20% tax would just increase the price of mexican imports. The consumers and buyers would paying the wall, not Mexico. To put into prespective, Texas alone imported around $84 billion from Mexico in the year 2015. With a 20% tax, Texas businesses and consumers would have paid an extra $16.8 billion for the same goods and services. Enough to pay the wall (supposedly) and thats a very possible final scenario. 

Mexico is the main  country when it comes to importing agricultural goods to the US, and considering how much the minimum wage is in Mexico and the variety of products that we receive, what we are paying to import those products (nearly nothing compared to other countries) replacing them as a business partner is going to improbable if not impossible. In 2015 US's imports from Mexico totaled $21 billion.  Leading categories include: fresh vegetables ($4.8 billion), other fresh fruit ($4.3 billion), wine and beer ($2.7 billion), snack foods ($1.7 billion), and processed fruit & vegetables ($1.4 billion). the majority of it produced at 73.00 pesos per hour (about $4.30). 

Earlier this week, a shipment of avocados from Jalisco, Mexico was stopped from coming to the US. Mexico turned around and sold the avocados to other countries at a 20% increase without a loss; meanwhile the prices of avocados in the US rose to 96.00 dlls a crate (the "normal" being 40.00 dlls a crate) Price increase, not enough product to meet the demand = consumers pay. The phrase "The guac will be extra" gets a new meaning. 

To tax Mexico would mean to leave NAFTA for either country and to leave NAFTA would mean Mexico can also tax US products or increase the price of their own to cover losses. Its a two way, street. Thats why bullying one of your 3 main business partners is never a smart move. 

Senator and sassy overlord Lindsey Graham had something to say (lol):

Isn't it a well documented fact that most illegal immigrants come into your country through legal means (Vacation, visiting) at border crossings and just overstay their visas. A wall wouldn't do anything to stop that kind of immigration.

20% tax would just increase the price of mexican imports. The consumers and buyers would be paying for the wall, not Mexico. To put into prespective, Texas alone imported around $84 billion from Mexico in the year 2015. With a 20% tax, Texas businesses and consumers would have paid an extra $16.8 billion for the same goods and services. Enough to pay the wall (supposedly) and thats a very possible final scenario. 

Mexico is the main  country when it comes to importing agricultural goods to the US, and considering how much the minimum wage is in Mexico and the variety of products that we receive, what we are paying to import those products (nearly nothing compared to other countries) replacing them as a business partner is going to improbable if not impossible. In 2015 US's imports from Mexico totaled $21 billion.  Leading categories include: fresh vegetables ($4.8 billion), other fresh fruit ($4.3 billion), wine and beer ($2.7 billion), snack foods ($1.7 billion), and processed fruit & vegetables ($1.4 billion). the majority of it produced at 73.00 pesos per hour (about $4.30). 

Earlier this week, a shipment of avocados from Jalisco, Mexico was stopped from coming to the US. Mexico turned around and sold the avocados to other countries at a 20% increase without a loss; meanwhile the prices of avocados in the US rose to 96.00 dlls a crate (the "normal" being 40.00 dlls a crate) Price increase, not enough product to meet the demand = consumers pay. The phrase "The guac will be extra" gets a new meaning. 

To tax Mexico would mean to leave NAFTA for either country and to leave NAFTA would mean Mexico can also tax US products or increase the price of their own to cover losses. Its a two way, street. Thats why bullying one of your 3 main business partners is never a smart move. 

Senator and sassy overlord Lindsey Graham had something to say (lol):

Kinda sad considering how much better Mexico would be without the cartels and corruption.

$21B is still less than the yearly cost of illegal migrants in the US.

Isn't it a well documented fact that most illegal immigrants come into your country through legal means (Vacation, visiting) at border crossings and just overstay their visas. A wall wouldn't do anything to stop that kind of immigration.

Generally the figure used seems to be 40% of illegal immigrants are result of overstays, but that is largely old data and new projections put that figure a good bit higher. Here is a chart from the Center for Migration Studies which puts overstays at around 58%:

PS: The figure of 113billion is also not quite what it seems. First of all, if you factor in the taxes paid by some illegal immigrants (yes, some illegal immigrants do pay taxes), that figure falls to around 99billion. This is still quite high, but it is also pretty much the highest estimate with other estimates ranging from about 85billion to under 10billion. And all of that is ignoring the other positive economic impacts of illegal immigration. It is far more complicated than that original post makes it out to be and simply speaking about the taxes they aren't paying doesn't provide an argument against giving them citizenship.

It's like the world's most powerful country is being ran by a spoiled brat that has a serious superiority complex because was born rich, what the actual fuck is even happening to USA, how the fuck will other countries take internacional relationships seriously with USA like that?