Trump’s Job Creation Claims for Native-Born Workers Face Scrutiny Over Data Accuracy

U.S. Labor Experts Challenge Trump’s Claims About Job Creation for Citizens

For months, President Donald Trump and his administration have repeatedly claimed that “all net job creation” during his second term has gone to American citizens rather than immigrants. However, multiple economists and labor experts warn that the federal data used to support these assertions is fundamentally misleading.

The controversy centers on Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data showing that from January to November this year, employment among native-born workers increased by nearly 2.7 million while employment for foreign-born individuals decreased by 972,000. Trump has cited these figures in multiple public appearances, including a December 9 speech in Pennsylvania and his prime-time national address on December 17.

“Before I entered office, 100% of all new net jobs were going to migrant workers,” Trump claimed in Pennsylvania. “Since I took office, 100% of all net job creation has gone to American citizens.”

However, economists point out that these employment figures are heavily influenced by predetermined population estimates that the Census Bureau calculated in 2024. Jed Kolko, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics and former Commerce Department official during the Biden administration, called the apparent boom in native-born employment “just a statistical artifact.”

“The statistical agencies explicitly warn that these data from the Current Population Survey are not suitable for sizing and trending the foreign-born and native-born populations,” Kolko wrote in August. He referenced a September 2024 Census Bureau working paper that cautioned against using the CPS to estimate the size of the foreign-born population.

The issue lies in how the Current Population Survey (CPS) functions. The survey, which samples 60,000 households monthly, must align its population totals with predetermined Census Bureau projections. When the reported foreign-born population decreases in the survey, the native-born population automatically increases to match the predetermined total population estimate.

“The way the CPS works, the foreign-born and native-born population add up to a predetermined forecast that was made last year,” Kolko explained. “So, a big decline in the reported foreign-born population is going to be offset by a reported increase in the native-born population.”

Dean Baker, senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, identified three possible reasons for the reported decrease in foreign-born workers: actual departures from the country, reduced survey response from immigrants, or immigrants misreporting their birthplace on the survey.

The reported increase of over 5 million in the native-born population since last year is particularly implausible, according to experts. “The native-born population typically grows at a predictable rate, because that’s based on fertility rates, the age distribution and mortality rates,” Kolko noted. “It is not plausible for the native-born population to jump the way it was reported in the CPS.”

Another discrepancy appears when comparing different employment surveys. The BLS Current Employment Statistics survey of businesses shows total U.S. employment increased by just 499,000 workers from January to November – over 1 million fewer than the CPS estimate of 1.7 million.

Trump’s characterization of foreign-born workers as “migrant workers and illegal aliens” is also inaccurate. The BLS defines the foreign-born category as including legally-admitted immigrants (some of whom may have become citizens), refugees, temporary residents such as students and workers, and undocumented immigrants.

Instead of focusing on employment levels, experts recommend examining unemployment rates, which are less affected by population control assumptions. The most recent data show the unemployment rate for native-born workers remained unchanged at 4.3% between January and November, while the rate for foreign-born workers improved slightly, dropping from 4.6% to 4.4%.

“The unemployment rate is the best information the CPS offers about the native born and the foreign born,” Kolko advised. “Ignore the levels of population and employment: they mislead.”

David J. Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, agrees: “The survey is meant not to establish how many people are in the United States, or how many people are in any subcategory. It’s meant to figure out what the people in the United States are doing.”

The White House did not respond to requests for comment on Trump’s claims.