"No one size fits all’: Diverse impacts of Temporary Protected Status on Haitians and Hondurans

Depósito de Investigación de la Universidad de Sevilla https://idus.us.es/ This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Elsevier in Economics Letters, Vol. 228, on July 2023, available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2023.111163 Copyright 2023 Elsevier. En idUS Licencia Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND Article Title ‘No One Size Fits All’: Diverse Impacts of Temporary Protected Status in Honduras and Haiti Authors and Affiliations Catalina Amuedo-Dorantes Economics, University of California – Merced, 5200 North Lake Rd., Merced, CA 95343 E-mail: [email protected]du Tel.: 1-619-300-6362 Cristina Borra Economics and Economic History, Universidad de Sevilla, Ramon y Cajal 1, 41018 Sevilla, Spain. E-mail: [email protected] Tel.: +34 954551699 Noelia Rivera-Garrido Economics, Universidad Loyola Andalucía, Avda. de las Universidades s/n, Dos Hermanas, 41704. Sevilla, Spain. E-mail: [email protected] Tel.: +34 955 641 600 Corresponding author Noelia Rivera-Garrido Economics, Universidad Loyola Andalucía, Avda. de las Universidades s/n, Dos Hermanas, 41704. Sevilla, Spain. E-mail: [email protected] Tel.: +34 955 641 600 Abstract We examine how Temporary Protected Status (TPS) has impacted the individual labor market outcomes and educational attainment of Honduran and Haitian beneficiaries, as well as their households’ earnings, poverty exposure, and food stamp receipt. We find evidence of TPS assisting Haitian migrants in all those respects, but not Honduran migrants. Further analyses examining the root causes for the differential impact of the program across nationalities are warranted. Keywords: Immigrants, TPS, Honduras, Haiti. JEL Codes: J15, J61. Disclosure Statements and Acknowledgements Catalina Amuedo-Dorantes has nothing to disclose. Cristina Borra has nothing to disclose. Noelia Rivera-Garrido acknowledges support by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation, and Universities (PID2021-126892NB-I00). Funding sources were not involved in any stage of the study design, production, or submission. 1 ‘No One Size Fits All’: Diverse Impacts of Temporary Protected Status on Haitians and Hondurans Catalina Amuedo-Dorantes (University of California Merced) Cristina Borra (Universidad de Sevilla) Noelia Rivera-Garrido (Universidad Loyola Andalucía) Abstract We examine how Temporary Protected Status (TPS) has impacted the individual labor market outcomes and educational attainment of Haitian and Honduran beneficiaries, as well as their households’ earnings, poverty exposure, and food stamp receipt. We find evidence of TPS assisting Haitian migrants in all those respects, but not Honduran migrants. Further analyses examining the root causes for the differential impact of the program across nationalities are warranted. Keywords: Immigrants, TPS, Haiti, Honduras. JEL Codes: J15, J61. 2 1. Introduction Over the past 50 years, the U.S. government has enacted several amnesties aimed at facilitating the assimilation of undocumented immigrants and their offspring, including the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), the 1997 Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA), and the 1998 Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act (HRIFA). However, concerns about the fiscal cost of amnesties and fears they might encourage unauthorized flows, have led to increased support for granting, instead, temporary, renewable reprieves from deportation and work permits, as in the case of Temporary Protected Status (TPS). Unlike amnesties, TPS does not provide undocumented immigrants a path to permanent residence nor citizenship. Its beneficiaries live in a state of “liminal legality” (Menjívar et al., 2020) that can interfere with their assimilation. We