Fact Check: Farage claims scrapping Indefinite Leave to Remain will save £234 billion (September 2025)
🗣️ The Claim
On 22 September 2025, at a Reform UK policy event, Nigel Farage claimed that scrapping Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) would save Britain £234 billion.
📍 The Context
- ILR allows non-UK citizens who have lived in the UK for a qualifying period to stay permanently without applying for visas.
- Holders of ILR can work, study, and access certain public services, but they are not automatically entitled to all benefits and must still apply for citizenship to vote in national elections.
- Reform UK framed the £234bn figure as a “cost saving” to taxpayers by restricting welfare and public services to UK citizens only.
🔎 The Facts
- Where the £234bn Comes From
- Reform UK has not provided a detailed breakdown of the figure.
- Economists and journalists note it appears to be a cumulative projection of supposed “savings” over a decade, not an annual figure.
- No independent body (IFS, OBR) has validated this calculation.
- Public Services and Benefits
- People with ILR already pay taxes and contribute to the economy.
- Restricting access to welfare and healthcare for ILR holders would also mean removing contributions from highly skilled migrants, NHS staff, and care workers.
- Economists warn this could create labour shortages and reduce net tax revenue.
- Legal and International Issues
- Removing ILR retrospectively would likely violate UK immigration law and international treaties (including the European Convention on Human Rights).
- Courts could block such measures, making the claimed “savings” unrealistic.
- Independent Analysis
- The Institute for Fiscal Studies and other experts have dismissed the £234bn figure as implausible, noting that costs of removing ILR could outweigh supposed benefits.
- Fact-checkers highlight that restricting ILR would harm sectors dependent on long-term migrant workers.
✅ Verdict: False
Farage’s claim that scrapping Indefinite Leave to Remain would save £234bn is not supported by evidence. The number lacks credible backing, ignores tax contributions by ILR holders, and overlooks the legal and economic realities of implementing such a policy.