretical framework which attempts to justify the main empirical specification
used in the existing literature.

14
Theoretical Framework
Theory of Regression Analysis
Controlling factors to estimate the economic impact that legal status and citizenship has
made on the nation’s economy through its authorized and unauthorized immigrant population is
central to this project. Therefore, the most influential theory associated with this process is the
theory of Regression Analysis as employed by Lynch and Oakford (2013). Regression analysis
is a statistical tool used for the investigation of relationships between two variables. Hence, the
two variables in this case being investigated are legalizing citizenship to immigrants and its
subsequent effect on the economy. Furthermore, through use of this method a positive
correlation is evident from the legalization of citizenship to immigrants and a cumulative
increase in the GDP as theorized by several economists (Lynch & Oakford, 2013; Shierholz
2010).
Control Factors
Lynch & Oakford’s (2013) use of Regression Analysis controlled for factors such as
education level; work experience; age; year of arrival in the United States; race/ethnicity; gender
differences; country of origin; state of residency; rural versus urban residence; and marital status
of naturalized and non-citizen immigrant population to estimate the effect that citizenship has on
earnings. Such factors are likely to be responsible for differences in the earnings of naturalized
immigrants (Lynch & Oakford 2013; Shierholz 2010). Hence, these differences would remain
even if all noncitizens acquired citizenship. Factors also taken into consideration were that

15
noncitizen immigrants are younger, less educated, and less advanced in their careers than
naturalized citizens.
Hypothesis
Furthermore, Lynch & Oakford’s (2013) use of regression analysis as a foundation in
finding a positive correlation between legalizing citizenship to immigrants and the economy lies
parallel with my own personal hypothesis. In my experiment, I will attempt to demonstrate the
correlation between legalizing citizenship to immigrants and its positive effect on the economy.
My hypothesis is that:
H1: If immigrants are granted legal status or full citizenship, then a cumulative increase in the
GDP will occur.
Lastly, the next chapter will delineate the methodology used to arrive at my conclusion.

16
Methods
The methodology of this research paper was based on a quantitative approach using data
retrieved from the U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce and the Pew Hispanic
Research Center. This data delineates statistical trends in our immigrant population and its
relative impact on the U.S. GDP. This method employs a comprehensive analysis of statistical
data rather than human observation. Moreover, analysis of certain key factors could not be
achieved through means of standard observation due to a limited time frame. Therefore, human
subjects were excluded from any empirical testing conducted within the scope of this study and a
more statistical approach was employed. Furthermore, selected data further expounds on key
variables that were used to establish the economic impact of legalizing citizenship to immigrants
in prior, current and future studies. The next chapter delineates the findings and limitations of
this study.

17
Findings/Limitations/Discussions
The results from each database were, in fact, consistent with suggested results from prior
empirical studies. Hence, the purpose of my research was thereby, to identify the correlation of
these trends and its subsequent impact on our economy, both on a state and national level.
Table 1 (See Appendix A), obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division,
provides positive affirmation that there are in fact, economic implications of providing
permanent legal status or citizenship to immigrants as stated in the prospective findings section
of this research paper. This correlation does not explain causation. However, considering the
technical and agricultural skills immigrants contribute to our labor market, a sizeable reduction
in the number of immigrants would mean, or equate to, a potential reduction in human capital
and a remarkable reduction in our labor force, which are major contributors to our economy.
The Census Bureau’s new projected forecast of 420.3 million in 2060 is below its
previous projection of 439 million for a decade earlier as delineated in Table 1. Moreover, by
the year 2050, the census bureau’s new projected population is 399.8 million in the year 2050.
This chart suggests a lower U.S. growth forecast mainly due to a significant reduction in
immigration and births.
Table 2 (See Appendix B), obtained from the Pew Hispanic Research Center Estimates
of the U.S. Unauthorized Immigrant Population, 2000-2009, suggests that in 2009 there was an
estimated 11.1 million unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. comparative to 11.6 in 2008 and
respectively, 12 million in 2007. This change in the population characterizes the downward shift
in the amount of immigrants entering the U.S. from 2007-2009.

