New Analysis: Job Growth in Latino Industries Collapses Under Trump Fiscal Policies – Americans For Tax Fairness

Analysis of Job Growth Disparities and Sustainable Development Goal Implications

Executive Summary

A recent analysis by Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF) indicates a significant downturn in job creation within key sectors employing a high concentration of Latino workers during the first eight months of 2025 compared to the same period in 2024. This trend presents considerable challenges to the achievement of several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities). The findings were discussed in a virtual conference featuring multiple stakeholder organizations.

Key Analytical Findings on Employment Trends

The data reveals a substantial contraction in job growth, directly impacting progress toward inclusive economic development as outlined in the SDGs.

• Overall Job Creation Decline: Industries with high Latino employment created nearly 300,000 fewer jobs between January and August 2025 compared to the corresponding period in 2024.
• Percentage Decrease: This represents a decline of over 35% in job growth for these sectors, undermining the principles of SDG 8 which promotes sustained, inclusive, and sustainable economic growth.
• Affected Industries: The analysis highlights a slowdown in sectors critical to national infrastructure and well-being, including:
  • Construction (Relevant to SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure and SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities)
  • Manufacturing (Relevant to SDG 9)
  • Health Services (Relevant to SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being)

Stakeholder Perspectives on Policy Impacts and SDG Alignment

During a virtual press conference, representatives from various organizations provided commentary on the socio-economic implications of the observed trends, linking them to specific policy decisions and their effects on sustainable development.

1. Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF): The organization attributed the job market contraction to fiscal policies, including tax cuts and reductions in social programs. These actions are seen as detrimental to SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), as they disproportionately affect working families and specific demographic groups. The cuts to healthcare and nutrition services also conflict with SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger).
2. Somos Votantes: Polling data was presented indicating that the economic downturn is negatively impacting Latino communities. This aligns with concerns under SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 8, as financial instability and lack of economic opportunities hinder progress.
3. Climate Power En Acción: The organization reported a loss or suspension of 85,000 jobs in the clean energy sector alongside rising utility costs. This development directly contravenes SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) and SDG 13 (Climate Action) by slowing the transition to a green economy and increasing the cost burden on families.

Conclusion: Economic Trends Diverge from Sustainable Development Agenda

The reported decline in job growth, particularly within the Latino community and the clean energy sector, signals a significant setback for the United States’ progress toward the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The analysis suggests that current economic policies are misaligned with the core objectives of fostering inclusive growth, reducing inequality, and promoting environmental sustainability.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth
   • The article’s primary focus is on the significant decline in job creation, which directly relates to economic growth and employment. It discusses the loss of nearly 300,000 jobs in specific sectors, highlighting a downturn in economic activity and its impact on the workforce.
2. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
   • The analysis specifically points out that the job market collapse has a disproportionate impact on the Latino community. The article states that “Latinos are taking a particularly hard hit” and that the decline was concentrated in “industries with high Latino employment,” addressing the theme of inequality among different population groups.
3. SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy
   • The article explicitly mentions the loss of jobs in the clean energy sector and rising electricity costs. It notes that “85,000 jobs in the clean energy sector… were lost or put on hold” and that “costs of essential services like electricity continue to rise,” connecting directly to the goals of promoting clean energy and ensuring it is affordable.
4. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
   • The article mentions that the administration’s policies included cuts to “health care… for workers and families.” This action directly impacts the goal of ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being by potentially reducing access to essential health services.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 8.5 (under SDG 8): “By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men…”
   • The article’s discussion of a 35% decline in job creation and the loss of nearly 300,000 jobs directly contradicts the objective of achieving full and productive employment.
2. Target 10.2 (under SDG 10): “By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of… ethnicity…”
   • The article’s finding that “Republican fiscal policies are hurting the whole country, but as usual, Latinos are taking a particularly hard hit” shows a setback in the economic inclusion of an ethnic group, which is the core of this target.
3. Target 7.2 (under SDG 7): “By 2030, increase substantially the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix.”
   • The loss of 85,000 jobs in the clean energy sector, as mentioned in the article, indicates a slowdown in the growth of the renewable energy industry, which is essential for achieving this target.
4. Target 3.8 (under SDG 3): “Achieve universal health coverage, including financial risk protection, access to quality essential health-care services…”
   • The mention of “cut health care… for workers and families” points to a reduction in access to healthcare services, moving away from the goal of universal health coverage.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. For SDG 8 and Target 8.5:
   • Indicator: Rate of job creation.
   • Evidence from the article: The article provides specific data points, such as “nearly 300,000 fewer jobs created” and a “decline of over a third (35%)” in job growth in certain industries over a specific eight-month period. This directly measures employment trends.
2. For SDG 10 and Target 10.2:
   • Indicator: Economic disparity by ethnicity.
   • Evidence from the article: The analysis measures job growth specifically in “industries with a high concentration of Latino workers.” The finding that these industries saw a significant collapse in job creation serves as an indicator of growing economic inequality for this demographic.
3. For SDG 7 and Target 7.2:
   • Indicator: Employment in the renewable energy sector.
   • Evidence from the article: The article quantifies the impact on the clean energy sector by stating that “85,000 jobs in the clean energy sector… were lost or put on hold,” providing a clear metric for progress (or regression) in this area.
   • Indicator: Cost of energy services.
   • Evidence from the article: It is mentioned that the “costs of essential services like electricity continue to rise,” which is an indicator related to energy affordability.
4. For SDG 3 and Target 3.8:
   • Indicator: Public spending or provision of healthcare services.
   • Evidence from the article: The article implies a negative trend for this indicator by mentioning “cuts to government resources affecting working families” and specifically that the administration “cut health care.” While not quantified, this points to a reduction in access to healthcare.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: americansfortaxfairness.org