Billionaire-funded bank faces backlash for lending to illegal immigrants using tax ID workaround

By willowt // 2025-06-09

Mastodon

Parler

Gab

Copy

Beneficial State Bank, backed by liberal billionaire Tom Steyer, offers $25M+ in auto loans to undocumented immigrants via ITINs (tax IDs), bypassing Social Security requirements.
Loans target borrowers without legal status, using California’s AB60 driver’s licenses and IRSTAX IDs to qualify.
The bank has been linked to developments like Texas’s Colony Ridge, a community with ties to undocumented immigrants and criminal suspects.
Critics argue the program enables illegal immigration, undermines national security and exploits legal loopholes for progressive activism.
Bank defends loans as “fighting systemic racism,” claiming systemic inequities justify aiding marginalized communities.

A Bay Area bank founded with support from Democratic donor Tom Steyer is offering millions in auto loans to illegal immigrants using a tailored financial strategy, sparking new tensions over immigration enforcement and corporate activism. Beneficial State Bank, based in Oakland, California, reported issuing $25 million in auto loans last year to 707 borrowers using Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs) — IRS-issued IDs for non-residents ineligible for Social Security numbers. The bank frames the initiative as combating “centuries of systemic racism,” but critics argue it enables undocumented populations, erodes border security and exploits federal tax protocols to incentivize illegal immigration. The loans exemplify a growing divide between financially progressive institutions and hardline immigration policies, with implications for state sovereignty and public safety. Beneficial State’s efforts have drawn particular scrutiny after media reports linked similar lending strategies to developments in Texas housing undocumented populations, including criminally charged individuals.

Lending strategy targets undocumented borrowers with tax ID loophole

Beneficial State Bank’s auto loan program explicitly accommodates borrowers without Social Security Numbers (SSNs), relying on ITINs and California’s AB60 driver’s licenses — a license type available to residents without legal immigration status. The bank’s 2022 impact report emphasizes its mission to “expand financial inclusion for communities of color,” with 10% of its 16,000 auto loans now targeting this demographic. The ITIN system, originally designed for tax purposes, allows undocumented individuals to file taxes and receive temporary IDs. Beneficial State advertises this as leveling the financial playing field, writing in its 2023 report: “People without SSNs, such as recent immigrants, face barriers to credit. We provide critical access.” California’s AB60 licenses further institutionalize this pathway, enabling borrowers to verify identity without legal status. The bank’s strategy extends beyond auto financing. Prysma Lending, another ITIN-focused firm, has loaned over $1 billion to undocumented immigrants and offers resources on how to legally delay deportation via “credible fear” asylum claims. These services directly connect borrowers to legal incentives to resist deportation, creating a financial ecosystem for unauthorized residents.

Ties to Texas development raise security concerns

The bank’s lending practices have been linked to Colony Ridge, a controversial Texas subdivision where thousands of undocumented immigrants — some connected to drug trafficking or cartel activity—purchased homes using ITIN-backed loans. The Daily Wire reported leaked emails from a Texas land developer, who admitted, “We couldn’t sell these properties if everyone needed a Social Security number.” Texas lawmakers have criticized such developments as challenges to border enforcement.

Controversy over "systemic racism" rationale

Critics, including immigration hardliners, dispute the bank’s framing of its initiative as social justice, instead viewing it as enabling illegal presence in the U.S. Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s office called Beneficial State’s claims “divisive rhetoric” and a “Trojan horse for amnesty.” Beneficial State defends its stance with appeals to equity, citing federal data showing immigrant households face disproportionate poverty rates. But opponents counter that the program underscores deeper failures: outdated immigration policies, weak enforcement and corporate activism that prioritizes ideology over border security.

Regulatory loopholes and corporate complicity

This practice follows years of documented irregularities in immigration-linked banking. Per an Associated Press report from 2017, banks nationwide began relaxing ID requirements for undocumented renters and borrowers, while states like California and New York expanded in-state tuition and driver’s licenses for undocumented residents. Federal analysts warn that such policies create a shadow economy, where unauthorized migrants acquire credit, housing and social services without legal accountability. A 2021 Government Accountability Office report found 92% of employers use ITIN-based tax filings for previously unauthorized workers. Legal experts argue the bank’s strategy exploits gaps between IRS financial practices and Department of Homeland Security enforcement priorities. Current Senate legislation targeting these loopholes, including bills introduced by Senators Sullivan (R-AK) and Cotton (R-AR), seek to require SSNs for all loan approvals.

A clash between financial inclusion and sovereignty

Beneficial State’s loans epitomize the tension between corporate activism and national self-determination. While framed as progressive philanthropy, the initiative’s ties to criminalized communities and policy loopholes amplify concerns over border integrity. As states like Texas push stricter immigration enforcement, parallels emerge to the late 2010s “sanctuary city” debates. Public policy expert Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute notes, “These loans aren’t fixing racism — they’re cementing a subculture of illegal residency, funded by taxpayers and corporate ideologies.” For conservatives, the case crystallizes a core principle: true freedom requires control over one’s borders. Sources for this article include: ZeroHedge.com DailyWire.com YourNews.com