Cross Border Remittances: Technology in the origin and Innovation on the payout

Manuel Orozco

7.13.17

San José Costa Rica

L a m a x i m i z a c i ó n d e l a s r e m e s a s o c u r r e a d o s n i v e l e s , a m b o s d e n t r o d e n e n t o r n o f i n a n c i e r o :

m e d i a n t e l a m o d e r n i z a c i ó n y o p t i m i z a c i ó n d e l s i s t e m a d e t r a n s f e r e n c i a d e p a g o

m e d i a n t e s u a p a l a n c a m i e n t o c o m o i n s t r u m e n t o d e c o n s t r u c c i ó n d e a c t i v o s

E l m a r c o d e r e f e r e n c i a e s s o b r e l a p r e s e n c i a d e u n m e r c a d o d e 3 0 m i l l o n e s d e t r a n s a c c i o n e s m e n s u a l e s h a c i a A m e r i c a L a t i n a y e l C a r i b e ( c o n u n va l o r d e m a s d e U S $ 7 0 m i l m i l l o n e s a n u a l e s ) , 7 5 % o r i g i n a d o e n E s t a d o s U n i d o s , m a n e j a d o p o r m á s d e 5 0 e m p r e s a s d e g i r o ( 1 5 q u e c o n t r o l a e l 8 0 % ) y c o n u n a r e d d e p a g o s d e m á s d e u n m i l l ó n d e p u n t o s , m u c h o s d e e l l o s c o n t e c n o l o g í a i n t e r n e t p a r a c a p t a r p a g o s e l e c t r ó n i c o s y d e p o s i t a r l o s e n c u e n t a s .

L a c o m p e t i t i v i d a d e n e l o r i g e n d e l o s p a g o s , e s t á i n c l u y e n d o e i n t e g r a n d o l a t e c n o l o g í a d i g i t a l p e r o c o n u n l e n t o p r o c e s o d e c a p t a c i ó n d e l m e r c a d o d e m e n o s d e l 8 % y c o n u n a t e n d e n c i a a l d e p ó s i t o a c u e n t a c o n t e n d e n c i a s i m i l a r p e r o c o n va r i a c i o n e s p o r p a í s e s ( C o l o m b i a c o n e l m a y o r p o r c e n t a j e d e d e p ó s i t o s a c u e n t a ) .

8% growth of Family Remittances to Latin America and the Caribbean in 2016; 7% in 2017

Country 2015 2016 Growth Jun 2017 (estimated

unless*)

Paraguay 461.5 562.2 21.8% 32%

Guatemala 6285.0 7160.0 13.9% 15%*

Ecuador 2377.7 2618.2 10.1% 5%

Mexico 24771.0 26962.0 8.8% 7%

Brazil 2175.2 2365.1 8.7% -5%

Dominican Republic 4963.5 5364.6 8.1% 13%

El Salvador 4283.9 4576.0 6.8% 12%*

Honduras 3650.6 3891.6 6.6% 16%

Nicaragua 1193.4 1265.4 6.0% 7%

Peru 2718.8 2882.2 6.0% 5%

Colombia 4635.5 4857.1 4.8% 4%

Jamaica 2226.0 2293.4 3.0% 4%

Bolivia 1178.4 1205.3 2.3% 3%

Belize 156 158.4 1.5% ND

Haiti 2195.0 2192.7 -0.1% ND

Costa Rica 517.5 504.3 -2.6% 11%

Uruguay 117.0 114.0 -2.6% 21%

Panama 472.8 424.6 -10.2% 2%

Latin America and Caribbean 64,379 69,397 8.% 7%

Source: http://www.thedialogue.org/resources/remittances-to-latin-america-and-the-caribbean-in-2016/ and estimates for 2017 using same methodology

http://www.thedialogue.org/resources/remittances-to-latin-america-and-the-caribbean-in-2016/

Nearly 23 million households receive remittances, 16.6 million from the U.S.