18
Table 3 (See Appendix C), obtained from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of
Economic Analysis, clearly demonstrates that the real GDP decreased at an annual rate of 1.0 %
in the second quarter of 2009 after declining below 6% in the first quarter. 2008 shows a
downward trend in the GDP towards the end of the 4th quarter due to the recession while 2007
reflects the beginning of the decline shown at the end of the 4th quarter. The smaller decrease in
the real GDP reflected much smaller decreases in business investment, including inventory
investment, and in exports: an upturn in government spending, and a smaller decline in housing.
Also note there was a significant decline in imports from 2007 to 2009 as well.
All of these factors were concurrently followed by a significant reduction in immigration.
As aforementioned in Table 2, the number of immigrants entering the U.S declined from 12
million in 2007 to 11.1 million in 2009; also around the same time that the U.S. GDP was on the
decline. Once again, this correlation does not explain causation.
Table 4 (See Appendix D), obtained from the Pew Hispanic Research Center, Statistical
Portrait 2013, clearly demonstrates that if immigrants are granted permanent legal status and
citizenship in the year 2013, then the cumulative GDP in 10 years will increase to $1.4 trillion
dollars. If the undocumented population acquires legal status in 2013 and a citizenship in five
years, then that will add $1.1trillion dollars to the U.S. economy. The chart also demonstrates
that the taxes paid by undocumented immigrants will add $184 billion dollars to the U.S. federal
economy.
However stated, there are both negative and positive implications of legalizing
citizenship to immigrants or providing them with permanent legal status. Immigration is the
cornerstone on which this great nation was built. Moreover, the passage of the 1986

19
Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) has proved to be ineffective and its methods of
rectification punitive. Therefore, true and meaningful reform has to take place now.
We still face huge deficits in our economy despite our rebound from this recent recession.
Increased government spending and rising health care costs continue to plague our nations
budget so additional sources of revenue should certainly be of a core interest. The economic
merits of immigration have historically proven to be an effective method of upward mobility.
Hence, in reference to immigration reform, it would be in the American government’s best
interest to act fast.

20
Bibliography
Bernstein, N. (2005, Jan 24). Record immigration changing New York's neighborhoods. New
York Times. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/432967641?accountid=28722
Camarota, S.A. & Zeigler, K. (2009). Trends in Immigrant and Native Employment. Center for
Immigration Studies. Retrieved from http://www.cis.org/FirstQuarter2009Unemployment
Dingmann, T. (2010). FAIR Report on Immigration Costs Is Anything But. Center for Civic
Policy. Retrieved from http://civicpolicy.com/fair-report-on-immigration-costs-is
anything-but
Federation for American Immigration Reform (2009). Immigration Issues. Population
Growth. Retrieved from http://www.fairus.org/issue/population-growth
Immigration Policy Center. (2011). Unauthorized Immigrants Pay Taxes, Too. Estimates of the
State and Local Taxes paid by Unauthorized Immigrant Households. Retrieved from
http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/unauthorized- immigrants-pay-taxes-too
Lynch, R & Oakford, P. (2013). The Economic Effects of Granting Legal Status and
Citizenship to Undocumented Immigrants. Center for American Progress. Retrieved
from http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/report/2013/03/20/57351/th
e-economic-effects-of-granting-legal-status-and-citizenship-to-undocumented-
immigrants
Maxwell, L. A. (2011). IMMIGRATION TRENDS. Education Week, 31(14), 5.
Motel, S. (2012). Statistical Portrait of Hispanics in the U.S., 2010. Pew Hispanic Center.
Retrieved from http://www.pewhispanic.org/2012/02/21/statistical-portrait-of-
hispanics-in-the-united-states-2010
Muste, C. P. (2013). The Dynamics of Immigration Opinion in the United States, 1992–2012.
Public Opinion Quarterly, 77(1), 398-416.
Myers, D., & Liu, C. (2005). The Emerging Dominance of Immigrants in the US Housing
Market 1970–2000. Urban Policy & Research, 23(3), 347-365.
doi:10.1080/08111470500197920
Passel, Jeffrey S., and D’Vera Cohn. 2009. A Portrait of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United
States. Washington, D.C.: Pew Research Center.
Queens. (2013). Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th Edition, 1.
Shierholz, H. (2010). Immigration and Wages. Economic Policy Institute. Retrieved from
http://www.epi.org/publication/bp255/

21
U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, “Table 1. U.S. International Transactions,”
www.bea.gov/iTable/iTableHtml.cfm?reqid=6&step=3&isuri=1&600=1 (accessed April
14, 2014).

22
Appendix
Appendix A
Table 1 (as noted on page 17)

23
Appendix B
Table 2 (as noted on pages 17, 18)

24
Appendix C

25
Appendix D

26

27

28

29

30

IMMIGRATION RESEARCH PAPER (FINAL)

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (6)

Destacado

Destacado (19)

Similar a IMMIGRATION RESEARCH PAPER (FINAL)

Similar a IMMIGRATION RESEARCH PAPER (FINAL) (20)

IMMIGRATION RESEARCH PAPER (FINAL)