WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Treasury’s recent proposed regulation to limit refunds for certain tax credits based on immigration status is the latest move by the Trump administration to restrict noncitizens’ access to federal benefits.

In President Donald Trump’s return to the White House, he has employed a governmentwide approach to fulfilling his immigration agenda that includes not only the central campaign promise of mass deportations, but curtailing what few federal benefits some immigrants had. 

Those actions include pushing out foreign-born workers from the trucking industry, barring noncitizens from accessing government-subsidized housing even for families that include U.S. citizens, and pressuring banks to restrict immigrants’ access to opening accounts or borrowing money.

Previous presidents generally restricted management of immigration to the departments of Homeland Security, State or Justice. But in Trump’s second term, several unrelated federal agencies have undertaken initiatives meant to disadvantage immigrants.

“What’s been unique about this administration is beginning to incorporate agencies that have never before been involved in immigration,” Colleen Putzel-Kavanaugh, an analyst with the immigration think tank Migration Policy Institute, said.

In Trump’s second term, the Department of Transportation, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Small Business Administration and Federal Communications Commission are among the agencies that have sought to carry out the president’s immigration crackdown.

Administration officials have said the benefits of federal programs should be reserved for U.S. citizens.

An executive order Trump signed in February 2025 to limit immigrants from receiving benefits, said it was necessary to “prevent taxpayer resources from acting as a magnet and fueling illegal immigration to the United States, and to ensure, to the maximum extent permitted by law, that no taxpayer-funded benefits go to unqualified aliens.”

In an Aug. 26 statement to States Newsroom, White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers said the “Trump Administration is putting Americans first.”

“As promised, President Trump secured the border, cracked down on illegal immigration, and put Americans first,” Rogers said.

Pace accelerating

Trump’s first administration was partially defined by its aggressive immigration policy, including visa restrictions, a travel ban from certain countries, a higher bar for asylum cases in immigration court, and forcing asylum seekers to remain in Mexico while their asylum cases were pending. 

But the rate at which the second Trump administration is pursuing immigration-related actions is far surpassing the first, according to an analysis from the Migration Policy Institute. 

In its first year, the administration took more than 500 immigration actions, including executive orders and regulations, compared to 472 actions in all four years of the first administration, according to MPI’s analysis.

Welfare restrictions

Federal public benefits are generally denied to “not qualified” immigrants, under a welfare reform law enacted during the Clinton administration known as the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, or PRWORA.

The law limits certain public benefits for individuals who do not meet a specific immigration status or eligibility requirements. 

Over the years, Congress has expanded certain immigrant categories and federal agencies have interpreted which programs are covered under PRWORA.

But Trump reversed that trend.

Last February, he signed an executive order directing federal agencies to review any programs that benefit immigrants and reverse any expansions. 

Following the order, the departments of Health and Human Services, Agriculture, Education, Labor, HUD and the IRS either rescinded notices that clarified eligibility or issued reinterpretations of PRWORA.

HHS in July 2025 designated 13 additional programs, including the early-childhood Head Start program, that are subject to PRWORA qualifications. 

HUD in October restricted certain housing programs and grants based on immigration status. 

USDA now considers certain licenses, grants, payments and loan programs to fall under the law’s requirements.

The Labor Department updated a policy that now forces noncitizens with temporary work authorization to go through reverification every three months in order to participate in a program to help access employment or education.

And the Department of Education issued a notice that certain higher education programs, such as Pell grants, loans and workforce programs fall under “federal public benefits.” 

A preliminary injunction currently prevents the Trump administration’s new interpretation of PRWORA from taking effect.

The FCC, which is supposed to operate as an independent federal agency but has shown a deference to Trump during his second term, issued a proposed rule in April that would limit the Lifeline program, which provides a discount on phone services for low-income consumers, to U.S. citizens and immigrants with a “qualified” status. 

That group includes lawful permanent residents, refugees, people granted asylum, certain survivors of trafficking and victims of abuse. All other immigrants, including those with some form of legal status, are considered “not qualified.” 

Livelihoods at stake

While the second Trump administration has expanded efforts to limit benefits, it has also moved to restrict access to the workforce in a couple of policies.

The SBA in March banned noncitizens from applying for small business loans. 

And the DOT issued a rule that limits the types of visas which can be used to obtain a Commercial Driver’s License for foreign-born truck drivers while pushing for veterans to fill the void. 

That approach was novel, David Bier, the director of immigration studies of the libertarian think tank the Cato Institute, said.

“There were certainly some benefits that they attempted to restrict more on the welfare side of things,” Bier said of the first Trump administration. 

“But I can’t think of an instance where they attempted to try to use their regulatory authority to prevent people from being able to engage in certain occupations that they would otherwise be eligible for if they were authorized to work.”

Restrictions in GOP megabill

The massive tax cuts and spending package that the Republican-controlled Congress passed last year also limits safety net programs for immigrants.

The “big, beautiful” law restricted eligibility for immigrants in Medicaid, Medicare, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, Affordable Care Act coverage, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

The bill struck several categories of non-citizens who were previously eligible for SNAP, such as immigrants with longstanding humanitarian status like refugees, asylees, parolees and those with suspended deportation status. 

It also implemented tighter proof-of-citizenship or immigration verification requirements for Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program, while also discouraging states from covering insurance for immigrants until that status is verified. 

The law also bars several other groups of immigrants from ACA subsidies. 

Immigrants with asylum or a pending claim, in the country on a humanitarian basis, who hold Temporary Protected Status or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals status, or who an immigration judge has deemed their home country too dangerous to return are ineligible, under the law.

The Trump administration’s focus on limiting safety net programs to noncitizens has produced a chilling effect. 

