Counties in Texas by net international migration, July to June
Harris County had the highest net international migration, July to June of 254 counties in 2020, at 19,679. Starr County had the lowest, at -40. The median was 7 and the figure for Texas was 54,650. Source: the U.S. Census Bureau.
Top 40 counties, 2020
Full ranking
| Rank | Counties | 2020 | Change on 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Harris County Estimated | 19,679 | -21.2% |
| 2 | Dallas County Estimated | 7,924 | -19.9% |
| 3 | Tarrant County Estimated | 3,826 | -16.8% |
| 4 | Fort Bend County Estimated | 3,526 | -22.8% |
| 5 | Collin County Estimated | 3,444 | -21.7% |
| 6 | Travis County Estimated | 3,430 | -20.8% |
| 7 | Bexar County Estimated | 2,056 | -5.5% |
| 8 | Denton County Estimated | 1,395 | -19.2% |
| 9 | Brazos County Estimated | 810 | -20.7% |
| 10 | Montgomery County Estimated | 764 | -17.8% |
| 11 | Williamson County Estimated | 697 | -15.7% |
| 12 | Webb County Estimated | 433 | -17.8% |
| 13 | Bell County Estimated | 337 | +110.6% |
| 14 | Nueces County Estimated | 328 | -15.7% |
| 15 | Midland County Estimated | 295 | -17.6% |
| 16 | El Paso County Estimated | 289 | +189% |
| 17 | Galveston County Estimated | 281 | -18.3% |
| 18 | Potter County Estimated | 278 | -16.8% |
| 19 | Jefferson County Estimated | 273 | +0.7% |
| 20 | Brazoria County Estimated | 271 | +7.1% |
| 21 | Hays County Estimated | 264 | -14.3% |
| 22 | Lubbock County Estimated | 245 | -21.2% |
| 23 | Hidalgo County Estimated | 211 | +154.2% |
| 24 | Ector County Estimated | 186 | -19.8% |
| 25 | Frio County Estimated | 177 | -22% |
| 26 | McLennan County Estimated | 171 | -12.8% |
| 27 | Taylor County Estimated | 146 | -14.6% |
| 28 | Wichita County Estimated | 138 | -20.2% |
| 29 | Walker County Estimated | 101 | -25.2% |
| 30 | Karnes County Estimated | 89 | -21.2% |
| 31 | Gaines County Estimated | 82 | -8.9% |
| 32 | Rockwall County Estimated | 77 | 0% |
| 33 | Smith County Estimated | 76 | -17.4% |
| 34 | Howard County Estimated | 73 | -15.1% |
| 35 | Parker County Estimated | 70 | -14.6% |
| 36 | Gregg County Estimated | 68 | -8.1% |
| 37 | Polk County Estimated | 66 | -29% |
| 38 | Coryell County Estimated | 61 | +84.8% |
| 38 | Maverick County Estimated | 61 | 0% |
| 40 | Hudspeth County Estimated | 59 | -1.7% |
| 40 | Hunt County Estimated | 59 | -11.9% |
| 42 | Comal County Estimated | 54 | -16.9% |
| 43 | Colorado County Estimated | 52 | -22.4% |
| 44 | Grayson County Estimated | 48 | -2% |
| 44 | San Patricio County Estimated | 48 | -12.7% |
| 46 | Harrison County Estimated | 47 | -16.1% |
| 46 | Randall County Estimated | 47 | -29.9% |
| 48 | Ellis County Estimated | 45 | -25% |
| 48 | Garza County Estimated | 45 | +7.1% |
| 50 | Jim Wells County Estimated | 44 | -2.2% |
| 51 | Anderson County Estimated | 40 | -20% |
| 51 | Dallam County Estimated | 40 | -28.6% |
| 51 | Fannin County Estimated | 40 | -11.1% |
| 54 | Bowie County Estimated | 39 | -25% |
| 54 | Reeves County Estimated | 39 | -27.8% |
| 56 | Van Zandt County Estimated | 38 | -20.8% |
| 56 | Yoakum County Estimated | 38 | -24% |
| 58 | Reagan County Estimated | 33 | -17.5% |
| 59 | Kleberg County Estimated | 32 | -33.3% |
| 60 | Nolan County Estimated | 31 | -18.4% |
| 61 | Kaufman County Estimated | 30 | +36.4% |
| 62 | Brooks County Estimated | 29 | -25.6% |
| 63 | Kerr County Estimated | 28 | -20% |
| 63 | Madison County Estimated | 28 | -31.7% |
| 63 | Matagorda County Estimated | 28 | -15.2% |
| 66 | Concho County Estimated | 27 | -15.6% |
| 67 | Gillespie County Estimated | 26 | -16.1% |
| 67 | Moore County Estimated | 26 | -7.1% |
| 67 | Waller County Estimated | 26 | -21.2% |
| 70 | Haskell County Estimated | 25 | -24.2% |
