What the evidence shows

The £23 billion is CSJ’s estimate for several kinds of support in 2025. Its three published components add up. The full calculation, including the treatment of mixed-nationality households, is not independently verified. Benefit spending alone also cannot tell us immigration’s overall effect on public finances.

  • £14.3 billion is working-age benefits, £2.9 billion is pension-related payments and £5.8 billion is support for children.
  • The model combines government records with survey-based estimates; it is not a single directly measured government total.
  • The main Universal Credit source counts whole qualifying household payments, which can support British partners too. CSJ says it adjusts mixed households; the reconciliation is still needed.
  • The £23 billion does not subtract taxes paid or include all other public costs. It is not a complete fiscal balance.

What is in the £23 billion?

The total brings together three kinds of spending. These are the rounded amounts in CSJ’s current announcement and report, not a new estimate calculated by TALLYCAT01.

CSJ’s estimated 2025 spending associated with foreign nationals; rounded headline components
Kind of supportCSJ estimate
Working-age benefits£14.3bn
Pension-related payments£2.9bn
Support for children£5.8bn
Total£23.0bn

Support for children includes Child Benefit, free school meals and government-funded childcare. It is not all cash handed directly to adults. Pension-related payments include the State Pension and other support for older people.

The label working-age benefits does not mean every recipient is out of work. These benefits can support people with jobs, illness or disabilities, and families. CSJ discloses these categories; they are not hidden additions we discovered.

Sources: Centre for Social JusticeCentre for Social JusticeDepartment for Work and Pensions response, hosted by Centre for Migration Control

How did the researchers reach the total?

There is no single government table that directly measures every part of this total by nationality. CSJ combined administrative records with survey-based estimates, population estimates and average payment amounts.

For example, DWP says nationality is not recorded as part of the State Pension claim process. The published Child Benefit nationality breakdown was also discontinued. Those gaps help explain why a model is needed.

Using a model is not itself an error. The question is whether its inputs and adjustments produce a reliable estimate. We found the public methods, but not a complete workbook, code, input table or sensitivity results that would let us independently reconstruct £23 billion.

Sources: Centre for Social JusticeCentre for Social JusticeUK Parliament, answer by Torsten BellUK Parliament, answer by Darren Jones

Why household payments need care

Universal Credit is paid to households. In a couple, one payment can support two adults and their children. Calling the whole payment spending on a foreign individual can therefore be misleading unless the household definition is explained.

The recovered DWP response reports £11.920 billion for calendar 2025 in Great Britain. It counts the full qualifying household award when at least one claimant is neither British nor Irish and the partner is eligible. Some of these households can include a British partner.

That total rounds to £11.9 billion, the Universal Credit amount in CSJ’s announcement. But the report also says estimated expenditure is halved for mixed households. We need the intermediate calculations to see how those statements fit together.

This is an unresolved question, not proof that CSJ ignored British partners or inflated the final total. The next useful step is to inspect its workings.

Sources: Department for Work and Pensions response, hosted by Centre for Migration ControlCentre for Social JusticeCentre for Social Justice

Why £23 billion is not the overall cost of immigration

A spending figure shows money going out. It does not show taxes coming in, all the other public services used, or how the economy would differ without immigration.

To calculate an overall balance, we would need a consistent group of people, period and method on both sides of the calculation. We have not substituted a tax figure from a different population or year.

The CSJ announcement does not describe £23 billion as a net fiscal loss. This distinction explains what the estimate can tell us; it is not a correction of words the announcement did not use.

Sources: Centre for Social JusticeCentre for Social Justice

The people count answers a different question

CSJ also estimates about 1.85 million non-British adults receiving at least one included benefit or pension in 2025, after allowing for people receiving more than one payment.

That adult count excludes people receiving only the specified child-related support, while the £23 billion includes spending on that support. The two totals therefore do not cover exactly the same things.

Dividing £23 billion by 1.85 million would not give an observed average payment to each counted adult. The model’s detailed overlap and receipt-rate calculations are also needed to check the headcount properly.

Sources: Centre for Social JusticeCentre for Social Justice

What we still need to know

Checked: what the headline includes, the sum of its rounded components and what the main Universal Credit source counts.

Still unclear: the complete calculation behind £23 billion, including mixed-household adjustments, population and geography matching, survey inputs and uncertainty.

Next update: if the missing workings become available, we can test the model rather than only explain it. We have prepared a clarification enquiry, but it has not been sent. We do not claim that a reply is due or that an update date has been arranged.

Sources: Centre for Social JusticeCentre for Social JusticeDepartment for Work and Pensions response, hosted by Centre for Migration Control

Technical notes: definitions, source versions and rounding

The DWP response is reproduced on PDF pages 6 to 12 of a Centre for Migration Control briefing. Its first five pages are CMC commentary. This is not a response obtained directly by us or a DWP-hosted copy.

The response uses the latest held self-reported nationality. Non-CTA means neither British nor Irish. Nationality, immigration status and birthplace are different categories. The response covers Great Britain, whereas CSJ uses UK and Britain language; the complete territorial reconciliation is not available.

The response describes an administrative extract that is not classified as Official Statistics. That is a quality-assurance limitation, not a reason to discard it. About 2% of households had a claimant without recorded nationality and were excluded from the nationality breakdown. Nationality and employment subcategories overlap and cannot be added.

The reported annual 2025 Universal Credit amount is £11,920 million. Its rounded monthly rows sum to £11,919 million. The £1 million difference is consistent with values rounded separately; it is not evidence of a missing payment.

