The Veiled Economics of Philoxenia
- Anagha B Poojari
- May 11
- 8 min read
The immigration detention estate in the world today has morphed into a poignant reflection of modernity’s treatment of migrants as disposable. Immigrants traveling to other countries seeking asylum are held in detention centres, which are more or less prison-like facilities, while they wait with bated breath for a court hearing that may never come. Considering that even in countries like the United States, only 11% of those in detention centres make it to court [1], the inhumane practice of indefinite immigration detention is an ever-looming threat.
In the modern days of globalisation, and particularly with the rise of the far right, immigration has become politicised. It is used as a tool to instigate a xenophobic form of nationalism. Unfortunately, this has also led to immigration detention and deportation becoming increasingly lucrative businesses. As hatred is built up against migrants by politicians in public, corporations in the shadows can cash in by securing deals with government contractors. Average citizens get crushed under the weight of the taxes that pay for their profits. Immigration detention is a system of economic exploitation—one that priorities profit over people and capitalism over compassion.
The Money Behind Bars
The corporations that get the most benefit from the business of immigration detention are private prison corporations. CoreCivic and GEO Group have dominated the private prison industry for years in the United States. As of September 2021, 79% percent of people detained under ICE custody were held in privately operated or owned facilities. [2] Unsurprisingly, the combined revenue of just these companies has risen from well under half a billion dollars in 2000 to around $4.5 billion in 2020. Between a quarter and third of that revenue comes from ICE detection contracts. [3] These private prisons secure lucrative contracts from the government through monetary influence while their profits are provided by taxpayer’s money.
The concept of a "bed quota”—which mandates for a minimum number of immigrants to be detained daily—is a chilling testament to how deep-rooted their profit motive has become. ICE detains a minimum of 34,000 individuals daily through the bed quota. In addition to this guaranteed minimum, the contract stipulates that ICE receives a discounted rate for each person detained in excess of the guaranteed minimum. This structure incentivises more detentions.
This problem is not endemic to the United States. In the United Kingdom, nine out of ten detention facilities are run by private firms like G4S, Mitie, Serco, and US-based GEO Group. [4] Canstruct International, the company behind Australia’s offshore detention centre in Nauru, made AUD $101 million in profit—equating to over $500,000 per detainee. [5] The Council of Europe urged Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s government to address the “serious and disturbing” conditions observed during its recent visits to Italian detention centres run by various private contractors. [6]
These private entities often circumvent labour laws of the countries they belong to, and as a cost-saving measure employ forced labour by detainees to decrease their running costs and maximise the profit. Those in detention centres, without the protection of labour laws, either get paid a meagre amount or not at all. Even after all money being poured into this business, detention centres often display low hygiene, inadequate care, and poor maintenance. In detention centers, reports of sexual abuse, denied medical care, unsanitary conditions, and mental health neglect are rampant. Detainees are often held indefinitely without trial. Children are separated from families and people are deported to war zones. The detainees have to survive poor standards of living while the government pretends to take its own sweet time completing the formalities.
The Sutradhaar
In order to maintain their empires, these companies make efforts to influence immigration policies in their favour. Politicians actively collaborate with corporations and lobby for stricter immigration laws. By selling fear and dehumanising migrants, they manufacture public acceptance. They sell the illusion of job creation and “boosting the economy”.
Eventually, this fear based-rhetoric brings them to power. The State, which ought to be the guardian of justice and human dignity, is transformed into a business partner profiting from suffering. Politicians employ this to feed their political campaigns and further a xenophobic nationalist ideology; behind the curtain private entities cash their cheques.
These corporations make rural areas dependent on their correction facilities by becoming the main driver of the economy and providing jobs in the region. This in turn makes the people lobby harder for stricter immigration laws to get more detainees. Companies aren’t in this for public service. For them, it’s a high profit game with low responsibility. And governments love hiring them, because it keeps dirty work at arm's length. For the people inside, it’s their life, their freedom, and their dignity on the line.
While the private prison corporations of America boast that they do not take positions on policy issues, their money tells a different story. Between 2008 and 2014, GEO Group and CoreCivic spent a combined $16,055,000 on federal lobbying, much of it towards increasing the detention bed quota. Prison corporations contributed millions to Trump’s campaigns that led him to the Oval Office. [7] [8] With Trump’s return to power in 2025, a $1 billion contract was signed with the GEO Group. Similarly, CoreCivic had the opportunity to reopen detention centres previously closed over human rights abuses by the Biden government. [9]
The CEOs of both CoreCivic and GEO Group have publicly stated that they are excited about the “unprecedented opportunities” that would arise under Trump’s second term. With beaming smiles on their faces as they stated this, their lust for profit spared them of any thought for those suffering under ICE detention. During the previous Trump administration, detention funding spiked, ICE raids intensified, and private detention centers boomed. It was all a public-private handshake, drenched in fear mongering and profit.