Country

Volume in

2015 (US $

Millions)

Share of

LAC

Total

Volume

Average

Remitted

per

Transactio

n

Incoming Transactions

–Worldwide

Incoming Transactions

–U.S. Originated

Bolivia 1,195 2% $280 355,655 106,696

Colombia 4,639 7% $241 1,606,747 1,044,386

Dominican Republic 4,952 7% $247 1,673,629 1,087,859

Ecuador 2,358 3% $217 905,697 498,133

El Salvador 4,280 6% $277 1,286,444 1,157,800

Guatemala 6,285 9% $376 1,394,287 1,254,858

Haiti 2,198 3% $120 1,526,389 1,144,792

Honduras 3,719 5% $261 1,185,694 1,067,124

Jamaica 2,217 3% $200 923,750 692,813

Mexico 24,771 36% $340 6,067,576 5,764,197

Nicaragua 1,190 2% $250 474,657 213,453

11 countries 57,804 - $250 17,586,979 14,215,325

Relative to LAC 68,313 85% $250 22,771,000 16,622,830

Source: http://www.thedialogue.org/resources/remittance-transfers-scorecard-2016-test/

Central American countries appear as the most dependent: remittances as percent of GDP

Country 2014 2015 Change

Haiti 22.5 25.0 2.5

Honduras 17.4 18.0 0.6

Jamaica 16.3 16.6 0.3

El Salvador 16.6 16.6 0.0

Guatemala 9.9 10.3 0.4

Nicaragua 9.7 9.4 -0.3

Guyana 10.7 9.3 -1.4

Dominican Republic 7.4 7.6 0.2

Belize 4.7 4.8 0.1

Bolivia 3.6 3.7 0.1

Ecuador 2.4 2.4 0.0

Mexico 1.9 2.3 0.4

Paraguay 1.6 2.0 0.4

Colombia 1.1 1.6 0.5

Peru 1.3 1.4 0.1

Panama 1.5 1.1 -0.4

Costa Rica 1.2 1.0 -0.2

Trinidad y Tobago* 0.5 0.5 0.0

Brazil 0.1 0.2 0.1

Uruguay 0.2 0.2 0.0

Argentina 0.1 0.1 0.0

Suriname 0.2 0.1 -0.1Source: http://www.thedialogue.org/resources/remittances-to-latin-america-and-the-caribbean-in-2016/

Issues in Marketplace Intermediation in Money Transfers

Competitiveness• Affordable pricing• Fair regulatory

environment• Value added services• Effectiveness• Innovation

• Technology• Business models

A CompetitiveMoney Transfer Industry

2006 2009 2012 2016

Number of RSPs 40 31 37 30

Avg. Number of Products p/RSP 2 2 3 4

Avg. Countries Operating p/RSP 4 31 52*

Fee 4.7% 4.1% 4.4% 3.7%

FX 2.4% 1.3% 1.3% 1.2%

Total cost 7.1% 5.4% 5.7% 4.9%

Avg. Payment points p-RSP 4,047 4,860 5,809 15,602

PP per country 1,570 2,208 2,509

Rural ratio 58% 74% 68%

Bank ratio 72% 78% 54% 38%

Credit Union and MFI ratio 16% 27% 21% 8%

Consumer Support 3 3 3 3

Source: http://www.thedialogue.org/resources/remittance-transfers-scorecard-2016-test/

Key competitors

↑↓ RSP Rank Score

Change in rank RSP 2012 2016 2012 2016

↑ Dolex 2 1 34 40

↔ Viamericas 1 1 36 40

↔ Xoom 1 1 36 40

↔ Ria 2 2 34 39

↑ Sigue 4 3 31 38

↔ La Nacional 3 3 32 38

↑ Barri International 7 3 28 38

↓ Univisión/BTS 2 3 32 38

Transfast 4 New Entrant 37

↓ MoneyGram 3 4 32 37

↑ Vigo 8 4 27 37

↑ Order Express 5 4 30 37

↑ Girosol 8 4 27 37

Remitly 5 4 New entrant 37

Choice Money Transfer 5 New Entrant 35

ShareMoney 5 New Entrant 35

↓ Uniteller 3 5 32 35

↓ Wells Fargo 1 5 36 35

↑ Delgado Travel 13 6 20 34

↑ Intermex 8 6 27 34

WorldRemit 6 New Entrant 34

↓ Giromex 6 7 29 33

↓ Western Union 5 7 30 33

↔ JNBS 8 8 27 32

↑ Cibao Express 12 9 21 31

↓ Unitransfer 9 11 26 26

↓ USPS Sure Money 9 11 29 26

Pangea 12 New Entrant 24

↓ CAM 11 12 22 24

↓ Orlandi Valuta 10 13 25 22Source: http://www.thedialogue.org/resources/remittance-transfers-scorecard-2016-test/

