Do positive economic evaluations of immigration affect the way people see immigrants cultural proximity? Much of the debate in immigration literature is about whether respondents oppose immigration because of labor market threats or because of cultural aversion to immigrants. Repeated studies show that natives favor immigrants from similar cultural and religious backgrounds and that this cultural assessment trumps economic assessments of immigration. This paper tests the assumption that these two ways of evaluating immigration are not as distinct as the literature suggests. With a survey experiment in the United Kingdom, we prime respondents with information about the positive economic effects on immigration and subsequently measure support for taking immigrants from similar and different cultures. Our working hypothesis is that upon learning about the positive economic effects of immigration, respondents also enlarge the scope of their cultural receptivness, that is, they show increased willingness to take in Eastern European and Muslim immigrants when compared to the non-primed control group. Preliminary analysis supports this hypothesis, which means that cultural assessments of immigrants is less stable than previously thought and more prone to personal economic assessments instead.