The report at the same public URL changed between our preserved 14 and 15 October copies. The 2025 working-age component changed from £14.2bn to £14.3bn, and its 2030 value from £16.2bn to £16.3bn. The current report and announcement agree on the figures used here. A source revision is not evidence of deceptive intent.

The Family Resources Survey 2024/25 uses linked benefit records and revises earlier years. We cannot assume which data vintage CSJ used. The Home Office Migrant Journey guide also warns that its records cannot directly establish current residence. These are model-audit questions; their presence does not establish the size or direction of any error.

Full validation of the £23bn model, the 1.85m unique-adult estimate and the 2030 forecast remains on hold. No fraud estimate, alternative net fiscal estimate or allegation of deliberate disinformation is made here.

Sources: Department for Work and Pensions response, hosted by Centre for Migration ControlCentre for Social JusticeCentre for Social JusticeDepartment for Work and PensionsDepartment for Work and PensionsHome Office

What is established

  • CSJ published this estimate and explicitly disclosed its main categories and use of modelling.
  • The displayed £14.3bn, £2.9bn and £5.8bn components total £23bn.
  • The reproduced DWP response establishes what the underlying £11.920bn Universal Credit household total counts.

What remains unknown

  • The complete input tables and calculations behind £23bn, including the mixed-household adjustments and uncertainty.
  • The detailed reconciliation of population, geography and data periods across the model.
  • A clarification enquiry is drafted but has not been sent. No reply or scheduled update is claimed.

The story, in order

Period being estimated
The £23bn estimate and main annual UC expenditure figure concern calendar 2025.

DWP response
DWP issued FOI2026/83815, later reproduced in CMC’s briefing.

CSJ report published
State of Dependency set out the model and its forecasts.

CSJ announcement
The announcement reported £23bn and its three main spending components.

TALLYCAT01 evidence check
The current report and decisive source pages were preserved and checked. This is not a publication date.

YOUR TURN TO CHECK

Reproduce this investigation

Follow these steps to check the displayed sum and the meaning of its main source. They do not reconstruct CSJ’s complete model, because the full workings are missing.

You will need
A web browser and PDF reader; a calculator or spreadsheet app for the small downloadable breakdown

What you can and cannot repeat

The source PDFs are linked at their publishers, not redistributed here. The DWP response is reproduced by CMC, and begins on PDF page 6. The preserved CSJ version was retrieved on 15 October 2026; the file at its public URL may change. Our downloads transcribe selected published figures, not individual records or the underlying model.

  1. Find the original claim

    Open CSJ’s 14 October announcement. Read the spending paragraph, Notes to editors and Table 1. Record the 2025 components and the definitions of the adult count and child support.

    Keep in mind The source itself discloses pensions, child support and modelling. Do not treat those as hidden categories.

  2. Check the headline sum

    Open the downloadable breakdown CSV. The rows are CSJ’s published rounded amounts in billions of pounds for 2025. Add the first three amounts.

    14.3 + 2.9 + 5.8 = 23.0 billion pounds

    Keep in mind This verifies the displayed addition, not the input estimates or the complete model. Do not add the Total row a second time.

  3. Read the household definition before the UC total

    Open the 12-page CMC briefing. Skip the first five pages of commentary. Read DWP’s introduction on PDF pages 6 and 7, then Table 1’s annual 2025 row on PDF page 8. It reports £11,920 million for whole qualifying household awards in Great Britain. Read the definition and notes on PDF pages 10 and 11.

    11,920 million pounds / 1,000 = 11.920 billion pounds; rounded to one decimal place = 11.9 billion pounds

    Keep in mind The qualifying claimant is neither British nor Irish. The household can include an eligible British partner. The overlapping nationality and work-status columns must not be added.

  4. Locate the mixed-household adjustment

    Read printed page 189 of State of Dependency, which is PDF page 191. It says estimated expenditure is halved for mixed households. Compare that with the £11.9bn UC row in the announcement and the full-household FOI total.

    Keep in mind The public material does not show enough intermediate calculations to reconcile the adjustment. Record this as an unanswered question, not a proven overcount.

  5. Keep the people count separate from the spending total

    Read Notes to editors on the announcement. The 1.85m adult count excludes the specified child-related categories, but £23bn includes those expenditures. Check these coverage notes before attempting any average.

    Keep in mind £23bn divided by 1.85m is not an observed average paid to each counted adult.

  6. Record what cannot yet be reproduced

    A complete model check needs the input tables, survey vintage and weights, population construction, overlap rules, household allocation, benefit-specific amounts and geographic coverage. Without them, stop at the narrower findings above.

    Keep in mind No enquiry has been sent. If the workings arrive later, repeat the calculations and assess uncertainty before changing the finding.

Sources you can check

We recovered the complete current CSJ report, announcement and the 12-page CMC briefing containing the DWP response. We checked the decisive pages, compared preserved report versions, reproduced the displayed arithmetic and reviewed relevant official methods. Full model validation remains on hold pending the missing workings. The narrower explanation here does not depend on proving the estimate wrong.

Inspect the evidence

Source notes include the links and verification limits. The timeline opens in Excel or any spreadsheet app.

Photo credit and licence

Jobcentre Plus sign, London, 5 October 2011. 1000 Words/Shutterstock.com. Shutterstock Standard Image License, Editorial Use Only. Proportionally resized and compressed; the homepage and sharing image add editorial text and a dark lower fade. Archive illustration of the UK benefits system, not foreign-national claimants or the 2025 estimate. Jobcentre Plus does not administer every type of spending included in the total.

Research and production assisted by AI. Read our approach

Have evidence that could change this finding? Contact TALLYCAT01