| 71 | Burleson County Estimated | 24 | -11.1% |
| 71 | Chambers County Estimated | 24 | -20% |
| 73 | Caldwell County Estimated | 23 | +15% |
| 73 | Castro County Estimated | 23 | +53.3% |
| 73 | Hardin County Estimated | 23 | -17.9% |
| 73 | Wilson County Estimated | 23 | 0% |
| 77 | Camp County Estimated | 22 | -24.1% |
| 78 | Andrews County Estimated | 21 | -22.2% |
| 78 | Kendall County Estimated | 21 | +31.3% |
| 80 | Guadalupe County Estimated | 20 | +300% |
| 81 | Zavala County Estimated | 19 | |
| 82 | La Salle County Estimated | 18 | -25% |
| 82 | Navarro County Estimated | 18 | -10% |
| 84 | Brown County Estimated | 17 | -29.2% |
| 84 | Freestone County Estimated | 17 | -15% |
| 84 | Hansford County Estimated | 17 | -29.2% |
| 87 | Calhoun County Estimated | 16 | +128.6% |
| 87 | Victoria County Estimated | 16 | -33.3% |
| 87 | Wise County Estimated | 16 | +77.8% |
| 90 | Scurry County Estimated | 15 | +25% |
| 90 | Tom Green County Estimated | 15 | +50% |
| 90 | Val Verde County Estimated | 15 | 0% |
| 93 | Fayette County Estimated | 14 | +7.7% |
| 93 | Hockley County Estimated | 14 | +40% |
| 93 | Robertson County Estimated | 14 | -30% |
| 96 | Cooke County Estimated | 13 | +30% |
| 96 | Parmer County Estimated | 13 | 0% |
| 96 | Winkler County Estimated | 13 | -51.9% |
| 99 | Cameron County Estimated | 12 | +120.3% |
| 99 | Cochran County Estimated | 12 | -25% |
| 99 | Glasscock County Estimated | 12 | +9.1% |
| 99 | Kinney County Estimated | 12 | -33.3% |
| 99 | Lamar County Estimated | 12 | +33.3% |
| 99 | Pecos County Estimated | 12 | +9.1% |
| 99 | Sutton County Estimated | 12 | 0% |
| 99 | Titus County Estimated | 12 | +152.2% |
| 99 | Zapata County Estimated | 12 | +140% |
| 108 | Comanche County Estimated | 11 | +22.2% |
| 108 | Henderson County Estimated | 11 | +22.2% |
| 108 | Wood County Estimated | 11 | -21.4% |
| 111 | Bandera County Estimated | 10 | 0% |
| 111 | Clay County Estimated | 10 | -16.7% |
| 111 | Liberty County Estimated | 10 | -33.3% |
| 111 | Orange County Estimated | 10 | +66.7% |
| 115 | Hamilton County Estimated | 9 | -10% |
| 115 | Jim Hogg County Estimated | 9 | -25% |
| 115 | Lavaca County Estimated | 9 | +50% |
| 115 | Medina County Estimated | 9 | +28.6% |
| 119 | Bosque County Estimated | 8 | -20% |
| 119 | Dawson County Estimated | 8 | -11.1% |
| 119 | Hardeman County Estimated | 8 | -20% |
| 119 | Johnson County Estimated | 8 | -27.3% |
| 119 | Young County Estimated | 8 | -20% |
| 124 | Live Oak County Estimated | 7 | 0% |
| 124 | Llano County Estimated | 7 | 0% |
| 124 | Ochiltree County Estimated | 7 | +250% |
| 124 | Rains County Estimated | 7 | 0% |
| 124 | Ward County Estimated | 7 | +40% |
| 129 | Austin County Estimated | 6 | -45.5% |
| 129 | Cherokee County Estimated | 6 | +50% |
| 129 | Hartley County Estimated | 6 | +50% |
| 129 | Jackson County Estimated | 6 | -33.3% |
| 129 | Limestone County Estimated | 6 | +100% |
| 134 | Blanco County Estimated | 5 | +400% |
| 134 | Crane County Estimated | 5 | 0% |
| 134 | Hemphill County Estimated | 5 | -16.7% |
| 134 | Lamb County Estimated | 5 | 0% |
| 134 | Lipscomb County Estimated | 5 | -37.5% |
| 134 | Palo Pinto County Estimated | 5 | -16.7% |
| 134 | San Saba County Estimated | 5 | +66.7% |
| 134 | Sherman County Estimated | 5 | -16.7% |
| 134 | Upton County Estimated | 5 | -16.7% |
| 134 | Wharton County Estimated | 5 | -50% |
| 144 | Fisher County Estimated | 4 | -20% |
| 144 | Hill County Estimated | 4 | +300% |
| 144 | Knox County Estimated | 4 | -20% |
| 144 | Lampasas County Estimated | 4 | 0% |
| 144 | Mills County Estimated | 4 | +33.3% |
| 144 | Mitchell County Estimated | 4 | -33.3% |
| 144 | Presidio County Estimated | 4 | -60% |
