Washington, D.C. — A newly circulated set of statistics shared by U.S. President Donald Trump has placed Liberia in the spotlight of America’s renewed immigration and welfare debate, with data claiming that 48.9 percent of Liberian immigrant–headed households in the United States rely on government assistance.
The figure appeared in a chart released by Trump on his social media platform, ranking immigrant households by country of origin based on their participation in U.S. welfare programs. According to the data, nearly half of Liberian households in the U.S. receive at least one form of public assistance, including food aid, healthcare coverage, housing support, or other means-tested benefits.
Trump cited the statistic as part of a broader argument that current immigration and social welfare systems are under strain, reigniting long-standing political divisions over immigration policy, public spending, and eligibility for government benefits.
However, policy analysts and immigration experts caution that the statistic requires important context. The 48.9 percent figure applies to households, not individuals, meaning a household is counted as receiving welfare if even one member benefits from a government program. In many cases, this includes U.S.-born children, who are legally entitled to benefits regardless of their parents’ immigration status.
Federal law also restricts many non-citizen immigrants from accessing most welfare programs during their first five years in the country, making it unlikely that the majority of adult Liberian immigrants are personally receiving cash assistance. Programs commonly included in such data sets range from Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits to Medicaid and housing assistance, rather than direct income support alone.
The release of the data has generated mixed reactions within Liberian communities across the United States. Some community advocates argue that the figures overlook the economic contributions of Liberian immigrants, including employment in essential sectors, tax payments, and significant remittances sent back home to Liberia. Others acknowledge that the data reflects ongoing socioeconomic challenges faced by immigrant families, such as low wages, high living costs, and limited access to upward mobility.
Broader studies on welfare usage in the United States present a more complex picture. While some research shows higher welfare participation rates among immigrant-headed households, other analyses indicate that immigrants overall use less welfare per person than native-born Americans, largely because household-based measurements can inflate perceived dependency.
As political debate intensifies ahead of new immigration and welfare policy discussions, analysts warn against interpreting the statistic as evidence that Liberians in the U.S. are broadly dependent on government support. Instead, they emphasize that the figure highlights structural economic pressures and household dynamics, not individual failure or unwillingness to work.
Still, the release of the 48.9 percent statistic has ensured that Liberia is now firmly part of a wider and contentious national conversation, one that continues to shape public opinion and policy direction on immigration and social support in the United States.
