Donald Trump has reignited debate around immigration and public welfare in the United States after sharing a detailed chart showing the percentage of immigrant households receiving government assistance, broken down by country of origin.
The chart, which Trump posted on his Truth Social platform on January 4, 2026, indicated that 33.3 per cent of Nigerian immigrant households in the United States received some form of public assistance. The post surfaced amid ongoing Republican conversations around immigration, welfare dependency, and the economic impact of migrants in U.S. domestic politics.
Titled “Immigrant Welfare Recipient Rates by Country of Origin,” the chart covers approximately 114 countries and territories. It highlights the share of immigrant households benefitting from public support programmes, including food assistance, healthcare benefits, and other government-funded aid.
According to the data shared, Bhutan recorded the highest welfare usage rate at 81.4 per cent, followed by Yemen (75.2 per cent), Somalia (71.9 per cent), Marshall Islands (71.4 per cent), Dominican Republic (68.1 per cent), Afghanistan (68.1 per cent), Congo (66.0 per cent), Guinea (65.8 per cent), Samoa (1940–1950) at 63.4 per cent, and Cape Verde at 63.1 per cent.
On the lower end of the chart, countries with the smallest percentage of immigrant households receiving public assistance included Bermuda (25.5 per cent), Saudi Arabia (25.7 per cent), Israel/Palestine (25.9 per cent), Argentina (26.2 per cent), South America (unspecified) at 26.7 per cent, Korea (27.2 per cent), Zambia (28.0 per cent), Portugal (28.2 per cent), Kenya (28.5 per cent), and Kuwait (29.3 per cent).
Alongside the welfare statistics, Trump’s administration has continued to push stricter immigration measures, including expanded travel bans and tighter entry requirements. These policies are part of broader efforts aimed at limiting who is allowed into the United States and reducing dependence on public assistance.
The release of the chart has drawn mixed reactions, with supporters citing it as justification for tougher immigration controls, while critics argue that welfare statistics alone do not capture the full economic contribution of immigrant communities.