Innovation in the origin: Internet-Based Stored Value Accounts,(the ´Fin´ and ‘Tech’ of Fintech in remittance transfers)

http://www.thedialogue.org/resources/on-the-cusp-of-change-migrants-use-of-the-internet-for-remittance-transfers/

Online (portal or mobile) transfers

Some Determinants of the 8% growthSpecific trends:

1. More Mexican migrants are sending money, rather than more new Mexican migrants (from 50 to over 60% of all Mexican migrants);

2. Remittance growth in Central America is reflected in its continued migration associated to insecurity, as well as from some more Central American migrants sending than before (from 70% 10 years ago, to 80% of all migrants in 2016)

3. Growth is also associated with electronic/Internet fund based transfers: at least 15% of flows are electronic account based and the principal or frequency sent is about 10% higher than cash-to-cash.

4. Change in US dollar exchange rates also explains growth for Mexico and the rest of Latin America and the Caribbean (Paraguay or Colombia, for example);

Countries LAC share Contribution to growth

Mexico 44% 3.5%Guatemala (C. America) 17% 1.4%D. Republic (Carb) 8% 0.6%El Salvador (C. America) 6% 0.5%Honduras (C. America) 5% 0.4%Ecuador (Andean) 5% 0.4%Colombia (Andean) 4% 0.4%

Source: http://www.thedialogue.org/resources/remittances-to-latin-america-and-the-caribbean-in-2016/

Electronic fund transfers are a influencing growth: Shift from C2C to A2c/a…

Sending Method Amount Frequency Cost Annual Percent Using

Bank 300 12 13.1 3600 8

Agency 290 14 7.65 4060 84

Internet/Mobile 260 16 5.16 4176 7

Other 40 1

2010 (%) 2013 (%) 2016 (%)

Willing to Change Method for Sending Money 47 58 42

Method

Remittance card 9 29

Direct deposit in a bank account 75 41 13

Internet 7 18 21

Cell phone mobile transfer 4 12 22

Other 5 0

Mexico…

Promedio

(dólares)

Frecuencia

Anual

Enviado

(dólares)

(%)Número de

Transacciones

Volumen

(dólares)

Contribución

Al

crecimiento

Internet o móvil 314 15 4703 8.10% 6,842,601 2,606,363,827 0.66%

Vía banco 498 10 4983 6.00% 6,842,601 2,045,800,846 0.51%

Efectivo 330 14 4620 85.90% 6,842,601 27,155,409,476 6.83%Source: http://www.thedialogue.org/resources/internet-based-transfers-current-landscape/

Innovation on the payout: increasing financial access through advice

• With a robust payment network and declining revenue per remittance transaction, payers are seeking to strengthen their relationship with remittance recipients;

• Several financial institutions have sought to introduce financial innovation in the form of innovation combining product and services;

• One key reason is that remittances intersect with finances through wealth generation

• Because the cash transfer is typically relying on a financial institution, people are accessing the system;

• The flow of money increases disposable income which in turns increases savings;

• The management of income improves decision making in ways that facilitates financial access (people have needs);

The instrumental role of remittances can thus be leveraged to further financial inclusion in at least four ways:

1. Expanding payment networks through a wide range financial institutions or instruments.

2. Ensuring payment networks are cost efficient;

3. Ensuring that remittance recipients are able to formalize the savings they accrue into accessible, open and regulated depository institutions;

4. Enabling tools that motivate (pull) recipients to access and use a range of financial products needed to increase assets.

The Inter-American Dialogue has developed a strategy that provides financial education to remittance recipients and other

transactional clients through partnerships with a range of grassroots and financial service institutions operating worldwide. In

partnerships with local financial institutions, the Dialogue then provides a client with four services: financial education, presentation of

available financial products, a referral or method to connect with a financial institution, and follow-up on financial behavior change.

The Dialogue’s methodology begins by identifying partner institutions and training financial educators on its unique approach. It then

rolls out the financial education program at field sites throughout the country.

