Analysis · 10 min read
What did 2015 cost? Lifetime net eleven years later
163,000 people sought asylum in Sweden in 2015. Eleven years later we can recalculate the National Institute of Economic Research's lifetime net with actual outcomes — employment, benefits and tax revenue. Where does the number land?
Published 2026-07-15
The starting point: KI's model
The National Institute of Economic Research (KI) published an updated model in 2025 to calculate lifetime net per immigrant, based on SCB register data and age-specific probabilities for employment, benefit uptake and tax payments.
For refugee immigrants in 2015, KI calculates an average lifetime net of minus 1.4 million SEK per person (2024 prices). The range is wide: −4.2 million to +0.3 million depending on education level.
Calculation on the actual cohort
Taking the 71,700 people who received refugee residence permits in 2015 and applying KI's average: approximately 100 billion SEK in expected negative lifetime net (present value 2024).
The equivalent calculation for family members (54,000 people with family-tie permits 2015–2018): approximately 43 billion SEK.
Total expected net effect from the 2015 cohort (main recipients + family): 130–150 billion SEK lifetime, with an uncertainty range of 90–200 billion.
What the cohort has actually done
After 7 years (2022), 58% of the cohort is employed (SCB). This is in line with KI's assumptions for the age group.
Average disposable income 2022: 254,000 SEK/year, compared to 358,000 SEK/year for native-born in the same age group.
Benefit uptake (income support, housing benefit, establishment allowance): on average 42,300 SEK/year in 2022 per person in the cohort.
What does the number mean?
150 billion SEK corresponds to about 2.4% of Sweden's GDP in 2024. Spread over 40 years, the effect is about 0.06% of GDP per year.
This is not a 'cost' in budgetary terms — it is the difference between expected tax payments and public expenditure linked to the individuals over their remaining lifetime, discounted to present value.
An equivalent calculation for Swedish-born children (who also draw more public resources than they contribute during childhood) would not be negative because lifetime earnings offset that. The difference lies in the shorter active working lifespan and lower average income for the asylum cohort.
Method criticism
KI's model assumes unchanged policy and unchanged integration outcomes. If employment rates after 15 years approach native-born levels (as has happened with earlier cohorts such as Chile 1970s and Bosnia 1990s), the negative net drops substantially.
The model does not account for second-generation outcomes. If the second generation reaches native-born levels (as studies of the Bosnia cohort indicate), lifetime net at family level can become neutral or positive.