assess if that is the case for two largely unexplored, yet longterm and sizeable groups of TPS beneficiaries –Haitians and Hondurans. While researchers have examined the impact of regularization processes on the local economy (e.g., Bahar et al., 2021; Ortega et al., 2018) and immigrants (e.g., Kuka et al., 2020; Pope, 2016), TPS remains largely understudied. One exception is the study by Orrenius and Zavodny (2015), who explore the short-term labor market impacts of TPS on Salvadorians. They find evidence of positive program impacts –results confirmed by Harris and Jerch (2022) when exploring the long-run impacts of TPS on Salvadorians. Yet, the experience of Salvadorians might not be extrapolated to immigrant beneficiaries from other countries, such as Haitians and Hondurans. 2. Institutional Background Temporary protected status (TPS) is a program created by the U.S. Congress in the Immigration Act of 1990 to provide nationals from countries experiencing armed conflicts, environmental disasters or extraordinary conditions that make it unsafe for them 3 to return home, temporary reprieve from deportation and work authorization. To be eligible for TPS, nationals from a designated country must have been continuously present in the United States since their countries’ designation. They can then register for TPS during a designated period, paying the corresponding fees. Most TPS holders have lived in the United States between 10 and 20 years. They have married, raised families, and actively participated in the labor market. Yet, they do not enjoy a direct path to permanent legal status or citizenship; although some achieve it through other routes, e.g., marriage to U.S. citizens. We study TPS holders from Honduras and Haiti accounting for roughly 81,000 and 56,000 immigrants in the United States, respectively. Both groups are primarily concentrated in metropolitan areas of New York and Miami, followed by Houston for Hondurans and Boston for Haitians (National Immigration Forum, 2021). Honduras was initially designated for TPS in December 1998 after Hurricane Mitch. Haiti’s designation came in January 2011, after a 7.0-magnitude earthquake. On May 22, 2021, Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas announced a new TPS designation for Haiti for 18 months, and TPS will continue for Hondurans while the preliminary injunction ordered by the court in Ramos, et al v. Nielsen, et al., No. 18-cv-01554 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 3, 2018) remains in effect, or by other order of the court. 1 3. Data We use data from the American Community Survey (ACS), which collects yearly data from more than 3.5 million of households in 50 states. In addition to demographic, educational, employment, and income data, the ACS has information on migrants’ country of origin and immigration year, enabling us to identify those eligible for TPS. 1 https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/temporary-protected-status/ 4 We conduct the analysis separately for Haitians and for Hondurans. 2 We focus on non-citizens 18 to 64 years of age since we model labor market outcomes. 3 We also restrict the analysis to migrants arriving to the United States during a short-time window of 3 years before and after the granting of TPS to circumvent eligibility for NACARA (requiring immigrating by 1996), the 1998 HRIFA (requiring paroling or filing for amnesty by December 31, 1995), and DACA (requiring living continuously in the United States since June 15, 2007). 