The central method is one-on-one sessions adapted to the reality of the partner institution’s mission and location. Financial educators

approach clients as they wait in line for their transactional activity, such as remittance payment. They then offer them a free,

personalized financial advising session that lasts approximately 30 minutes. The session relies on a pedagogical approach that defines,

explains, illustrates and evaluates basic issues of personal finance while connecting them to the person’s day to day income and

expenditure realities (We call this “ SEXI:” Statement, Explanation, eXample, Implication). A typical session would have the following

structure:

1. Financial education (20 minutes): basic explanation of budgeting, savings, credit and insurance using real-life examples;

2. Promotion of financial products (5 minutes): brief introduction to financial products based on the interests and needs of the client;

3. Point of contact (3 minutes): introduction to a staff person who can open an account.

The end result is that 20%-25% of clients formalize their savings by depositing their money at the financial institution after receiving

their advice.

Financial advising strategy—

Nudging people to save…discouting and gratitude as techniques

• Our gratitude component is part of a strategy aimed at modifying financial behavior and stems from an step forward to financial education that is mostly informative as a means to ‘inform’ rational choice.

• The conventional, and most respected rational choice theory stresses that people make decisions based on their expected utilities (the net assessment of their preferences compared to all other player preferences) accompanied by their clout and priorities and a sense of risk in the decision. If their expected utility is low, then their choice is not todo X. For example, giving information to people will make the expected utility of informal savings to be lower than putting it in a bank. However, information has not been enough to change choices over formal savings.

• Using nudging or prodding techniques learned from our previous work and in behavior economics we learned that there are other factors influencing people’s decisions (particularly those subjective valuations prioritizing what matters and what not) and they have to do with psychological subjective factors such as moral codes, social norms, hearsaying, reward-punishment, emotions, beliefs. In other words, rational choice is not only informed by rank ordering preferences. We also learned that we all work in ‘automatic’, not reflective efforts. So we needed to ‘nudge’ to get people to arrive at their “Aha!” moment.

• For example, when it comes to financial decisions, BEs have demonstrated that behavioral time discounting and emotions play a key role in changing financial decisions. We first introduced a nudging technique of forming, informing and transforming clients by with the motivation that time discounting through financial planning would yield greater value in their financial decisions. Then we came across gratitude from some studies.

• Gratitude as an emotional attribute is said to shape economic outcomes. Lerner had used the evocation of gratitude to explore how people responded to economic decisions. We followed that framework and introduced randomly the evocation of gratitude (at the beginning or at the end of the session).

http://inudgeyou.com/en/archives/1177

Innovation in financial access amongrecipients

COUNTRY

EL SALVADOR (Fedecaces)

GUATEMALA(Banco Industrial/Banrural/Micoope

NICARAGUA(Promerica)

Formalized savings? Formalized savings? Formalized savings?Did not

formalize savings

Formalized savigns

Did not formalize savings

Formalized savigns

Did not formalize savings

Formalized savigns

Time discounting through financial planning

Not pursued 92.2% 7.8% 90.5% 9.5% 92.3% 7.7%Pursued by client 81.9% 18.1% 78.8% 21.2% 83.9% 16.1%

Evocating gratitude

Was not evoked 88.5% 11.5% 83.8% 16.2% 92.1% 7.9%Was evoked 82.0% 18.0% 79.7% 20.3% 83.1% 16.9%

Conversion total 16% 20% 16%

Thank youInter-American Dialogue

Washington, DC

Explaining 2016 growth

1. Remittances to Mexico: a) more Mexican migrants are sending in 2016 compared to 2006; they are staying longer

Year

Mexican

Migrants

in the U.S.

Family

Remitters

to Mexico

As Share

of All

Mexican

Migrants

Annual

Remittance

Growth

2006 11,541,400 5,023,879 50% 0

2010 11,711,100 4,828,067 47% -1%

2014 11,773,073 6,291,867 61% 4.8%

2016 11,831,938 6,842,601 66% 8.8%

Source: http://www.thedialogue.org/resources/las-remesas-a-mexico-durante-el-2016/

b) Remittances and US dollar exchange rate to Mexico…An increase in the exchange rate, increases the number of transactions.