| 144 | Trinity County Estimated | 4 | -50% |
| 144 | Uvalde County Estimated | 4 | +180% |
| 144 | Willacy County Estimated | 4 | +300% |
| 154 | Archer County Estimated | 3 | +50% |
| 154 | Brewster County Estimated | 3 | +200% |
| 154 | Duval County Estimated | 3 | -40% |
| 154 | Jeff Davis County Estimated | 3 | -25% |
| 154 | Mason County Estimated | 3 | -57.1% |
| 154 | San Augustine County Estimated | 3 | +50% |
| 154 | Wilbarger County Estimated | 3 | |
| 161 | Bee County Estimated | 2 | +100% |
| 161 | Callahan County Estimated | 2 | 0% |
| 161 | Carson County Estimated | 2 | |
| 161 | Cass County Estimated | 2 | -50% |
| 161 | Franklin County Estimated | 2 | -33.3% |
| 161 | Jack County Estimated | 2 | 0% |
| 161 | Jones County Estimated | 2 | -50% |
| 161 | Leon County Estimated | 2 | +100% |
| 161 | Menard County Estimated | 2 | -33.3% |
| 161 | Refugio County Estimated | 2 | 0% |
| 161 | Runnels County Estimated | 2 | -50% |
| 172 | Aransas County Estimated | 1 | +133.3% |
| 172 | Briscoe County Estimated | 1 | 0% |
| 172 | Coleman County Estimated | 1 | -66.7% |
| 172 | Crosby County Estimated | 1 | -66.7% |
| 172 | Deaf Smith County Estimated | 1 | -50% |
| 172 | Dickens County Estimated | 1 | |
| 172 | Donley County Estimated | 1 | 0% |
| 172 | Erath County Estimated | 1 | +150% |
| 172 | Hall County Estimated | 1 | |
| 172 | Hood County Estimated | 1 | +150% |
| 172 | Kenedy County Estimated | 1 | 0% |
| 172 | Lynn County Estimated | 1 | 0% |
| 172 | Martin County Estimated | 1 | -50% |
| 172 | McCulloch County Estimated | 1 | 0% |
| 172 | Red River County Estimated | 1 | +200% |
| 172 | Schleicher County Estimated | 1 | 0% |
| 172 | Terrell County Estimated | 1 | 0% |
| 189 | Armstrong County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Atascosa County Estimated | 0 | +100% |
| 189 | Baylor County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Borden County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Collingsworth County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Cottle County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Crockett County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Culberson County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Delta County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Floyd County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Foard County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Goliad County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Gray County Estimated | 0 | +100% |
| 189 | Irion County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Jasper County Estimated | 0 | -100% |
| 189 | Kent County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Kimble County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | King County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Loving County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Marion County Estimated | 0 | -100% |
| 189 | McMullen County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Motley County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Newton County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Oldham County Estimated | 0 | -100% |
| 189 | Real County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Roberts County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Shackelford County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Stephens County Estimated | 0 | +100% |
| 189 | Sterling County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Stonewall County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Throckmorton County Estimated | 0 | |
| 189 | Upshur County Estimated | 0 | +100% |
| 221 | Bailey County Estimated | -1 | +80% |
