View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

ESSAYS ON ISSUES

THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK
OF CHICAGO

FEBRUARY 2004
NUMBER 199

Chicago Fed Letter
Immigrant financial market participation: Defining the research
questions
by Robin Newberger, research analyst, Sherrie L. W. Rhine, senior economist, Federal Reserve Bank of New York,
and Shirley Chiu, research analyst

The strong growth of the immigrant population in recent years, coupled with their
lower average income and educational levels, makes financial access an issue of
broad concern. A national conference in April 2004 aims to encourage policy-oriented
research and to identify public–private partnerships that can help bring the foreign
born into U.S. financial markets.
Between 1990 and 2000, the foreign-

1. Unbanked population
percent
60

45

30

15

0

U.S.born
SOURCE :

Mexicanborn

Latin
Americanborn

Asianborn

born population in the United States
grew by 57% to 31 million people. Immigrants represent about 11.1% of the
total population and 12% of the total
civilian labor force.1 Despite the increasing economic
importance of immigrants, the foreign-born are less
likely than their
U.S. counterparts
to use a wide variety
of financial services.2
Their financial integration may be
hampered by lower
household incomes,
language and cultural differences,
and inexperience
with domestic finanEuropean
Born
born
elsewhere
cial institutions.

1966 SIPP Panel 1996, wave 12 (August 1999–February 2000).

Ensuring fair and
equal access to transaction accounts, consumer-related
credit, business financing, and other
bank products or services is central to
the mission of the Federal Reserve
System. Laws such as the Community
Reinvestment Act, the Equal Credit
Opportunity Act, and the Fair Housing
Act aim to encourage the provision of

mainstream financial products and services to all sectors of society. The benefits
of banking relationships are far-reaching. Transaction account ownership
provides individuals with useful tools for
effectively managing personal finances
and contributes to asset building (e.g.,
savings accounts) and wealth creation
(e.g., homeownership). From a community perspective, greater participation
in housing and credit markets can help
promote neighborhood stabilization
and revitalization. While an extensive
literature has examined immigrant labor market and homeownership assimilation, there has been little academic
research on access to financial markets
for immigrants.
In April 2004, a national conference,
Financial Access for Immigrants: Learning
from Diverse Perspectives, is being cosponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank of
Chicago’s Center for the Study of Financial Access for Immigrants and the
Brookings Institution’s Center on
Urban and Metropolitan Policy.3 The
conference will draw on the expertise
of national researchers, community
development professionals, financial
institutions, and government agencies
to discuss immigrant access to financial
services. It is designed to encourage
future policy-oriented research and to

identify public–private partnerships to
help bring immigrant communities
into the financial mainstream.
In anticipation of the conference, this
Chicago Fed Letter provides an overview
of key topics related to immigrant participation in financial markets.
Characteristics of the immigrant
population

The strong growth of the immigrant
population in recent years, coupled with
their lower average income and educational levels, makes financial access an
issue of broad concern. Compared with
the U.S.-born, about 20% fewer of the
foreign-born population aged 25 or older had completed high school as of 2000.
In addition, foreign-born households
have lower incomes on average than
U.S.-born households, even taking into
account differences in household size
and the number of earners. A greater
proportion of the foreign-born have
fewer years of residence in the United
States, a higher rate of non-citizenship,
and potentially less experience with the
U.S. financial system. The fraction of
the foreign-born population residing
in the United States for 20 years or more
dropped from 50% in 1970 to 32% in
2000. In addition, 37% of the foreignborn were naturalized citizens in 2000,
down from 64% in 1970. An immigrant’s
banking decisions are likely to be substantially influenced by his or her age, educational attainment, income level, years
of U.S. residence, or citizenship status.
The location decisions of many of the
foreign-born population in the U.S.
have made their integration into local
economies a concern at the national
level. Although the destinations for the
majority of the foreign-born population
included the largest metropolitan areas
in six states (California, New York,
Florida, Texas, New Jersey, and Illinois),
there was also substantial population
growth in the Southeast, Midwest, and
Rocky Mountain regions.4 Areas such as
Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas,
Kentucky, Nebraska, and North Carolina
that experienced little if any international migration for most of the twentieth
century now host concentrated pockets
of immigrants in small rural towns.5

