Inside the CBO Data: Why the US Population Will Shrink by 2033 Without Net Immigration
New long-term projections from the Congressional Budget Office reveal that U.S. deaths will outpace births beginning in 2033. From that point forward, the nation's population and workforce growth will rely entirely on net immigration.
By Logan Price
Share this story
In short
- The CBO projects the U.S. population will reach 372 million by 2055, growing at a fraction of its historical pace.
- By 2033, the annual number of deaths in the U.S. is forecast to exceed the number of births.
- Without net immigration, the overall U.S. population would begin to shrink in 2033.
The mathematics of American population growth are undergoing a fundamental transition. For decades, the United States relied on a reliable engine of natural increase—more births than deaths—to expand its workforce, fuel consumer demand, and support an aging population. But that engine is stalling. According to the Congressional Budget Office's long-term demographic outlook, the U.S. is rapidly approaching a historic threshold.[1]
By 2033, the CBO projects that the annual number of deaths in the United States will exceed the annual number of births. It is a demographic crossover point that alters the trajectory of the nation. From that year forward, the natural growth rate of the U.S. population drops below zero, meaning that without net immigration, the country would begin to physically shrink.[1]
The data, detailed in the CBO's "The Demographic Outlook: 2025 to 2055," paints a picture of a nation aging into a new economic reality. The agency projects the total U.S. population will reach 372 million by 2055. While that represents an absolute increase, the pace of that growth is decelerating dramatically.[1]
Between 1975 and 2024, the U.S. population grew at an average rate of 0.9 percent per year. Over the next decade, that rate is expected to fall to 0.4 percent. By the period spanning 2036 to 2055, the growth rate will slow to a near-standstill of 0.1 percent annually—less than one-quarter of its historical average.[1]
The primary driver of this slowdown is a sustained collapse in the total fertility rate. To maintain a stable population without immigration, a country requires a replacement rate of roughly 2.1 births per woman. The U.S. has operated below that threshold for years, and the CBO model projects the decline will deepen.[1]
The agency forecasts that the fertility rate for women under the age of 30 will continue to fall, dropping from 0.79 births per woman in 2025 to just 0.62 by 2055. While the rate for women over 30 is expected to rise slightly as Americans delay childbearing, it is not enough to offset the broader contraction.[1]
This leaves immigration as the sole mechanism for long-term population expansion. The CBO notes that through 2032, net births will account for roughly one-sixth of projected population growth, with immigration accounting for the rest. But once the 2033 crossover hits, immigration will account for 100 percent of the nation's net growth.[1]
The stakes of this shift are highly visible in the labor market. The civilian noninstitutionalized population—the metric used to project the size of the workforce—is aging rapidly. The CBO projects that the number of Americans age 65 or older will grow at an average annual rate of 1.1 percent through 2055.[1]
In contrast, the prime working-age population, defined as adults between 25 and 54, will grow at a sluggish 0.3 percent per year. The youngest cohort of the workforce, those aged 16 to 24, is actually projected to decline on average over the next three decades.[1]
This growing imbalance between retirees and active workers places immense structural pressure on federal entitlement programs. Social Security and Medicare rely on current payroll taxes to fund current beneficiaries. As the ratio of workers to retirees shrinks, the mathematical burden on the remaining labor force intensifies.[1][3]
The national projections, however, mask deep regional disparities. The 2033 crossover point is a national average, but natural decrease is already a reality for vast swaths of the country. Data from the Population Reference Bureau reveals that the buffer provided by immigration is highly localized.[2]
Between 2024 and 2025, net international migration prevented population loss in just 254 U.S. counties. In another 882 counties, immigration helped offset losses but could not entirely erase them. Most starkly, 377 counties lost population despite gaining international migrants, underscoring how deeply entrenched the demographic decline has become in certain regions.[2]
For these shrinking counties, the economic consequences are immediate. A declining local population means a shrinking tax base, reduced consumer spending for local businesses, and a smaller pool of essential workers for healthcare, education, and infrastructure maintenance.[2][3]
The CBO acknowledges that its 30-year projections carry significant uncertainty. Small shifts in fertility behavior, mortality rates, or federal border policy compound over decades, leading to vastly different outcomes. The 2025 outlook, for instance, revised the 2055 population target down by 11 million people compared to the previous year's estimate, driven by updated census data and executive actions that temporarily reduced asylum processing.[1]
If immigration levels fall below the CBO's baseline assumptions, the onset of national population decline could arrive even sooner than 2033. Conversely, a sustained increase in net migration could delay the contraction and provide a larger prime-age workforce to support the aging Baby Boomer and Generation X cohorts.[1][3]
Ultimately, the data presents a clear mathematical boundary. The United States can no longer rely on natural birth rates to sustain its economic expansion. As the 2033 threshold approaches, the nation's demographic future—and the fiscal health of its institutions—will be determined entirely by its approach to immigration.[3]
How we did this
- Method
- Cross-referencing the CBO's national timeline for natural population decrease with county-level demographic data to project localized impacts.
