ECONOMY · 2026-10-29
Controversy over President Lee Jae-myung’s Remarks on Foreign Workers’ Economic Contribution: Remittances and Domestic Demand at the Center
President Lee Jae-myung’s remark that foreign workers are not of much help to the national economy has sparked controversy. While the president explained that he was comparing them with Korean workers, experts say foreign workers’ domestic spending and contribution to agricultural production should also be taken into account.
If foreign workers send the money they earn back overseas, does that mean they do little for the Korean economy? President Lee Jae-myung’s remarks at a Cabinet meeting have reignited debate over how to assess foreign workers’ economic contribution. The key questions are whether remittances alone can be used to measure that contribution, and how much weight should be given to the impact of rural labor and local spending on the economy.
The remarks and the president’s explanation
According to Kyunghyang Shinmun, during a Cabinet meeting on the 27th discussing labor shortages in farming and fishing communities, President Lee said foreign workers were “not of much help” to the national economy. The comment came in the context of considering ways to support income by subsidizing labor costs for Korean workers who work in rural areas.
As the controversy grew, President Lee posted on social media that same night, explaining that he did not mean foreign workers make no contribution to the domestic economy, but rather that their level of contribution is not “much” higher than that of Korean workers. He said there was a difference between saying they are “not helpful” and saying they are “not very helpful,” and also called for a correction and apology regarding the related reports. The media outlet in question later revised the article title to reflect the word “much.”
A contribution that cannot be explained by remittances alone
Experts pointed out that the assumption that foreign workers send all of their earnings back to their home countries does not reflect reality. In the National Data Office’s “2025 Survey of Immigrants’ Residence Status and Employment,” cited in the article, remittances to home and abroad accounted for 25.5% of total income among all foreign nationals. For non-professional workers in farming, livestock, and fisheries, the share was higher at 56.5%, but the rest of their income is spent on living expenses and housing, the report explains.
Domestic consumption and production activity are also factors that should be considered when assessing economic contribution. Research fellow Jang Young-wook of the Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security explained that foreign workers’ domestic spending helps local economies, pointing to the consumption effect. The article also introduced an estimate from the Korea Migration Policy Institute on the economic ripple effects of foreign workers. However, such figures can vary depending on the method and assumptions used, so rather than concluding a contribution level based on a single number, it is necessary to look at what activities are included.
Rural jobs and concerns over discrimination
Labor shortages in agriculture are another major part of the debate. A representative from a farmers’ organization said, in effect, that it would be difficult to maintain farming without foreign workers, while experts stressed that labor in rural areas contributes to agricultural production and supply. If a shortage of migrant workers disrupts production, the impact could spread not only to farms but also to consumers.
On the other hand, there are concerns that the president’s remarks could portray migrant workers as a group that does not contribute to the economy, reinforcing discriminatory attitudes. Even if policy discussions focus on increasing employment for Korean workers, many are calling for a fuller explanation of the role foreign workers’ labor and spending play in Korean society.
This controversy shows that foreign workers’ contribution cannot be judged by remittances alone. Domestic spending, agricultural production, and sustaining local economies are all factors that need to be considered together. At the same time, questions remain over how to address labor shortages in rural areas and how to balance support for Korean employment with the treatment of foreign workers. Separate from the debate over the wording of the remarks, the realities of labor shortages and migrant workers’ contributions clearly call for a more balanced discussion.
Source: Kyunghyang Shinmun report
The remarks and the president’s explanation
According to Kyunghyang Shinmun, during a Cabinet meeting on the 27th discussing labor shortages in farming and fishing communities, President Lee said foreign workers were “not of much help” to the national economy. The comment came in the context of considering ways to support income by subsidizing labor costs for Korean workers who work in rural areas.
As the controversy grew, President Lee posted on social media that same night, explaining that he did not mean foreign workers make no contribution to the domestic economy, but rather that their level of contribution is not “much” higher than that of Korean workers. He said there was a difference between saying they are “not helpful” and saying they are “not very helpful,” and also called for a correction and apology regarding the related reports. The media outlet in question later revised the article title to reflect the word “much.”
A contribution that cannot be explained by remittances alone
Experts pointed out that the assumption that foreign workers send all of their earnings back to their home countries does not reflect reality. In the National Data Office’s “2025 Survey of Immigrants’ Residence Status and Employment,” cited in the article, remittances to home and abroad accounted for 25.5% of total income among all foreign nationals. For non-professional workers in farming, livestock, and fisheries, the share was higher at 56.5%, but the rest of their income is spent on living expenses and housing, the report explains.
Domestic consumption and production activity are also factors that should be considered when assessing economic contribution. Research fellow Jang Young-wook of the Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security explained that foreign workers’ domestic spending helps local economies, pointing to the consumption effect. The article also introduced an estimate from the Korea Migration Policy Institute on the economic ripple effects of foreign workers. However, such figures can vary depending on the method and assumptions used, so rather than concluding a contribution level based on a single number, it is necessary to look at what activities are included.
Rural jobs and concerns over discrimination
Labor shortages in agriculture are another major part of the debate. A representative from a farmers’ organization said, in effect, that it would be difficult to maintain farming without foreign workers, while experts stressed that labor in rural areas contributes to agricultural production and supply. If a shortage of migrant workers disrupts production, the impact could spread not only to farms but also to consumers.
On the other hand, there are concerns that the president’s remarks could portray migrant workers as a group that does not contribute to the economy, reinforcing discriminatory attitudes. Even if policy discussions focus on increasing employment for Korean workers, many are calling for a fuller explanation of the role foreign workers’ labor and spending play in Korean society.
This controversy shows that foreign workers’ contribution cannot be judged by remittances alone. Domestic spending, agricultural production, and sustaining local economies are all factors that need to be considered together. At the same time, questions remain over how to address labor shortages in rural areas and how to balance support for Korean employment with the treatment of foreign workers. Separate from the debate over the wording of the remarks, the realities of labor shortages and migrant workers’ contributions clearly call for a more balanced discussion.
Source: Kyunghyang Shinmun report
Related search terms
#foreign workers economic contribution in Korea#President Lee Jae-myung foreign worker remarks#remittances and Korean economy#foreign workers domestic spending#agricultural labor shortages in rural Korea#migrant workers contribution to local economy#Korea foreign worker policy debate