Misleading Claims on Job Creation for U.S.-Born Workers

President Donald Trump and members of his administration have repeatedly asserted that all net job creation during his second term has benefited U.S.-born workers, while employment among foreign-born individuals has declined. This claim has been based on data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) indicating a significant increase in native-born employment and a decrease in foreign-born employment. However, economists and labor experts have criticized these assertions, labeling the figures as misleading due to their reliance on flawed statistical methodologies.

Fact Check

According to the BLS, native-born employment reportedly increased by approximately 2.7 million from January to November 2025, while foreign-born employment decreased by 972,000 during the same period. However, experts, including Jed Kolko, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, argue that these figures are influenced by predetermined population estimates that do not accurately reflect the labor market. Kolko described the apparent boom in native-born employment as a "statistical artifact," resulting from the way the Current Population Survey (CPS) data is constructed.

Fact Check

Critics have pointed out that the foreign-born category includes a diverse group of individuals, such as legally-admitted immigrants, refugees, and undocumented immigrants. Kolko emphasized that the BLS data should not be used for direct comparisons between native-born and foreign-born employment due to the inherent limitations of the CPS. He noted that the survey's small sample size and predetermined population controls can distort the reported figures. Dean Baker, founder of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, highlighted that the reported increase in native-born employment is implausible given the current immigration trends.

Fact Check

Experts recommend focusing on unemployment rates rather than employment levels to gain a clearer understanding of labor market dynamics. Kolko and David J. Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, both advocate for using unemployment rates as a more reliable measure, as these rates are less susceptible to the biases present in employment level data. The most recent BLS data indicate that the unemployment rate for native-born individuals remained unchanged at 4.3% from January to November 2025, while the rate for foreign-born individuals decreased from 4.6% to 4%.

Fact Check

The claims made by President Trump regarding job creation for U.S.-born workers are contested by economists who argue that the underlying data is misleading. The discrepancies in employment figures and the recommendation to focus on unemployment rates suggest a more complex labor market situation than the administration's narrative implies. As the debate continues, it remains crucial for policymakers and the public to critically evaluate the data and its implications for understanding employment trends in the United States.

Fact Check

• “Do not look at native-born LEVELS of anything — employment, unemployment, labor force, or population. These stats may be official but they are meaningless.” — Jed Kolko, Senior Fellow, Peterson Institute for International Economics

Fact Check

• “The unemployment rate is the best information the CPS offers about the native born and the foreign born.” — Jed Kolko, Senior Fellow, Peterson Institute for International Economics

Fact Check

• “It’s really dependent on the number of people surveyed.” — David J. Bier, Director of Immigration Studies, Cato Institute

Fact Check