-.04

-.02

0

.02

.04

.06

Fxgro

wth

4000 5000 6000 7000 8000Transactions

Source: http://www.thedialogue.org/resources/las-remesas-a-mexico-durante-el-2016/

2. Remittance growth is associated to Central American migration…-Nearly 100,000 people enter the U.S., 60% without papers;-More than 300,000 attempt to leave their countries

Annual

migrant

entry

U.S.

Removals

(FY2016)

U.S.

Apprehensions

(FY2015)

Mexican

Apprehensions

(2016)

Immigrant

Visas

(FY2015)

Non-

Immigrant

visas

issued

(FY2015)

Cross-

Border

unauthorized

Honduras 26,751 21,994 42,433 58,814 4,728 49,025 18,440

Nicaragua 4,316 795 1,577 1,564 2,099 19,122 1,818

Guatemala 33,222 33,940 66,982 83,745 5,699 55,991 25,575

El Salvador 30,117 20,538 51,200 35,390 12,465 59,921 14,580

Sub region 94,406 77,267 162,192 179,513 24,991 184,059 60,414

Causes of migration…El Salvador Honduras Guatemala

Violence/Insecurity 24.70% 26.80% 12.90%

Economic Opportunities 59.40% 62.50% 65.30%

Family Reunification 7.10% 1.80% 11.90%

Other 8.80% 8.90% 9.90%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Un

acco

mp

anie

d m

ino

rs b

y ci

ty

Homicides in city as ratio of all country

3. Electronic fund transfers are another factor influencing growth: Shift from C2C to A2c/a…

Sending Method Amount Frequency Cost Annual Percent Using

Bank 300 12 13.1 3600 8

Agency 290 14 7.65 4060 84

Internet/Mobile 260 16 5.16 4176 7

Other 40 1

2010 (%) 2013 (%) 2016 (%)

Willing to Change Method for Sending Money 47 58 42

Method

Remittance card 9 29

Direct deposit in a bank account 75 41 13

Internet 7 18 21

Cell phone mobile transfer 4 12 22

Other 5 0

Mexico…

Promedio

(dólares)

Frecuencia

Anual

Enviado

(dólares)

(%)Número de

Transacciones

Volumen

(dólares)

Contribución

Al

crecimiento

Internet o móvil 314 15 4703 8.10% 6,842,601 2,606,363,827 0.66%

Vía banco 498 10 4983 6.00% 6,842,601 2,045,800,846 0.51%

Efectivo 330 14 4620 85.90% 6,842,601 27,155,409,476 6.83%Source: http://www.thedialogue.org/resources/internet-based-transfers-current-landscape/

Prospects for Growth in 2017: 1. Much of the growth in remittances originates from countries confronting some form of state fragility

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

-0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35

2. A federal tax against remittances?If it were to occur, it would generate less than US$1 billion

Monto estimado de remesas por nacionalidadindocumentada Impuesto agregado por pagar

Bolivia $ 155,349,376 $ 3,106,988

Colombia $ 981,618,401 $ 19,632,368

Dominican Republic $ 349,311,525 $ 6,986,230

Ecuador $ 421,569,958 $ 8,431,399

El Salvador $ 2,918,466,460 $ 58,369,329

Guatemala $ 4,293,622,133 $ 85,872,443

Haiti $ 357,175,104 $ 7,143,502

Honduras $ 2,896,601,386 $ 57,932,028

Jamaica $ 360,262,760 $ 7,205,255 Mexico $ 17,834,425,518 $ 356,688,510

Nicaragua $ 277,488,900 $ 5,549,778

11 countries $ 30,845,891,521 $ 616,917,830 Trump, Immigration Policy and the Fate of Latino Migrants in the United States (IAD: January 2017)

https://confidencial.com.ni/la-amenaza-trump-impacto-las-deportaciones/

http://www.thedialogue.org/resources/trump-immigration-policy-and-the-fate-of-latino-migrants-in-the-united-states/

3. Small businesses in the US economy are dependent on low skilled labor and exert a demand for it * Differences between migrants wages and wages in the markets, excluding fringe benefits represent important savings to these businesses;*Accompanied to a security and development strategy an additional 80,000 H2B visas could be expanded through a guest worker program to reduce

cross border migration of Mexican and Central Americans.OCCUPATION—annual DC LA NYC Miami Chicago USA Undoc.

