Does the ban on asylum seekers working actually work?

Ali Ahmadi, Catherine Barnard and Fiona Costello argue that while the UK’s restrictions on employment for asylum seekers do not act as a strong deterrent, they do drive up asylum costs, risk pushing asylum seekers into exploitative working conditions and harm their wellbeing and integration.

The UK has one of the strictest systems in Europe concerning the right to work for asylum seekers. This blog considers why this is the case and the consequences for asylum seekers, the Home Office, and the economy as a whole.

Most European countries allow asylum seekers to work immediately or within six months of making an asylum application. In the UK, most asylum seekers are not allowed to work while their claim is being decided. This has been the case since 2002, when the Labour government removed the previous rule allowing asylum seekers to apply for permission to work after waiting six months for an initial decision. Today, asylum seekers can apply for permission to work but only if they have been waiting 12 months or more, and the delay is not the claimant’s fault. Even then, they are restricted to jobs on the Immigration Salary List of skilled occupations and, from 26 March, RQF level 6 or above (i.e. degree level roles). They cannot be self-employed or take most entry-level jobs.

The government says that allowing asylum seekers to start working early would not only undermine local labour markets but also act as a ‘pull factor’, encouraging economic migrants to abuse the asylum route. However, as we have discussed before, there is little evidence that labour market access has any significant impact on the number of arrivals.

Yet not allowing asylum seekers to work brings its own costs. While waiting for a decision on their asylum application (and not working), those who would otherwise be destitute are entitled to asylum support under section 95 of Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. This includes accommodation and/or a weekly payment for essentials, currently £49.18 (approx. £7 per day). For those living in hotels that provide meals the rate is £9.95 per week. For many, this support is not enough and they are often forced to rely on food banks and charities to meet their basic needs. As of June 2025, over 106,000 people were receiving asylum support.

Home Office spending on asylum support is increasing significantly: from £739m in 2019-20, to £4.7bn in 2023-4 (and £4bn in 2024-5). The growing costs are largely due not only to an increase in the number of asylum seekers but also to backlogs in decision-making. In 2014, 25% of asylum seekers (11,629 people) waited six months or more for a decision. In 2024, 59% (73,866 people) waited that long. A study from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) shows that allowing earlier permission to work could significantly reduce these costs.

So not allowing asylum seekers to work is an expensive policy. Allowing asylum seekers to work would also bring benefits to the UK economy. Analysis by the Lift the Ban coalition suggests that if one in two adults among the 73,866 people waiting an initial decision for longer than six months found employment at the average UK salary, the benefit from tax, national insurance contributions, and savings in asylum support, could be over £280m. Based on the Home Office data from 2022, NIESR calculate that allowing asylum seekers to work would increase tax revenue by £1.3bn, reduce government expenditure by £6.7bn, and increase GDP by £1.6bn, annually.

Instead, a ban on employment pushes some asylum seekers into ‘survival-related’ illegal and exploitative employment where, studies show, they work for well below the minimum wage, ‘cash in hand’ (from which the government does not benefit in terms of tax take), and in unacceptable work conditions. The exploitation is more severe for vulnerable asylum seekers. For instance, one study showed that some female asylum seekers had been pushed into ‘abusive situations’ and/or ‘sex work’ because they had no legal means of income. There is also evidence that those working lawfully as delivery riders ‘rent’ their passes to those who cannot work legally, taking a cut off the top. Likewise, organised crime networks help failed and/or limbo asylum seekers run or work illegally in mini-marts, barbershops, and car washes by faking paperwork and providing ‘ghost directors’.

It is not just the economic costs: preventing asylum seekers from working affects their mental health, with longer term consequences for them and the NHS if they subsequently get refugee status. Asylum seekers in the UK are five to six times more likely than the general population to have mental health needs, and 61% will experience severe mental illness. A systematic review studying the impact of asylum processes on mental health found that policies restricting work or meaningful activities contributed to psychological distress and social exclusion. The Mental Health Foundation reported that not being allowed to work leads to ‘loss of self-esteem, loneliness, and an increased risk of depression’ for asylum seekers. Employment has been shown to reduce psychological distress and depression in this population.

A ban on working also affects the long-term economic integration of refugees. Research consistently shows that being unable to work causes de-skilling, reducing employment prospects even after refugee status is granted, creating what researchers call an ‘economic scarring effect’. A study from Germany found that those who waited longer for permission to work were less likely to find employment within 5 years, and it took nearly 10 years for this gap to close.

In conclusion, the UK’s restrictions on asylum seekers’ right to work do not appear to act as a strong deterrent, yet they drive up asylum costs, risk pushing asylum seekers into exploitative working conditions, and harm their wellbeing and integration. You Gov polling, albeit somewhat dated, has shown that the British public are largely in favour of lifting the ban on asylum seekers working, with 81% in favour of asylum seekers being able to work after 6 months of submitting their application (as suggested by the Commission on the Integration of Refugees). Allowing employment in all types of jobs would reduce asylum costs, bring in tax revenue, and treat people with dignity. It would also help those granted refugee status to rebuild their lives faster and is likely to cost taxpayers less in the long run.

By Ali Ahmadi, Research Associate, University of Cambridge and PhD student at Anglia Ruskin University, Catherine Barnard, Senior Fellow, UK in a Changing Europe & Professor of EU Law and Employment Law, University of Cambridge and Fiona Costello, Assistant Professor, University of Birmingham.