Close But Misleading: The "87.5% of Non-Citizen Households Have a Worker" Stat Gets the Numbers Wrong and Skips the Key Context
“87.5% of non-citizen households include at least one worker, compared to 70% of U.S.-born households”
The argument in brief
A widely shared claim says 87.5% of non-citizen households include at least one worker, versus 70% of U.S.-born households. The real figures from the original source are closer to 87% vs. 73% — and even those numbers mislead, because non-citizen households are larger on average, meaning they simply have more people who could be working. The gap shrinks significantly once you account for household size.
Data: Center for Immigration Studies, 2015 (based on Census CPS 2012)
Why it spread
Immigration is an emotionally charged topic where people on all sides are hungry for hard numbers. This statistic felt concrete and specific, which made it shareable. It also had a dual use — supporters of immigration cited it to show immigrants work hard, while others used it as a lead-in to welfare statistics — so it got amplified across ideological lines without anyone stopping to check the source or the math.
You may have seen the claim that 87.5% of non-citizen households contain at least one worker, compared to just 70% of U.S.-born households. The numbers sound precise and authoritative. But they're slightly wrong, and even the real figures tell an incomplete story.
The closest published source is a 2015 report from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), which used 2012 Census data and found roughly 87% of non-citizen households had at least one worker, compared to about 73% of native-born households. The figures in the viral claim — 87.5% and 70% — don't match any widely cited published source. They appear to be a misquotation or informal rounding of the CIS data.
The directional point — that non-citizen households are more likely to include a worker — is real and confirmed by U.S. Census Bureau Current Population Survey data. But here's what the raw comparison leaves out: non-citizen households are larger on average. More people under one roof means more chances for at least one of them to be employed. The Cato Institute's Alex Nowrasteh reviewed the same data and concluded the gap is largely explained by household size, not by non-citizens having higher individual employment rates than native-born Americans.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities made the same point: comparing households without accounting for their composition is an apples-to-oranges problem. A household of six has a much higher chance of containing one worker than a household of two, regardless of anyone's immigration status. The Migration Policy Institute adds that results also shift depending on how "household" is defined and the age makeup of its members.
So what's true? Non-citizen households do tend to include workers at high rates. Individual labor force participation among immigrants is comparable to or slightly above native-born rates, according to Census data. But the specific numbers in this claim are off, and the household-level framing inflates the apparent gap in a way that doesn't survive scrutiny.
This stat spreads because it's easy to weaponize in either direction — as proof immigrants work hard, or as a setup for welfare-use arguments. When a number can serve two opposing narratives, it travels fast. Watch for statistics that compare groups at the household level without mentioning household size. That omission is almost always doing heavy lifting.
Sources
- Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) – Steven Camarota, 2015
CIS reported that 87% of non-citizen households had at least one worker, compared to 73% of native-born households, using 2012 Census data. These figures are close to the claim but not exactly 87.5% and 70%.
- Center on Budget and Policy Priorities – Fact Check on CIS Data
CBPP noted that immigrant households, including non-citizens, tend to have higher labor force participation rates than native-born households, but cautioned that CIS figures can be misleading due to household composition differences (larger household sizes mean more potential workers per household).
- U.S. Census Bureau – Current Population Survey
CPS data consistently shows that foreign-born workers, including non-citizens, have labor force participation rates comparable to or higher than native-born workers, though household-level comparisons depend heavily on household size and composition.
- Cato Institute – Alex Nowrasteh, Immigration Research
Cato analysts confirmed that non-citizen households do tend to have more workers per household than native-born households, but argued this is largely because non-citizen households are larger on average, not because of higher individual employment rates.
- Migration Policy Institute
MPI data shows immigrant workers (including non-citizens) participate in the labor force at high rates, but household-level statistics are sensitive to how households are defined and the age composition of household members.