Alfredo Cuellar
In April 2025, Mexico experienced a 12.1% drop in remittances received from the United States, totaling $4.761 billion—the sharpest decline since September 2012. This reduction reflects not only a drop in the number of transactions but also a decrease in the average amount sent, which fell to $385, 4.4% less than the previous year.
Factors Behind the Decline
Analysts attribute this decline to several interrelated factors:
• Restrictive immigration policy: Measures implemented by the Trump administration have instilled fear among migrants, causing many to avoid going to work or reduce their working hours for fear of deportation.
• Proposed remittance tax: The proposal to impose a 3.5% tax on remittances sent from the United States has created uncertainty and could encourage the use of informal channels for sending money.
• Weakness in the U.S. labor market: The deterioration of the U.S. labor market has affected migrants’ ability to earn income and therefore send remittances.
Impact on Mexican Communities
Remittances are a vital source of income for many Mexican families, especially in rural and marginalized areas. The decline in these transfers directly affects domestic consumption and the ability of families to meet basic needs such as food, healthcare, and education.
Risks Associated with Informal Channels
The potential implementation of the remittance tax could drive migrants to turn to informal methods to send money, exposing them to risks of fraud, theft, and exploitation by criminal organizations.
Broader Economic Implications
The decline in remittances also has macroeconomic implications, as these funds represent approximately 3.5% of Mexico’s GDP. A sustained drop could affect the country’s economic growth and financial stability.
A Micropolitical Reading: Power Behind the Money
From a Micropolitical perspective, the decline in remittances is not just an economic phenomenon: it is a covert form of strategic retaliation. Here, power is exercised not through bullets, but through decrees, taxes, threats, and silences. The migrant becomes a hostage of policies aimed at disciplining, intimidating, and economically silencing them. But the true target is often their family, community, and home country.
The threat of a remittance tax is a form of symbolic and coercive power: it has not yet been implemented, but it already generates fear, retreat, and anticipatory reaction. It is the perfect example of power exercised without being executed—only by being suggested.
In this dynamic, governments exercise the “least interest principle”: while migrants need to send money, the state can condition the transfer with fiscal or immigration threats. This creates a power asymmetry that perpetuates dependency and weakens the bargaining power of the most vulnerable.
In response, a grassroots micropolitical reaction is urgent: community organization, transnational alliances, legal strategies, and international visibility. Because if power is exercised in small ways, it can also be resisted there. The migrant—historically treated as disposable labor—must now become a strategic political actor.
Conclusion
The decline in remittances sent to Mexico in April 2025 reflects the combined effects of restrictive immigration policies, fiscal proposals, and adverse economic conditions. Addressing these challenges requires policies that protect migrants’ rights and promote secure, efficient channels for sending remittances—ensuring the well-being of millions of families who depend on them.