4 For Honduras, the sample spans from 2002 through 2007 –a period centered around the country’s TPS designation in December 1998. Hondurans who arrived in the United States during the 3 years prior to the country’s TPS designation, i.e., between 1996 and 1998, are considered TPS-eligible, while those arriving in the 3-year period that followed, i.e., between 1999 and 2001, are not eligible for TPS. In the case of Haiti, the sample spans from 2014 through 2019 –a period centered around the country’s TPS designation in January 2011. Haitians arriving between 2008 and 2010 are considered TPS-eligible, whereas their counterparts arriving in the 3-year period that followed (i.e., 2011 through 2013) are not. Following the literature (e.g., Kaushal, 2006; Orrenius and Zavodny, 2015), we use Mexican migrants entering the United States during the same period as our main control group. We also experiment with expanding the control group to include migrants from other Latin American countries unaffected by TPS. 5 2 See Table A.1 for variable definitions. Tables A.2 and A.3 provide summary statistics for Haitian, Hondurans, and Mexican migrants arriving before and after the TPS designations. 3 As shown in Table A.4, results prove robust to including citizens in our sample. 4 As shown in Table A.4, results prove robust to using Orrenius and Zavodny (2005) sample cut-offs. 5 As shown in Table A.4, results prove robust to using this alternative control group. 5 4. Empirical Methodology To gauge the impact of TPS on Haitians and Hondurans, we estimate equation (1) for each country’s nationals and its respective control group(s): (1) 𝑦𝑖𝑐𝑦𝑠𝑡 = 𝛼 + 𝛽 𝑇𝑃𝑆 𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑏𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑦 + 𝑋𝑖𝑐𝑦𝑠𝑡 ′𝛾 + 𝛿𝑐+ 𝛿𝑦 + 𝛿𝑠+ 𝛿𝑠𝑡 + 𝜀𝑖𝑐𝑦𝑠𝑡 where 𝑦𝑖𝑐𝑦𝑠𝑡 is the ith migrant’s labor market outcome, educational attainment, or her/his household’s income, poverty exposure, and food stamp receipt. 𝑇𝑃𝑆 𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑏𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑦 equals one for TPS eligible migrants based on their country-of-origin c and arrival year y. The vector 𝑋𝑖𝑐𝑦𝑠𝑡 ′ includes individual traits affecting the outcomes, i.e.., age, age squared, gender, marital status, race, and years since migration. Equation (1) also includes country of origin (𝛿𝑐), year of arrival (𝛿𝑦), state of residence (𝛿𝑠), and survey year (µ𝑡) fixedeffects to account for unobserved, time-invariant geographic traits and macroeconomic conditions shaping the outcomes of interest. State-specific time trends (𝛿𝑠𝑡) capture unobserved, time-varying economic/policy conditions influencing the outcomes. Standard errors are clustered at the state-year level, and ACS sampling weights are used throughout. The parameter 𝛽 captures TPS’ intent-to-treat estimated impact on migrants’ labor market outcomes, educational attainment, and their households’ income, poverty exposure, and food stamp receipt. Event studies enable us to assess if the outcomes were trending similarly for migrants from Haiti and Honduras, relative to migrants from the control groups, entering the United States after their respective nations’ TPS designation. Finally, while we are not concerned about policy endogeneity given the rationale for granting TPS, i.e., two natural disasters, results could be biased due to out-migration. While we limit this possibility by focusing on a six-year period around the country’s TPS designation, some out-migration could be taking place, especially among migrants not 6 eligible for TPS in the control group. Incidentally, this would bias our findings against finding a significant TPS impact, alleviating concerns about upward-biased estimates. 5. TPS Impacts among Hondurans and Haitians Table 1 displays the results from estimating equation (1). In Panel A, we compare TPS-eligible Hondurans to their non-eligible countrymen and to Mexican migrants entering the United States during the same time. In Panel B, we repeat the same exercise for Haiti. 