An estimated one in ten adult immigrants stopped participating in government benefits for food, housing or healthcare because they were afraid to enroll in benefits they qualified for, according to a report from the Migration Policy Institute.

WASHINGTON — A developing trade war with Canada could bite Republicans ahead of the upcoming midterm elections as voters worry about rising prices and industries in states with competitive races could suffer.

Maine’s lobster industry dodged what officials had warned could be economic havoc Thursday morning when Canada reversed its decision to tax lobster imports at 25%. But states including Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Michigan and Wisconsin could see effects if Canada follows through on retaliatory tariffs on alcohol, automobiles, dairy, home appliances, steel and other goods.

Those products are among the 629 categories Canada’s Department of Finance announced Tuesday in response to President Donald Trump’s most recent tariffs on Canadian goods that went into effect over the weekend.

“On one hand you have the issue of the U.S. import tariffs, which voters are associating with affordability, but then on the other hand you have the retaliatory Canadian tariffs, which are going to impact businesses in those states,” said Alfredo Carrillo Obregon, a trade policy analyst with the libertarian think tank Cato Institute. 

“So you could have a sort of double whammy where there’s pressure on behalf of voters for the president to recede this policy,” he said.

Trade talks have completely stalled between the U.S. and Canada, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer told Canadian Broadcasting Corporation News on Wednesday evening, a day after Canada announced retaliatory taxes to start Sept. 8 on $27.6 billion worth of American goods. 

The duties on U.S. imports will match Trump’s new 50% tariffs on hundreds of Canadian products “dollar-for-dollar,” according to Canada’s Department of Finance.

Individual businesses and importers, rather than governments, pay the tariffs on goods. Economists warn increased costs on either side of tariffs can affect investment decisions and increase consumer prices.

States Newsroom documented accounts from numerous small business owners affected by Trump’s tariff policies during his second term.

Small portion of trade volume

The Yale Budget Lab estimates that under the Trump administration’s current tariff schedule, including its latest tariffs on Canadian goods, Americans will spend an additional $1,100 annually on household costs.

The increase in annual household costs pre- and post-Trump’s newest duties on Canadian goods, which took effect Aug. 22, ranges roughly between $27 and $33, according to the Yale Budget Lab’s comparison.

Of the massive and intertwined trade relationship between the U.S. and Canada, the new tariffs account for a small fraction of all goods traded. Canada is the U.S.’s second-largest trading partner, and the two countries exchanged $879.9 billion in goods in 2025, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.

Major areas of trade between the two countries that are subjected to tariffs include automobiles, industrial supplies, steel, iron and aluminum.

“It’s not a huge magnitude. Both the Canadian and the American tariffs cover only about 5% of what each country exports to each other. We’re not talking about all of a sudden everything we get from Canada is going to get tariffs. It’s only a share of that. But this is the initial salvo,” Obregon said.

“If you are a company that relies on imports from Canada, and you’re sort of doing production on both sides of the border in that sense, then you are worried about where this could lead in the future,” he added.

Outsized politics

While tariffs are small in proportion to Canada and the U.S.’s entire trade portfolio, the politics are outsized.

Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who faces a tough race to keep her seat, told local reporters Wednesday she spoke with the Trump administration about protecting her state’s major lobster and seafood industry, which was spared Thursday.

Collins’ opponent, Democrat Troy Jackson, attacked the incumbent on social media Wednesday, blaming her for having “completely failed” to stop Trump’s tariffs.

The Republican candidate for Michigan’s open Senate seat, former U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers, has not commented on the new tariffs, but Democrats in Michigan are seizing the issue.

Michigan Democratic Party Chair Curtis Hertel told the Michigan Advance the tariffs will “throw Michigan’s economy into chaos.”

Rogers’ opponent, Abdul El-Sayed, on Tuesday responded to Trump’s threat on Truth Social to rename Lake Ontario to Lake America.

“Whatever you call it, you just made all the goods we buy that come across our border more expensive,” El-Sayed wrote on X. “Michigan, he’s asking us to pay for his vanity trade war with our money.”

Trump signed an executive order Thursday renaming Lake Ontario to Lake America.

During comments to reporters, Trump said Canada “has been ripping us off a long time on trade, very sadly, even the military. You know, we defend Canada for nothing.”

He added: “They don’t pay for anything, and they want to be treated like a state, but they’re not a state.”

Imran Bayoumi, an expert on U.S.-Canada relations with the Atlantic Council, said Canadians are “angry, hurt and upset” about Trump’s rhetoric toward their country’s sovereignty. 

The country, which has long received scrutiny over its defense spending, has increased the allocation in recent years, said Bayoumi, a Canadian-American.

“There’s a recognition that you can’t change your geography, and so the two are going to need to find a way to work together … on shared defense challenges, economic priorities, the Arctic, the defense of North America,” Bayoumi said. 

“The challenge now is to either find a narrow way off this path that both sides are on, which seems to be spiraling downwards, or ensure the deterioration of relations in the economic and trade sector doesn’t spill into other areas.”

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney enjoys approval from 76% of Canadians for his decision over the weekend to walk away from trade talks with the U.S., according to the Canadian Angus Reid Institute. But the poll found two in five Canadians also fear for their job security.

Carney has already pledged a $7.5 billion package for businesses and workers who might be affected by the tariffs.

Trump administration officials remain dug in on the tariffs and denied any major effects of the Canadian retaliatory tariffs.

“The concept that this could have any kind of meaningful effect on the United States is quite limited,” Greer told Fox News’ Laura Ingraham Wednesday. 

“And guess what? If there’s something in there that has some negative effect that is brought to the attention of President Trump, he can do what he needs to do,” he added. “I mean, this is just not going to lead to any economic Armageddon.” 

Jennifer Shutt contributed to this story.