Election 2024: Where the Harris and Trump campaigns stand on immigration, and what it means for HR

Here’s something even scarier than all of the horror films you’re binging around Halloween: The US presidential election is less than two weeks away.

We’ve covered how Kamala Harris and Donald Trump’s stances on issues such as childcare, organized labor, and abortion might affect the HR function when a new administration enters the White House next year. Now, we’re looking at another facet of the candidates’ platforms that could significantly impact HR professionals: immigration.

Immigration influences the US economy, contributing to a growing labor force despite a declining population. Foreign-born workers made up 18.6% of the US civilian workforce in 2023, the highest share in more than 18 years, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That influx of immigrants has helped fill labor shortages that otherwise might have contributed to a recession. Future changes in the flow of immigration could drastically affect the US labor supply and, by extension, people professionals, experts told HR Brew.

“Immigration is a major driver of the US economy…and a key buffer against population aging,” David Dwertmann, an associate professor of management at Rutgers University, told HR Brew via email. “Thus, restrictions on immigration could cause labor shortages, while additional immigration could make it easier for businesses to find employees.”

Let’s dive into how each candidate plans to address immigration, and how that could impact HR professionals.

Harris plans for sweeping immigration reform. The Harris campaign, criticized for being vague on policy, has made the revival of a bipartisan immigration reform bill that was killed earlier this year a key tenet of its immigration platform.

The bill would limit the number of border crossings and raise standards for asylum. It would also expedite the asylum authorization process to less than six months and the work authorization process to less than the current 180 days, offer employment authorization to the spouses and dependent children of H-1B visa holders, fund more immigration-related government jobs (including 1,500 border patrol officers, 4,300 asylum officers, and 100 immigration judges and associated staff), and add 250,000 employment and family visas over five years.

“Anything that facilitates work, like work authorization and spousal work permits, would be welcomed by immigrants and employers,” Tara Watson, director of the Center for Economic Security and Opportunity and a senior fellow of economic studies at the Brookings Institution, told HR Brew. She cautioned, however, that a faster asylum process might not necessarily increase immigration and, by extension, the labor supply, but rather rejection rates, noting, for example, the importance of legal representation, which can be difficult to find quickly, to applicant success.

Trump pledges immigration crackdown. The Trump campaign has proposed many immigration-related policies, some of which would revive legislation enacted during his administration. Trump, who has made several false or misleading claims about immigrants, has vowed to finish building a border wall between the US and Mexico, and redirect federal law enforcement and military resources to border security. He has also proposed reinstating the “travel ban” that barred individuals from some Muslim-majority countries from entering the US, the “Remain in Mexico” program that required non-Mexican asylum seekers to wait in Mexico ahead of their court proceedings, and Title 42, which restricts migration among those from countries where an infectious disease is present.

While Trump’s campaign hasn’t taken an official stance on H-1B visas, when he was in office, the denial rate for H-1B visa applications increased by 24% and 21% in fiscal years 2018 and 2019, respectfully, and in June 2020, he suspended H-1B visas through the end of the year. Experts have suggested that a second Trump administration could target this program again.

“A lot of people still really do want to come to the US, but the more we make it difficult, the more we have these long backlogs and this really terrible bureaucracy and the hostile environment once people are here, I worry that we’ll start to lose that talent to Canada or Australia, which are being much more proactive about getting people to come and welcoming them,” Watson said.

On the other hand, Trump has proposed giving green cards to vetted foreign graduates of US colleges, which Watson said would be welcomed by employers, including HR professionals. However, immigration advocates have expressed doubt that such a policy would come to fruition.

Zoom out. No matter who is in the White House next year, there will likely be an immigration slowdown, Watson said.

Research co-authored by Watson, and published by the Brookings Institution earlier this month, analyzed the potential macroeconomic impact of “high immigration” and “low immigration” scenarios during each administration.

Net migration during a “high immigration” Harris administration is projected to be 12.3 million over four years, on par with the rate of immigration during the Biden administration following the end of Title 42, and the highest of the scenarios. As a result, the GDP is expected to increase by 0.1% in 2025. This is the only scenario in which the GDP—considered by many to signal the strength of the economy and labor market—would increase. A “low immigration” scenario was estimated to result in a net migration of 5.4 million and a GDP decrease of 0.1%.

“The Harris administration probably will take a harder line at the border than the Biden administration has, based on what’s happened the past few months, but still not as restrictive as Trump,” Watson said.

A “high immigration” scenario for a second Trump administration is expected to see a net migration of 5.6 million over four years, with a GDP decline of 0.1%, while a “low immigration” scenario is expected to result in a net migration of 410,000, as well as a 50% increase in voluntary emigration. In this scenario, the GDP is projected to shrink by 0.4% as early as 2025.

“We don’t know exactly how big the difference will be, but my sense is that immigration flows are likely to slow compared to the past two years in both scenarios,” Watson said. “[The] Trump scenario will be smaller and could even be a net negative, meaning more people are leaving than coming, and that would be true in this sort of extreme deportation scenario. And the Harris scenario, I do not expect that to be true.”

Industries that rely on immigrant labor, particularly construction, agriculture, and healthcare, may experience talent shortages the most by a slowdown in immigration, Watson said, though the impact may not be felt for a few years.

“The group that’s come in the past two years is still ramping up their labor force participation,” she said. “It’s not like it’s gonna fall off a cliff on day one.”

In the face of shortages, HR teams may have to lean on strategies like upskilling existing workers, particularly if immigration programs like the H-1B visa are impacted.

“Strategic talent management is certainly a key factor for business success, and a drop in available talent will only amplify this importance,” Dwertmann said. “Of course, it is hard to predict the exact impact of automation, artificial intelligence, et cetera, on the demand for labor…but at least in the near future, less immigration will likely make it harder on businesses to find and attract employees.”

An immigration slowdown could have other macroeconomic consequences that could impact HR professionals. For example, fewer immigrants could mean less consumer spending and demand for goods and services, affecting businesses’ bottom lines and HR’s ability to hire more workers.

“Immigrants are not only adding labor, but they’re also demanding goods and services, and they’re contributing to the pretty robust consumer spending that we’ve been having,” Watson said. “If it really slows down our growth in the population, or if it even becomes negative, that could have really pretty dramatic effects on business groups in general.”