6 The difference in the estimated impacts of TPS on Honduras and Haitians is striking. While we find no evidence of a significant impact of TPS among Hondurans, Haitians eligible for TPS were 12 p.p. (18%) more likely to be employed than their noneligible counterparts after the country’s TPS designation. They earned $5,222 more per year (27%) than their non-eligible counterparts and appeared to have benefited from their ability to attend school, with their educational attainment rising by 1 year (10%). These impacts benefited entire households, with family income rising by $8,617/year (14%), poverty exposure dropping by 11 p.p. (18%), and the likelihood of food stamp receipt dropping by 6 p.p. (30%). 7 Figures 1 and 2 display the event studies for each of the outcomes in Table 1. There is no evidence of statistically significant differences between TPS-eligible Hondurans or Haitians and Mexicans arriving after the countries’ TPS designation. Yet, there is a clear break in how the examined outcomes trend for TPS-eligible Haitians arriving during the three-year period preceding their country’s TPS designation vs. Mexican migrants arriving during the same time, hinting on the causal nature of the 6 Table A.4 shows similar results using an alternative control group. 7 For comparison purposes, Table A.5 reports the impacts of TPS in El Salvador using our sample cutoffs. Results are similar to those in Orrenius and Zavodny (2015). 7 program’s positive impacts on Haitian beneficiaries. Further analyses of the root causes for the differential impact of the program across nationalities are warranted. Acknowledgements Noelia Rivera-Garrido acknowledges support by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation, and Universities (PID2021-126892NB-I00). Funding sources were not involved in any stage of the study design, production, or submission. 14 Table A.3: Descriptive Statistics for Sample Used to Examine TPS Impacts on Haitians Column: (1) (2) (3) (4) Country of Origin: Haiti Mexico Arrival Time Relative to Haiti’s TPS Designation: 3 Yrs. Before 3 Yrs. After Diff (1)-(2) 3 Yrs. Before 3 Yrs. After Diff (3)-(4) Panel A: Individual and Household Level Outcomes Employment 0.75 0.64 0.105*** 0.66 0.65 0.013** (0.431) (0.477) (0.0197) (0.471) (0.476) (0.006) Earnings (in dollars) 19,004.98 15,658.21 3,346*** 18,618.45 19,942.07 -1,323*** (24,588.67) (20,243.23) (980.19) (26,401.46) (31,158.79) (361.96) Years of Education 12.42 11.85 0.57*** 10.07 10.69 -0.615*** (3.67) (3,811) (0.162) (4.20) (4.375) (0.054) Household Income (in dollars) 65,584.07 63,883.02 1,701 61,263.17 66,556.26 -5,293*** (56,535.9) (57,725.31) (2,528.76) (56,611.34) (62,697.37) (769.39) Poverty Exposure 0.54 0.59 -0.05** 0.61 0.58 0.032*** (0.498) (0.490) (0.21) (0.486) (0.493) (0.006) Food Stamp Receipt 0.29 0.31 -0.14 0.22 0.17 0.053*** (0.457) (0.463) (0.199) (0.420) (0.380) (0.005) Panel B: Control Variables Male 0.40 0.47 -0.07*** 0.53 0.54 -0.014** (0.49) (0.50) (0.02) (0.50) (0.50) (0.01) Age 35.82 34.64 1.18** 33.36 32.82 0.53*** (11.56) (11.76) (0.51) (9.82) (10.04) (0.13) Married 0.38 0.40 -0.02 0.50 0.48 0.02 (0.48) (0.49) (0.02) (0.50) (0.50) (0.01) Years since Migration 6.89 4.29 2.59*** 7.45 4.32 3.14*** (1.75) (1.79) (0.08) (1.89) (1.84) (0.24) Race White 0.005 0.01 -0.005 0.64 0.65 -0.013** (0.07) (0.10) (0.16) (0.48) (0.47) (0.01) Black 0.98 0.98 -0.003 0.004 0.004 -0.0005 (0.15) (0.13) (0.01) (0.06) (0.07) (0.001) Others 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.36 0.034 -0.002** (0.13) (0.09) (0.005) (0.48) (0.47) (0.001) Observations 1,110 1,022 2,132 14,245 11,090 25,335 Notes: ACS 2014-2019. Haitians who arrived in the United States up to 3-years prior to their country’s TPS designation were TPS-eligible. 