In the United Kingdom, investigations have revealed that private firms have funneled substantial funds into All-Party Parliamentary Groups (APPGs), raising concerns about potential backdoor influence on policy decisions related to immigration detention. [10] As of February 2022, Canstruct International has made 11 donations to the Liberal National Party in Queensland, Australia. The company repeatedly denied that these donations were linked to a AUD $591 million contract to run an offshore detention facility. [11]
From Aisle Seats to Digital Shackles
Private prison is not the only industry that profits from the circus of immigration detention. Airline companies are used to carry out deportations at extremely high costs. CSI Aviation, based in the United States, donated thousands of dollars to President Donald Trump and was awarded a $3.6 billion contract for deportation flights. Another airline subcontractor was GlobalX, a contractor well-criticised in the media for mistreating migrants on its flights. [12] The billions in profit that these companies make from these flights throw into sharp focus the profiteering behind ICE detention.
In the United Kingdom, a charter flight deported 17 people in 2020, costing £200,000—over £11,000 per person. [13] Privilege Style, an airline that was used to deport those seeking asylum in the United Kingdom to Rwanda, withdrew its flight operations after a vigorous campaign by refugee organisations. [14] They also operated under the German government to deport Afghan asylum seekers from Germany to Afghanistan. [15]
Some governments are turning to digital tracking systems which include apps that use facial recognition, geolocation, and biometric data to monitor migrants awaiting court proceedings. These tools are developed and managed by private tech firms. In reality, these systems only extend the reach of detention outside of walls, despite being marketed as humane substitutes
for physical detention.
In 2018, Microsoft faced internal and public scrutiny over a $19.4 million contract with ICE. The contract involved providing cloud computing services through Microsoft's Azure platform, which included capabilities for data processing and artificial intelligence. While Microsoft stated that the services did not involve facial recognition or direct support for family separation policies, employees expressed concern over any association with ICE's immigration enforcement activities. [16]
The Migrant Exchange Program
Immigration detention is not solely a domestic issue in this current era of global capitalism. It has franchised internationally and become a global supply chain of misery—outsourced, privatised, and marketed to the highest bidder. In reality, nations are renting each other's jails to house migrants.
For instance, consider the European Union (EU). Wealthier EU states have entered into outsourcing agreements to keep migrants as far away as possible, frequently in nations with dubious human rights records, while border countries like Greece and Italy receive the majority of incoming migrants.
Since 2017, the EU, particularly Italy, has collaborated with Libya to intercept migrants attempting to cross the Mediterranean. This cooperation involves training and equipping the Libyan coastguard. Critics argue that intercepted migrants are often returned to detention centers in Libya, where they face inhumane conditions and abuse. [17]
In 2023, Italy reached an agreement with Albania to establish two migrant processing centers on Albanian territory. These centers are intended to house up to 3,000 migrants while their asylum applications are processed. The deal has been criticised for potentially violating international laws and EU regulations, especially concerning migrants rescued in EU waters. [18]
Australia's "Pacific Solution" involved transferring asylum seekers to offshore detention centers in Nauru and Manus Island, Papua New Guinea. These centers have faced international criticism for poor conditions and indefinite detention practices. [19] The United Kingdom’s plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda faced significant criticism from human rights organisations due to concerns over potential violations of international law and the undermining of asylum protections. Human Rights Watch highlighted Rwanda's documented human rights issues, including instances of extrajudicial killings and suppression of dissent, arguing that this plan risked exposing asylum seekers to such conditions. [20]
If Not This, Then?
Portugal reduced crime and increased economic contribution by decriminalising undocumented status and integrating migrants into the labour, healthcare, and educational systems. Portugal has adopted a compassionate approach by regularising the status of undocumented migrants, allowing them access to essential services and the labour market. This policy shift has enabled approximately 260,000 immigrants to gain temporary legal status, granting them access to healthcare, social support, and other public services. [21]
Canada ensures rights while equitably observing migrants by using community-based alternatives to detention. Programs like Community Case Management and Supervision (CCMS) allow for the release of individuals into the community under supervision, reducing reliance on detention facilities. [22] Thailand has emerged as a leader in ending child immigration detention. The country has developed community-based alternatives for children and their families, focusing on protection and livelihood opportunities in collaboration with international and local NGOs. [23]
These models demonstrate that border security can be achieved without commodifying individuals.
The Detention Economy
Beyond balance sheets and barbed wire, psychological destruction is the hidden price of immigration detention. For-profit correctional facilities are shattering spirits in addition to shackling bodies. A culture of learnt helplessness is fostered by prolonged seclusion, endless wait times, language obstacles, and ongoing anxiety. It is deliberate psychological warfare.
A wider breakdown of democratic principles and humanitarian commitments is reflected in the conversion of immigration detention and deportation into profit-driven industries. By outsourcing their duties, governments have made it possible for a system to exist in which private interests profit from the suffering of the underprivileged. The commodification of migrants is a political decision supported by laws, budgets, and contracts rather than an unavoidable result of globalisation or security concerns. Reforming policies is only one aspect of challenging this system; another is a fundamental change in how societies view human life.
Human rights organisations, academics, and activists must keep bringing attention to the detention-industrial complex's realities and pushing for alternatives that put dignity before money. Deportation may be a lucrative business for some, but no civilised society can afford to overlook the moral costs involved. The question of who really benefits and at what cost will persist until justice and compassion take the place of profit and punishment at the core of immigration policy.
No company is entitled to profit from human trauma. Furthermore, no government should help transform optimistic journeys into corporate horror. The essence of democracy will be lost if human freedom is for sale.
Article by:
Anagha B Poojari
Comments