5 Takeaways From WERC's First Talent Mobility Market Sizing Report

For the first time, the talent mobility industry has a shared answer to the question it gets asked most often: how big is this industry, and why does it matter?

WERC's inaugural report, Talent Mobility's Global Market Size and U.S. Economic Impact, conducted by Rockport Analytics, puts the global market at roughly $90 billion and quantifies what mobility contributes to the U.S. economy. It draws on a survey of 543 corporate practitioners from organizations headquartered in 26 countries, representing about 475,000 moves and $5.3 billion in 2024 mobility spend.

Why now? Mobility professionals have long struggled to explain the value and impact of what they do, and until now there was no comprehensive benchmark of the industry's size or contribution. Part of the problem is structure: mobility isn't one sector but an ecosystem spanning immigration law, tax, real estate, housing, moving, destination services and technology, which has hidden its true economic footprint. WERC commissioned the study to give the industry a shared set of data for advocacy, strategic decision-making and a stronger seat in workforce planning.

At 55 pages, it's a lot to digest, and the headline numbers aren't necessarily the most useful part for those running programs. Here are the five takeaways we think matter most for corporate mobility leaders.

1. The headline numbers: great trivia, real advocacy power

The report sizes global talent mobility at about $90 billion in 2024, supporting roughly 8.7 million employment-related moves. The U.S. accounts for $33.2 billion and about 2.1 million moves. Run through an economic model, U.S. spending contributes $34.1 billion to GDP, supporting nearly 340,000 jobs and generating $7.1 billion in tax revenue.

For most mobility leaders, these numbers are like trivia. They make a good conference opener, but they won't change how you design a policy or size a budget. In front of a lawmaker, though, they're something more. Jobs, GDP, and tax revenue are the language of policy, which gives the industry a credible voice on issues such as the moving expense deduction, immigration processing delays, and housing supply. Mobility leaders benefit when those debates go well.

Two caveats before quoting them. First, this is a total addressable market: it includes moves where employees bought services on their own, outside any corporate program. Second, the economic impact figure measures what is spent on mobility, not what mobility returns, a gap we come back to below.

2. Lean internal teams are running large, complex programs

Roughly half of corporate mobility teams have five or fewer people, and 11% are a team of one. Despite that, they're managing immigration, tax, housing, household goods and policy across multiple jurisdictions.

The result is heavy reliance on partners. 64% of companies manage at least half of their programs through external providers, and 23% outsource fully. Over 90% use an immigration law firm, 83% use an RMC and 82% use a tax firm.

The report names this as a defining trend: programs are becoming too complex to run as an internal core competency. For a small team, the value of an RMC isn't just logistics. It's compliance oversight, supplier coordination and the market intelligence few employers can build on their own.

3. Compliance shapes both policy and spend

Tax compliance (80%) and immigration compliance (77%) top the list of factors shaping mobility policy, ahead of attracting talent (74%). The spend follows: in the U.S., tax support is 16.1% of mobility spending and immigration 12.1%, behind only other allowances (18.5%).

Cost per move is a useful rough benchmark too. The report puts the U.S. average at about $15,500, against $10,700 in Western Europe and $7,500 in Asia Pacific. Because those averages include self-procured moves, a managed program will often run higher.

Lump sums show the cost-versus-risk trade-off. They make up 12.5% of U.S. mobility spend and simplify accounting, but they shift logistics and compliance risk onto employees.

4. Demand is splitting between knowledge industries and manufacturing

Finance firms generate about 37% more mobility than the average industry, and other service sectors about 29% more. Manufacturing runs at roughly half the average.

The gap widened in 2025. On a net basis, more finance (24.1%) and other service firms (20.3%) reported rising move volumes than falling ones. Manufacturing was the only sector with a net decline (-14.3%).

Who moves is broader than many assume. Mid-level professionals account for 43.7% of moves, new hires 20.7% and executives just 16.3%. The top reasons are intra-company transfers (59%), skills transfer (58%) and leadership deployment (57%). Mobility is bigger than an executive perk, it's a workforce planning tool.

5. We can now measure what mobility costs, but not what it returns

This may be the report's most important finding, even if it isn't framed that way. Every headline figure, from the $90 billion market to the $34.1 billion GDP contribution, measures money going into mobility. The report itself acknowledges it does not capture the value moved employees create in their new roles.

Companies have the same blind spot. ROI reviews mostly track transactional costs: travel, housing, moving and professional fees. The costs that matter most strategically often go uncounted, including failed or shortened assignments, re-recruiting and the delay before a moved employee is fully productive.

Closing that gap is the next frontier. Mobility leaders who can connect moves to business outcomes, such as a project delivered, a market opened or a leader retained, will make a far stronger case than any industry total can.

The bottom line

This report gives the industry something it has long lacked: a common baseline for its scale and economic footprint. Treat it as a starting point, as WERC does. The figures are modeled estimates from a first-year survey, and they size the whole addressable market rather than formal corporate programs.

For corporate mobility leaders, the most practical value lies beneath the headlines: peer benchmarks on staffing and outsourcing, the compliance-driven shape of policy and spend, and a clear view of where demand is heading. The biggest opportunity is the question the report leaves open, which is how to measure what mobility actually returns.