15 Table A.4: Robustness Checks Outcomes: Employment Earnings Years of Education Household Income Poverty Food Stamp Panels A: Honduras Panel A1: Including citizens in the sample TPS Eligible 0.0228 336.9 0.0224 -3,199 0.0305 0.000398 (0.0232) (680.7) (0.229) (2,134) (0.0367) (0.0197) Observations 65,424 65,424 65,424 64,771 65,424 65,424 R-squared 0.263 0.192 0.036 0.057 0.038 0.019 Panel A2: Using Orrenius and Zavodny (2015) sample cut-offs TPS Eligible -0.0279 -1,408 -0.777 -10,162* 0.201** 0.0171 (0.0599) (1,868) (0.700) (5,599) (0.0878) (0.0335) Observations 6,581 6,581 6,581 6,581 6,581 6,581 R-squared 0.286 0.235 0.054 0.095 0.074 0.035 Panel A3: Including other Latin American non-citizens in the control group TPS Eligible 0.0221 541.0 -0.115 -1,817 0.0217 -0.00460 (0.0227) (727.3) (0.245) (2,272) (0.0377) (0.0200) Observations 66,813 66,813 66,813 66,138 66,813 66,813 R-squared 0.257 0.196 0.036 0.059 0.040 0.020 Panels B: Haiti Panel B1: Including citizens in the sample TPS Eligible 0.0982*** 4,581*** 1.000*** 6,967** -0.0805*** -0.0659*** (0.0296) (1,081) (0.135) (2,944) (0.0262) (0.0245) Observations 32,847 32,846 32,847 31,497 32,847 32,847 R-squared 0.196 0.144 0.069 0.050 0.042 0.026 Panel B2: Using Orrenius and Zavodny (2015) sample cut-offs TPS Eligible 0.176*** 6,533*** 1.126*** 9,202** -0.0799 -0.0101 (0.0575) (1,493) (0.270) (3,970) (0.0641) (0.0700) Observations 6,329 6,328 6,329 5,983 6,329 6,329 R-squared 0.228 0.149 0.092 0.049 0.055 0.054 Panel B3: Including other Latin American non-citizens in the control group TPS Eligible 0.126*** 5,203*** 0.985*** 7,274** -0.102*** -0.0549** (0.0353) (985.0) (0.173) (3,082) (0.0299) (0.0254) Observations 36,611 36,610 36,611 35,092 36,611 36,611 R-squared 0.195 0.142 0.058 0.039 0.040 0.034 Notes: ACS 2002-2007 for Panels A. ACS 2014-2019 for Panels B. Orrenius and Zavodny (2015) select individuals who arrived in the United States during the 2-year period before and after the country’s TPS designation. The additional Latin American countries included in the control group are Belize, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, and the Dominican Republic. In separate analyses available from the authors, we also experiment using the sample selection criteria in Harris and Jerch (2022). Results for Haiti –the only country for which the criteria can be used– continue to prove robust. 16 Table A.5: Impacts of TPS in El Salvador Outcomes: Employment Earnings Years of Education Household Income Poverty Food Stamp Panel 1: Using Mexico as the control group TPS Eligible 0.0419*** 1,897*** -0.102 502.1 -0.0207 -0.0180** (0.0152) (518.0) (0.136) (1,220) (0.0153) (0.00912) Observations 88,202 88,202 88,202 86,878 88,202 88,202 R-squared 0.251 0.187 0.034 0.067 0.042 0.028 Panel 2: Including citizens in the sample TPS Eligible 0.0434*** 1,675*** -0.0824 -489.9 -0.0222 -0.0117 (0.0144) (555.2) (0.128) (1,238) (0.0145) (0.00891) Observations 94,449 94,449 94,449 93,048 94,449 94,449 R-squared 0.242 0.181 0.033 0.064 0.039 0.027 Panel 3: Using Orrenius and Zavodny (2015) sample cut-offs TPS Eligible 0.0531** 2,339*** 0.150 2,630 -0.0725** -0.0213 (0.0257) (869.3) (0.332) (1,882) (0.0331) (0.0143) Observations 22,571 22,571 22,571 22,367 22,571 22,571 R-squared 0.284 0.217 0.043 0.092 0.052 0.026 Panel 4: Including other Latin American non-citizens in the control group TPS Eligible 0.0433*** 1,802*** -0.143 558.6 -0.0206 -0.0198** (0.0155) (529.9) (0.133) (1,263) (0.0155) (0.00909) Observations 97,926 97,926 97,926 96,475 97,926 97,926 R-squared 0.241 0.179 0.031 0.063 0.042 0.030 Notes: ACS 2005-2010. El Salvador was initially designated for TPS in March 2001 after two earthquakes. Salvadorians arriving between 1998 and 2000 were considered eligible for TPS, while those arriving between 2001 and 2003 were not. Orrenius and Zavodny (2015) select individuals who arrived in the United States during the 2-year period before and after the country’s TPS designation in 2001. The additional Latin American countries included in the control group are Belize, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, and the Dominican Republic.