Migr.

Relative

To nation

Restaurant Industry 26,340 27,570 29,290 29,034 21,980 23,020 18,798 82%

Construction Industry 34,430 42,660 50,980 73,488 56,890 31,000 22,229 72%

Child/Elder Care Industry 25,780 24,416 22,850 21,272 24,000 22,000 12,500 57%

Maintenance 28,700 29,780 34,270 32,767 30,210 36,550 21,785 60%

Cleaning 27,210 28,890 33,000 20,423 29,590 23,000 14,807 64%

Professional—MANAGEMENT 70,154 70,124 80,137 60,873 73,198 78,232 27,500 35%

Professional—TECHNICAL (ENGINEERING, ETC.) 99,690 96,370 84,060 74,528 80,490 82,980

https://confidencial.com.ni/la-amenaza-trump-impacto-las-deportaciones/

https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes353031.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes353031.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes353031.htmhttps://www.indeed.com/salaries/Server-Salaries,-Miami-FL?period=yearlyhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes353031.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes353031.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes472061.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes472061.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes472061.htmhttps://www.indeed.com/salaries/Construction-Worker-Salaries,-Miami-FL?period=yearlyhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes472061.htmhttp://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Construction_Worker/Hourly_Ratehttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes311011.htmhttp://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Caregiver/Hourly_Rate/d02b409e/Los-Angeles-CAhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes311011.htmhttps://www.indeed.com/salaries/Caregiver-Salaries,-Miami-FL?period=yearlyhttp://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Caregiver/Hourly_Rate/1a98bac5/Chicago-ILhttp://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Caregiver/Hourly_Rate/d02b409e/Los-Angeles-CAhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes370000.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes370000.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes370000.htmfile:///C:/Users/Manuel Orozco/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/Content.Outlook/R3QS8HW9/32,767https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes370000.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes472061.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes372011.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes372011.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes372011.htmhttps://www.indeed.com/salaries/House-Cleaner-Salaries,-Miami-FL?period=yearlyhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes372011.htmhttp://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Cleaner/Hourly_Ratehttps://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/washington-dc-operations-manager-salary-SRCH_IL.0,13_IM911_KO14,32.htmhttps://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/los-angeles-operations-manager-salary-SRCH_IL.0,11_IM508_KO12,30.htmhttps://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/new-york-city-operations-manager-salary-SRCH_IL.0,13_IM615_KO14,32.htmhttp://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=General_/_Operations_Manager/Salary/b655020c/Miami-FLhttps://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/chicago-operations-manager-salary-SRCH_IL.0,7_IM167_KO8,26.htmhttps://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/new-york-city-operations-manager-salary-SRCH_IL.0,13_IM615_KO14,32.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes170000.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes170000.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes170000.htmhttps://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/miami-engineer-salary-SRCH_IL.0,5_IM558_KO6,14.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes170000.htmhttps://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes170000.htm

4. US Deportations and apprehensions could affect transfers

Estimación del

aumento en el 2017

Deportaciones 2010 2015 30% 20%

Honduras 19501 20,204.00 26,265 25,255

Nicaragua 1552 914 1,188 1,143

Guatemala 23430 33,233.00 43,203 41,541

El Salvador 17947 21,471.00 27,912 26,839

Mexico 151688 242,456.00 315,193 303,070

Total 214118 318278 413,761 397,848

Detenciones 2010 2016 2017 est.

Honduras 32,501 30,694 26,090

Nicaragua 2,587 1,700

Guatemala 39,050 41,980 35,683

El Salvador 29,911 44,626 37,932

Mexico 632,034 215,407 183,096

Caida de remesas Disminución asociada

a detenciones

Disminución asociada

a deportaciones

Honduras $ 11,652,600 $ 22,224,400

Nicaragua $ 1,320,600 $ 1,005,400

Guatemala $ 16,017,000 $ 36,556,300

El Salvador $ 9,466,800 $ 23,618,100

Mexico $ 83,427,600 $ 266,701,600

Region $ 121,884,600 $ 350,105,800

https://confidencial.com.ni/la-amenaza-trump-impacto-las-deportaciones/