Transaction account ownership

A growing body of research has investigated how changes in the financial
services sector affect the banking
relationships of lower-income and minority populations. Focusing on the
determinants of “banked” versus “unbanked” status, researchers have found
that the unbanked (i.e., those without
a transactions account at a mainstream
financial institution) tend to be more
heavily represented among families with
lower incomes, a smaller amount of
net worth, or less education. Families
are also more likely to be unbanked if
they are unemployed, a member of a
minority group, headed by a single
female, or a resident of the South.6
Studies asking why the unbanked in
the general population do not have
checking accounts have found a variety
of answers, including not having enough
money, not trusting banks, the potentially high costs of maintaining a bank
account, and the concurrent decision
to patronize check cashers.7
The paucity of studies on the foreignborn population has been due in part to
a lack of suitable data. Using 1999 data
from the U.S. Census Survey of Income and
Program Participation, our analysis indicates that about 32% of foreign-born
households in the U.S. do not hold transaction accounts, compared with roughly
18% of the U.S.-born. As shown in figure 1, the rate of unbanked status is highest for Mexican immigrants at 54%. By
comparison, 17% of European immigrants and 19% of Asian immigrants are
unbanked. The unbanked foreign-born
share many of the same characteristics
as the unbanked in the general population: lower incomes, lower net worth,
fewer years of education, and single
marital status.
To the extent that immigrants are less
likely than their U.S.-born counterparts
to have a transaction account, it is of
interest to determine whether barriers
such as legal status, language proficiency,
or source-country cultural differences
influence an immigrant’s decision to
use the financial mainstream. Many immigrants arrive in this country with a
distrust of formal financial institutions.8
The absence of universally accepted

documentation among banking institutions for foreign nationals has also resulted in inconsistent identification
requirements and confusion within certain ethnic communities about what is
required to open a bank account.9
Homeownership

An important milestone in the assimilation process for immigrants is homeownership.10 Homeownership represents
a major household investment and
wealth creation opportunity. Immigrants
accounted for 20% of the overall increase in homeownership during the
1990s, up from a 10% share during the
1980s. Even so, wide disparities in homeownership rates persist between the U.S.born and immigrants, further motivating
the study of immigrant homeownership.
According to the U.S. Census, the homeownership rate for the U.S.-born approached 70% by 2000. By comparison,
the homeownership rate for Latin
American immigrants was roughly 41%,
for European immigrants the rate was
63%, while for Asians the rate was
52%. A number of studies have suggested that a portion of the gap in homeownership rates can be explained by
differences in socioeconomic, demographic, or location characteristics.11
For example, relatively lower educational levels, younger age, immigrant status,
and residential location have contributed to the lower homeownership rate
for Hispanics. Although these socioeconomic, demographic, and residential
characteristics are important determinants of homeownership, they do not
fully explain the variation in homeownership rates. Other factors, possibly behavioral or cultural in nature, are likely
to influence the decision to own a home.
Business

Access to credit and other financing for
immigrant business owners is another
measure of financial integration. Historically, self-employment has been an important avenue of economic progress for
immigrants.12 As traditional opportunity
structures change for low-skilled workers,
entrepreneurship has been viewed as
both a viable route up the socioeconomic
ladder and as a mechanism for survival

