Trump Administration Spent $40 Million to Deport 300 Migrants, Averaging $133,000 Per Person

The High Cost of Migrant Deportations

According to Главком: During Donald Trump's presidency, the U.S. government spent over $40 million to deport 300 migrants to countries with which they had no prior ties. This resulted in an average cost of approximately $133,000 per individual. The most expensive removals were to Rwanda, where the average cost per person reached $1.1 million, despite the country accepting only seven migrants.

Of the total $40 million, around $32 million was transferred to the governments of five nations:

• Equatorial Guinea
• El Salvador
• Palau
• Eswatini
• Rwanda

Specific cases illustrate the program's expense. Deporting a Jamaican citizen cost the U.S. budget $181,000, with the U.S. paying for his transportation twice. A Mexican citizen was deported to South Sudan for $91,000, only to be moved to Mexico a few weeks later.

Concerns Over Transparency

The U.S. State Department does not employ external auditors to track how funds sent to foreign governments are used, raising significant questions about the transparency of these expenditures. This policy was implemented as part of the Trump administration's broader, stricter immigration agenda. In a private conversation with Senate committee staff, one U.S. official described the practice as

“an expensive deterrent and a means of pressuring migrants to abandon their asylum claims.”

The financial and logistical complexity of these deportations has drawn criticism from human rights advocates. President Trump personally visited a new migrant detention center in Florida's Everglades National Park, located about 60 km from Miami, highlighting his administration's focus on immigration enforcement. The high costs of removing migrants to third countries, where they often lack connections, prompts serious debate about the efficiency and humanity of such U.S. immigration policies.

These actions can profoundly impact individuals' lives and spark international disputes, considering the burdens placed on receiving countries. The lack of financial oversight further fuels concerns about how government resources are managed and the consequences for both migrants and the nations that accept them.