- What we found
- The national demographic contraction projected for 2033 will not be distributed evenly; it will act as a multiplier on the 377 U.S. counties already experiencing population loss, accelerating regional economic divides before the national baseline officially shrinks.
- What we worked from
- National crossover year when deaths exceed births: 2033 — Congressional Budget Office
- Number of U.S. counties currently losing population despite immigration: 377 counties — Population Reference Bureau
- Limits of this analysis
- County-level migration patterns can shift rapidly based on local economic incentives, meaning the specific counties experiencing loss today may not be the exact same ones driving the national contraction in 2033.
Terms to know
- Replacement Rate
- The fertility rate required for a generation to exactly replace itself in the absence of immigration, generally considered to be 2.1 births per woman.
- Natural Decrease
- A demographic condition that occurs when a population experiences more deaths than births during a given period.
- Civilian Noninstitutionalized Population
- People age 16 or older who are not in the military or in institutions like prisons or nursing homes, used to measure the labor force.
Different angles
Macroeconomists
Focuses on the structural risks of a shrinking labor force and the strain on entitlement programs.
For macroeconomic analysts, the CBO data represents a looming fiscal bottleneck. A shrinking prime-age workforce combined with an expanding retiree population fundamentally alters the dependency ratio. This camp argues that without a significant influx of immigrant labor, the U.S. will face chronic labor shortages, slower GDP growth, and a mathematical crisis for pay-as-you-go systems like Social Security and Medicare. They view immigration not as a political issue, but as an economic necessity to maintain the nation's growth baseline.
Demographers
Emphasizes the mathematical reality of sub-replacement fertility and the limits of pro-natalist policies.
Demographic researchers point out that the U.S. is simply following the trajectory of other advanced economies like Japan and South Korea, albeit on a delayed timeline. This perspective highlights that fertility rates rarely rebound significantly once they drop below the 2.1 replacement level, as the cultural shift toward delayed childbearing and smaller families becomes entrenched. For this camp, the 2033 crossover point is an inevitable mathematical reality, making the debate over natural increase largely obsolete.
Regional Planners
Highlights the uneven geographic distribution of population loss and the threat to local municipalities.
Local government officials and regional planners view the national data through a hyper-local lens. They note that while the U.S. as a whole won't see deaths outpace births until 2033, hundreds of rural and post-industrial counties are already living in a state of natural decrease. This camp argues that national immigration figures mask a geographic sorting effect, where new arrivals cluster in major metropolitan areas, leaving shrinking counties to manage declining tax bases, abandoned infrastructure, and a lack of essential healthcare workers.
- Macroeconomists
- Focuses on the structural risks of a shrinking labor force and the strain on entitlement programs.
- Demographers
- Emphasizes the mathematical reality of sub-replacement fertility and the limits of pro-natalist policies.
- Regional Planners
- Highlights the uneven geographic distribution of population loss and the threat to local municipalities.
Perspectives this story doesn't cover
- Advocates for pro-natalist family policies
- Environmental groups focused on population stabilization
Sources
[1]Congressional Budget OfficeMacroeconomistsThe Demographic Outlook: 2025 to 2055
Read on Congressional Budget Office →
[2]Population Reference BureauDemographersImmigration Is Saving Fewer U.S. Counties From Population Loss
Read on Population Reference Bureau →
[3]Factlen Editorial TeamRegional PlannersSynthesis by Factlen editorial team
Read on Factlen Editorial Team →
More in Data & Analysis
See all →Differential Privacy
Evidence Pack: The Accuracy and Utility Trade-Offs of Differential Privacy
5 sources
Statistical Methodology
How Standard Error Compresses Apparent Variance Compared to Standard Deviation
9 sources
Bayesian Inference
Metropolis-Hastings Cancels Impossible Denominators to Sample Posterior Distributions
9 sources
Algorithm Selection
Evidence Pack: Tree-Based Models Versus Deep Learning for Tabular Data
6 sources
Comments
Every angle. Every day.
Get Data & Analysis stories with full source coverage and perspective breakdowns, free every day.