U.S.-born entrepreneurs.15 Several of
percent
these studies have
16
also pointed out that
the informal financial sector can play
12
an important role.
What is unclear from
the literature is wheth8
er small business
owners have made a
4
decision not to seek
formal sector funding because they do
0
Latin
not understand credU.S.Foreign Mexican American- Asian- European- Born
born
born (all)
born
born
born
born
elsewhere
it markets, do not
SOURCE: 1966 SIPP Panel 1996, wave 12 (August 1999–February 2000).
want to incur debt,
or have experienced
real or perceived barriers to financial access.
in an economically uncertain environment. Figure 2 displays the percentage
International remittances
of business ownership in the U.S. by
Based on data collected in 2002, primarily
country of origin. In every decennial
on the Latin American market, over $30
census since 1880, immigrants were
billion flowed from immigrants in the U.S.
more likely to be self-employed than
to family and friends in their home counnatives.13
try.16 Many studies have focused on the
Factors that influence the business particbehavioral motivators for remittances,
ipation rates of various ethnic groups
which include altruism or the desire to
include the prevalence of self-employcare for those left behind, financing the
ment within the origin country, tenure
emigration of additional family members,
in the United States, English proficieninvestment in the human capital of fam14
cy, and education. Some studies have
ily back home, insuring family against
determined that ethnic enclaves proregional shocks, or the purchase of
mote the proliferation of immigrant
physical assets in home communities.17
enterprises, while others suggest that
Other studies have focused on strategies
enclaves inhibit the development of
for increasing the efficiency and weleconomic opportunities.
fare of remitters. An insufficient supply
Both national and case-study data demof consumer transfer services by bankonstrate that access to start-up capital
ing institutions has contributed to the
is a primary determinant of business
usage of nonbank money transfer serownership, and that capital, labor, and
vices, and by most accounts, the costs
business know-how, more so than soto individual remitters have been relacial capital, enable immigrants to estively high. Particular characteristics have
tablish small businesses in the United
been found to significantly influence
States. Studies of particular immigrant
the decision to use banking institutions
groups have also found a positive relato remit funds. For example, Mexican
tionship between start-up capital and
migrants are less likely to use banks when
the longevity of businesses and a posiremitting money to rural areas that
tive relationship between business proflack a sound banking infrastructure.18
itability and start-up capital.
Migrants are also less likely to use banks
when the remitters lack legal documents.
Whether immigrants are credit conConversely, banks were more likely to
strained at start-up because of institube used by immigrants who were more
tional barriers is uncertain. Many studies
find evidence that start-up funding is low- highly educated or skilled, had family
er for immigrants than for comparable and friends residing in the U.S., or
2. Business ownership

who were remitting a relatively large
percentage of their earnings.
Emerging financial services

Emerging financial products and services
refer to a range of offerings that are intended to supplement traditional transaction accounts or loan products. They
are often complemented by financial
education programs aimed at helping
consumers make sound financial decisions. Typically, studies have used a “best
practices” approach to highlight the
more successful or innovative examples.
These include specialized bank cards,
low-cost transactions accounts aimed at
facilitating money transfers abroad, secured credit cards, secured term loans for
building a credit history, and loan products that rely on rent and utility payments
to demonstrate creditworthiness for
large asset purchases.
Growing numbers of financial institutions
are adapting their application procedures
to accept alternative forms of identification (consular identification card or individual taxpayer identification number)
for opening accounts. Some large investment firms have also hired financial
advisors with expertise in asset management for particular immigrant markets.
National conference

While the topics of immigrant bank
account ownership, homeownership,
business credit, and other uses of the
financial mainstream have been studied
Michael H. Moskow, President; Charles L. Evans,
Senior Vice President and Director of Research; Douglas
Evanoff, Vice President, financial studies; David
Marshall, Vice President, macroeconomic policy research;
Daniel Sullivan, Vice President, microeconomic policy
research; William Testa, Vice President, regional
programs and Economics Editor; Helen O’D. Koshy,
Editor; Kathryn Moran, Associate Editor.
Chicago Fed Letter is published monthly by the
Research Department of the Federal Reserve
Bank of Chicago. The views expressed are the
authors’ and are not necessarily those of the
Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago or the Federal
Reserve System. Articles may be reprinted if the
source is credited and the Research Department
is provided with copies of the reprints.
Chicago Fed Letter is available without charge from
the Public Information Center, Federal Reserve
Bank of Chicago, P.O. Box 834, Chicago, Illinois
60690-0834, tel. 312-322-5111 or fax 312-322-5515.
Chicago Fed Letter and other Bank publications
are available on the World Wide Web at http://
www.chicagofed.org.
ISSN 0895-0164

to varying degrees, rarely has there been
an opportunity to explore the common
question of financial access across related
subjects. The upcoming conference is
intended to identify the basic questions
that unify this area of study and give a
clearer definition to the concept of financial access among the foreign-born.
The sessions will treat broad themes

such as how the financial practices of
immigrants compare with those of the
U.S.-born, as well as more focused topics
such as the techniques used to inform
immigrants about financial products.