| 221 | Coke County Estimated | -1 | 0% |
| 221 | Edwards County Estimated | -1 | +50% |
| 221 | Falls County Estimated | -1 | +50% |
| 221 | Hopkins County Estimated | -1 | +80% |
| 221 | Houston County Estimated | -1 | -114.3% |
| 221 | Hutchinson County Estimated | -1 | +50% |
| 221 | Morris County Estimated | -1 | +50% |
| 221 | Panola County Estimated | -1 | +50% |
| 221 | Wheeler County Estimated | -1 | 0% |
| 231 | Gonzales County Estimated | -2 | +75% |
| 231 | Montague County Estimated | -2 | -200% |
| 231 | Shelby County Estimated | -2 | +86.7% |
| 231 | Somervell County Estimated | -2 | +33.3% |
| 231 | Tyler County Estimated | -2 | +50% |
| 236 | Eastland County Estimated | -3 | +25% |
| 236 | Milam County Estimated | -3 | +50% |
| 236 | Terry County Estimated | -3 | +25% |
| 239 | Childress County Estimated | -4 | 0% |
| 239 | Sabine County Estimated | -4 | +33.3% |
| 239 | Swisher County Estimated | -4 | +63.6% |
| 242 | DeWitt County Estimated | -5 | +54.5% |
| 242 | Washington County Estimated | -5 | +44.4% |
| 244 | Dimmit County Estimated | -6 | 0% |
| 244 | Lee County Estimated | -6 | -50% |
| 246 | Grimes County Estimated | -8 | -60% |
| 246 | Rusk County Estimated | -8 | 0% |
| 248 | Angelina County Estimated | -9 | -28.6% |
| 249 | Hale County Estimated | -10 | +50% |
| 250 | San Jacinto County Estimated | -12 | +29.4% |
Other periods
About this ranking
Estimated moves into the area from abroad minus moves out of the area to other countries, from July 1 of the previous year through June 30 of the reported year. United States: Census Bureau estimates, including people born in the United States and abroad, moves between the states and Puerto Rico, and net movement of the Armed Forces overseas. Canada: Statistics Canada immigrants, minus net emigration, plus the net change in non-permanent residents. Australia: ABS net overseas migration for the financial year. United Kingdom local authorities: Office for National Statistics mid-year estimates, counting people who move for at least 12 months.
A component of each country's official population estimates. Methods differ between the statistical offices, so compare places within a country first. Differs from the World Bank net_migration series, which uses calendar years and a different method.
Every value in the ranking comes from the same publisher and the same period, so the counties are compared on one definition. Equal values share a rank.
How to cite
U.S. Census Bureau. Population Estimates Program: net international migration, July 1 of the previous year to June 30 of the reported year; vintage 2020 files for 2011 to 2020 and the latest 2020s vintage from 2021. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/data/data-sets.html. Retrieved 2026-10-12.Citation styles
APA 7
U.S. Census Bureau. (2026). Population Estimates Program: net international migration, July 1 of the previous year to June 30 of the reported year; vintage 2020 files for 2011 to 2020 and the latest 2020s vintage from 2021 (Counties in Texas by net international migration, July to June, 2020) [Data set]. Retrieved October 12, 2026, from https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/data/data-sets.html
MLA 9
Population Estimates Program: net international migration, July 1 of the previous year to June 30 of the reported year; vintage 2020 files for 2011 to 2020 and the latest 2020s vintage from 2021, Counties in Texas by net international migration, July to June, 2020. U.S. Census Bureau, 26 Mar. 2026, https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/data/data-sets.html. Invokely, https://invokely.ai/rankings/net-international-migration-july-june/texas-counties?period=2020. Accessed 12 Oct. 2026.
