Identity Theft at the Intersection of Citizenship and Ethnicity Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Design-Correct Replication and Extension Using the National Crime Victimization Survey
This design-correct replication and extension of a National Crime Victimization Survey analysis reveals that while a protective effect for Hispanic individuals against identity theft remained stable between 2018 and 2021, the previously observed elevated risk for Hispanic noncitizens and the significance of noncitizen status generally diminished during the pandemic, coinciding with a surge in benefits fraud among victims.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
Every year, millions of people in the United States wake up to find that someone has stolen their identity, draining bank accounts, opening new credit cards in their name, or filing for government benefits they never received. In 2021 alone, this crime affected nearly 24 million people and cost the nation $16.4 billion. While the financial loss is staggering, the real story lies in who gets targeted and why. For decades, researchers have noticed a curious pattern in crime statistics: immigrants and non-citizens often face lower rates of direct crime, such as robbery or assault, compared to native-born citizens. This is often called the "protective effect." The leading theory suggests that many immigrants avoid interacting with official institutions—like banks, police, or government agencies—out of fear that doing so might expose their legal status or lead to deportation. By staying under the radar, they inadvertently stay out of the reach of criminals who rely on those same institutions to commit their crimes.
But identity theft is different. It does not require a criminal to meet a victim face-to-face; it happens through digital footprints, credit records, and government databases. When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, it forced a massive shift in how people interacted with these systems. To survive the economic crisis, millions of people, including many immigrants who had previously avoided government help, were forced to apply for emergency unemployment benefits and stimulus payments. This sudden, widespread engagement with federal systems raised a critical question: Did the pandemic break the protective shield that had kept non-citizens safe? Did the very act of seeking help make them more vulnerable to identity theft, especially for those who faced the double burden of being both immigrants and part of a specific ethnic group, such as Hispanic communities?
A team of researchers set out to answer this by looking at national survey data from before the pandemic in 2018 and during the pandemic in 2021. Their goal was to see if the old patterns held up when the rules of engagement changed. They focused on three groups: citizens, non-citizens, and specifically Hispanic non-citizens. They also paid close attention to a specific type of fraud: people using stolen identities to apply for government benefits. The researchers were careful to use a rigorous statistical method that accounts for how the survey was conducted, ensuring their results were not just lucky guesses but reliable reflections of the population.
The study confirmed that the protective effect for Hispanic people remained strong and stable. Regardless of whether it was 2018 or 2021, Hispanic individuals were consistently less likely to be victims of identity theft than non-Hispanic individuals. This suggests that the factors keeping this group safe—perhaps different spending habits, tighter community financial networks, or a general caution in how they share personal information—were not disrupted by the chaos of the pandemic. However, the story for non-citizens was more complex. In 2018, non-citizens were significantly less likely to be victims than citizens. By 2021, that gap had narrowed so much that the difference was no longer statistically clear. The data showed a trend in the right direction for the researchers' theory: the protective effect seemed to weaken as non-citizens were forced to engage with the very systems they had avoided. Yet, the evidence was not strong enough to say with certainty that the pandemic definitively broke the shield; the shift could have been due to normal variations in the data rather than a permanent change.
Perhaps the most surprising finding concerned the idea of "double marginalization." A previous study had suggested that Hispanic non-citizens faced a unique, elevated risk because they were targeted by scammers speaking Spanish and because they faced barriers to reporting crimes. The new analysis tested this again. When the researchers used the exact same methods as the previous study, they could reproduce the result. But when they applied the more rigorous statistical corrections required for this type of national survey, the result disappeared. In 2021, there was no evidence that Hispanic non-citizens faced a higher risk than the sum of their individual risks. The "double danger" that was thought to exist in 2018 was not found in 2021, and the earlier finding appears to have been a fluke of the statistical method rather than a real-world pattern.
While the patterns of who gets victimized shifted, the nature of the crime changed dramatically. The researchers found a massive surge in a specific type of fraud: using stolen identities to apply for government benefits. In 2018, only about 12 percent of identity theft victims reported that their information was used to fraudulently apply for government aid. By 2021, that number had skyrocketed to nearly 79 percent. This aligns with reports from government watchdogs that billions of dollars in pandemic relief funds were lost to fraud. The rapid rollout of emergency programs, which prioritized speed over strict identity verification, created a perfect opening for criminals.
The study concludes that while the pandemic did not completely erase the safety margins for immigrants, it did expose a critical weakness in how emergency systems are built. When governments rush to distribute aid, they often lower the barriers to entry, which inadvertently lowers the barriers for criminals. The findings suggest that future emergency programs must be designed with security in mind from the very beginning, not added as an afterthought. This includes creating verification systems that do not accidentally exclude people with mixed immigration status and ensuring that fraud detection tools are not trained only on data from groups that are already well-represented in police reports. The research highlights that in a crisis, the people who are forced to step into the spotlight to survive are often the ones most exposed to new dangers, and protecting them requires more than just good intentions; it requires systems that are secure by design.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.