1

Washington, DC, Financial Management
Center, OMB No. 15100-00-68.
7
For example, see William H. Greene,
Sherrie L. W. Rhine, and Maude ToussaintComeau, 2003, “Who uses check-cashing
businesses and why: A look at racial/ethnic differences,” Federal Reserve Bank
of Chicago, working paper, No. 2003-10.
8
See Schoenholtz and Stanton, 2001.
9
See Sheila C. Bair, 2002, “Remarks by
the Honorable Sheila C. Bair, Assistant
Secretary for Financial Institutions before the Multi-Lateral Investment/InterAmerican Development Bank,” Second
Regional Conference on Impact of Remittances as a Development Tool.
10
See R. D. Alba and J. R. Logan, 1992,
“Assimilation and stratification in the
homeownership patterns of racial and
ethnic groups,” International Migration
Review, Vol. 26, No. 4, Winter, pp. 1314–1341.
11
For example, see D. Myers, I. Megbolube,
and S. W. Lee, 1998, “Cohort estimation of
homeownership attainment among nativeborn and immigrant populations,” Journal
of Housing Research, Vol. 9, pp. 237–269.
12
See Jimy Sanders and Victor Nee, 1996
“Immigrant self-employment: The family
as social capital and the value of human
capital,” American Sociological Review, Vol.
61, No. 2, April, pp. 231–249; and I. Light,

2

3

4

5

6

See Census 2000 website and U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau,
2001, “Profile of the foreign-born population in the United States: 2000,” Current Population Reports, Special Studies, December.
See Sherrie L.W. Rhine and William H.
Greene, 2003, “Immigrant participation in
the financial mainstream: Taking that first
step,” unpublished manuscript; and Una
Okonkwo Osili and Anna Paulson, 2003,
“The financial assimilation of immigrants
in the U.S.,” unpublished manuscript.
For more details, go to www.chicagofed.org/
community_development/index.cfm.
See Audrey Singer, 2004, “The rise of new
immigrant gateways: Historical flows and
recent settlement trends,” Washington, DC:
The Brookings Institution, forthcoming.
See Andrew Schoenholtz and Kristin
Stanton, 2001, “Reaching the immigrant
market: Creating Homeownership Opportunities for New Americans,” Georgetown
University and Fannie Mae Foundation.
See Jeanne M. Hogarth and Kevin H.
O’Donnell, 1997, “Being accountable: A
descriptive study of unbanked households
in the U.S.,” Proceedings of Association for
Financial Counseling and Planning Education; U.S. Department of the Treasury,
1997, Mandatory EFT Demographic Study,

From both an empirical and a practical
perspective, much remains to be understood about the choices confronting
the foreign-born population in their

participation in the financial system.
Building on the diverse perspectives
presented at the upcoming conference,
the Chicago Fed aims to encourage additional policy-oriented research that
takes into account the experiences of
financial institutions, service providers,
and government agencies to address
these unanswered questions.
P. Bhachu, and S. Karageorgies, 1993,
“Immigrant networks and entrepreneurship,” in Immigration and Entrepreneurship,
Ivan Light and Parminder Bhachu (eds.),
New Brunswick, NJ.
13
See “Immigrant entrepreneurs” in Research
Perspectives on Migration: A Joint Project of
the International Migration Policy Program
of the Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace and the Urban Institute, January/
February 1997, Vol. 1, No. 2.
14
For example, see Borjas 1986; Fairlie and
Meyer, 1996; and Andrew Yuengert,1995,
“Testing hypotheses of immigrant self-employment,” Journal of Human Resources,
Vol. 30, No. 1.
15
For example, see Timothy Bates, 1990,
“Self employment trends among Mexican
Americans,” U.S. Census, Economic Studies, No. 90-9.
16
See Manuel Oroczo, 2003, “Worker remittances: Issues and best practices,” InterAmerican Dialogue, Washington, DC.
17
For example, see Robert Lucas and Oded
Stark, 1985, “Motivations to remit: Evidence
from Botswana,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 93, No. 5, pp. 901–918.
18
See Catalina Amuedo-Dorantes and Susan
Pozo, 2002, “On the use of differing money
transmission methods by Mexican immigrants,” mimeo.