Chicago (author-date)
U.S. Census Bureau. 2026. Population Estimates Program: net international migration, July 1 of the previous year to June 30 of the reported year; vintage 2020 files for 2011 to 2020 and the latest 2020s vintage from 2021. Counties in Texas by net international migration, July to June, 2020. Dataset. Accessed October 12, 2026. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/data/data-sets.html. Also distributed by Invokely, https://invokely.ai/rankings/net-international-migration-july-june/texas-counties?period=2020.
Harvard
U.S. Census Bureau (2026) Population Estimates Program: net international migration, July 1 of the previous year to June 30 of the reported year; vintage 2020 files for 2011 to 2020 and the latest 2020s vintage from 2021, Counties in Texas by net international migration, July to June, 2020 [Dataset]. Available at: https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/data/data-sets.html, via Invokely: https://invokely.ai/rankings/net-international-migration-july-june/texas-counties?period=2020 (Accessed: 12 October 2026).
BibTeX
@misc{census_counties_in_texas_by_2020,
author = {{U.S. Census Bureau}},
title = {{Population Estimates Program: net international migration, July 1 of the previous year to June 30 of the reported year; vintage 2020 files for 2011 to 2020 and the latest 2020s vintage from 2021: Counties in Texas by net international migration, July to June, 2020}},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {Data set},
url = {https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/data/data-sets.html},
urldate = {2026-10-12},
note = {Accessed via Invokely, https://invokely.ai/rankings/net-international-migration-july-june/texas-counties?period=2020. Publisher attribution: U.S. Census Bureau. Population Estimates Program: net international migration, July 1 of the previous year to June 30 of the reported year; vintage 2020 files for 2011 to 2020 and the latest 2020s vintage from 2021. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/data/data-sets.html. Retrieved 2026-10-12.},
}
RIS
TY - DATA
AU - U.S. Census Bureau
TI - Population Estimates Program: net international migration, July 1 of the previous year to June 30 of the reported year; vintage 2020 files for 2011 to 2020 and the latest 2020s vintage from 2021: Counties in Texas by net international migration, July to June, 2020
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/03/26
PB - U.S. Census Bureau
DB - Invokely
UR - https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/data/data-sets.html
L2 - https://invokely.ai/rankings/net-international-migration-july-june/texas-counties?period=2020
Y2 - 2026/10/12
N1 - Accessed via Invokely, https://invokely.ai/rankings/net-international-migration-july-june/texas-counties?period=2020.
N1 - Publisher attribution: U.S. Census Bureau. Population Estimates Program: net international migration, July 1 of the previous year to June 30 of the reported year; vintage 2020 files for 2011 to 2020 and the latest 2020s vintage from 2021. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/data/data-sets.html. Retrieved 2026-10-12.
ER -
Use this data in your AI agent
Invokely serves this figure to AI assistants through MCP and to code through a REST API, with the source and citation attached. Ask your assistant:
Rank Counties in Texas by net international migration, July to June using official data, and cite the source.
rank_places {"indicator":"net_international_migration_july_june","level":"province","within":"Texas","limit":10}
GET https://invokely.ai/api/v1/rank?indicator=net_international_migration_july_june&level=province&within=Texas&limit=10Questions
Which county has the highest net international migration, July to June?
Harris County, with 19,679 in 2020, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
Which county has the lowest net international migration, July to June?
Starr County, with -40 in 2020.
Where does this ranking come from?
Every value comes from one source and one period, so the places are comparable: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates Program: net international migration, July 1 of the previous year to June 30 of the reported year; vintage 2020 files for 2011 to 2020 and the latest 2020s vintage from 2021. Retrieved 2026-10-12.