Time, space, and loss of language abilities, alongside other assimilation processes, weaken bonds between migrants and their families in their countries of origin, and this gap widens for subsequent immigrant generations. However, contrary to theories of assimilation, many immigrants and their children do maintain ties to their homelands, specifically through homeland property ownership. I investigate this empirical puzzle, asking how and why do Latino immigrants and the second generation maintain transnational ties, under conditions that would normally lead to their assimilation and integration? Using in-depth interviews (n=43) and a novel nationally representative survey of the Latino first-and second-generation living in the US (n=1,046), I show how homeland property ownership is not only an economic investment, but is also a part of caring for family and identity maintenance for Latinos living in the US.

By studying how immigrants and the second generation can be both integrated members of the American economy and society and look abroad—both for investments and emotional connection—I also show how such a globalized outlook is not only for the wealthy. For some, this transnational outlook back to the homeland is actually an economic survival strategy—like migrating may have been in the first place. For others, especially those with greater human capital, cross border investments may be a way to maximize economic returns and diversify long-term risk by eschewing permanent commitment to a single place. This is especially so for those with some degree of dissatisfaction with life in the United States, due to discrimination or legal status.

This dissertation studies different facets of cross-border life, through a comparative analysis of first- and second- generation Latinos in the United States. I begin with a quantitative overview of different transnational characteristics including remitting, transnational employment, dual citizenship, location of family members, homeland visits, transnational financial assets, and homeland property ownership (Ch.1). While many of these characteristics decline over generation, I find that homeland property ownership is greater for the second generation compared with the first. Subsequent chapters explore this finding in more depth, examining homeland property purchase and inheritance (Ch.2), homeland property ownership aspirations (Ch.3), and homeland retirement aspirations (Ch.4).

I show how property ownership abroad and return migration intentions may be in reaction to anxieties about race, the increasing economic stress of life in the US, or an insurance policy in the event of a potential deportation of oneself or loved ones. Additionally, both immigrants and the second generation may look beyond US borders—often to their countries of origin, but not exclusively—for a sense of self. Indeed, even when firmly planted in the US—professionally and economically—Latinos may still look abroad for cultural and ethnic identification, often through real or aspirational economic attachment to a place. Ultimately, immigrant and second-generation cross border investments are laden with both economic and affective components.

This topic is particularly important given the present globalized societal context where people—beyond the ultra-wealthy—are decreasingly beholden to life within a single national context. While this is a case study of a limited set of transnational behaviors among a select population, this study may also shed light onto how the general American and global public may similarly look outside their country of residence for both investments, and better long-term quality of life.