Poverty Rates in the USA by State for 2025

Rank	State/District	Poverty Rate (%)
1	New Hampshire	7.2
2	Utah	8.3
3	Maryland	8.6
4	New Jersey	9.1
5	Massachusetts	9.4
6	Wisconsin	9.5
7	Kansas	9.7
8	Virginia	9.8
9	Delaware	9.9
10	Rhode Island	9.9
11	Vermont	9.9
12	Oregon	10.0
13	Iowa	10.1
14	Nebraska	10.1
15	Illinois	10.2
16	Idaho	10.3
17	Colorado	10.4
18	Wyoming	10.4
19	North Dakota	10.4
20	Hawaii	10.5
21	Connecticut	10.6
22	Minnesota	10.6
23	Pennsylvania	11.2
24	Ohio	12.4
25	Missouri	12.5
26	Michigan	12.8
27	Washington	12.9
28	Indiana	12.9
29	Florida	13.1
30	Arizona	13.2
31	Georgia	13.3
32	Texas	13.4
33	Oklahoma	13.7
34	Nevada	13.8
35	California	13.9
36	New York	13.9
37	South Carolina	14.0
38	Tennessee	14.2
39	North Carolina	14.7
40	Kentucky	15.8
41	West Virginia	16.7
42	Arkansas	16.8
43	New Mexico	17.8
44	Alabama	17.8
45	Alaska	18.0
46	Louisiana	18.7
47	Montana	18.8
48	Maine	18.8
49	Mississippi	18.8
50	South Dakota	19.0
51	District of Columbia	17.3

Poverty in the USA in 2025 impacts millions in varying degrees across different states.

New Hampshire has the lowest poverty rate at 7.2 percent, whereas South Dakota experiences the highest rate at 19.0 percent.

The national average is approximately 12.1 percent, as reported by the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.

These statistics illustrate a fragmented economy where employment, education, and policies influence outcomes.

States with robust technology and manufacturing industries maintain low poverty levels, while rural or resource-dependent regions encounter challenges.

Workers and families are acutely aware of these disparities in access to food, housing, and education.

States with the Lowest Poverty

New Hampshire stands out with a poverty rate of 7.2 percent. The presence of technology companies and manufacturing plants attracts skilled workers who receive competitive wages.

The state’s low tax rates appeal to families, and its quality educational institutions foster essential job skills for the future. Following closely is Utah, with a poverty rate of 8.3 percent.

Families tend to be larger in this state, where Mormon principles prioritize work and community assistance. Technology centers such as Salt Lake City contribute high-paying positions in the software industry.

Maryland, with a rate of 8.6 percent, benefits from government contracts in proximity to Washington, D.C.

Federal employment offers reliable income, and suburban areas provide affordable housing. New Jersey and Massachusetts rank fourth and fifth, with poverty rates of 9.1 and 9.4 percent, respectively.

These states place significant emphasis on education. Institutions like Princeton University cultivate local talent in fields such as medicine and engineering.

Urban centers foster a variety of job opportunities ranging from finance to biotechnology. Wisconsin, with a poverty rate of 9.5 percent, depends on its manufacturing and agricultural sectors.

The factories in Milwaukee and the research facilities in Madison contribute to low unemployment rates, which are closely tied to poverty alleviation.

Middle and Higher Rates

States such as Virginia, with a rate of 9.8 percent, and Minnesota, at 10.6 percent, remain stable.

The defense technology sector in Northern Virginia is thriving, while major health care providers like the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota employ a significant number of individuals.

In contrast, California and New York both experience rates of 13.9 percent. The high cost of living significantly impacts wages, with San Francisco rents surpassing $3,000 per month, which drives low-income earners into poverty despite the wealth generated by the tech industry.

The growing inequality in New York City exacerbates the situation, leaving immigrants and service workers at a disadvantage.

Texas, with a rate of 13.4 percent, and Florida, at 13.1 percent, reflect trends seen in the Southern states.

The growth in these regions is fueled by the oil and tourism industries; however, hurricanes pose a threat to job stability, and migrants often occupy low-wage positions.

Kentucky’s rate has risen to 15.8 percent, as the closure of coal mines has left rural communities with limited options. Many workers lack the necessary training to transition into emerging fields such as renewable energy.

Highest Poverty

New Mexico and Alabama both report a poverty rate of 17.8 percent. The oil industry in New Mexico is subject to fluctuations, and Native American reservations often experience isolation.

Alabama’s economy relies heavily on agriculture and manufacturing, yet low educational attainment keeps many families trapped in poverty.

Louisiana’s poverty rate reaches 18.7 percent, as floods devastate homes and the repercussions of past oil spills continue to affect the region.

The challenges are compounded by inadequate schools and health care issues.

Mississippi, Montana, and Maine each have a poverty rate of 18.8 percent. In Mississippi, agricultural and manufacturing jobs offer low pay, contributing to the highest rural poverty rate in the country.

Montana’s limited population restricts job diversity, with the economy primarily dependent on mining and tourism.

Maine faces challenges with an aging workforce and a lobster industry threatened by climate change.

South Dakota’s surprising rate of 19.0 percent is notable, as agricultural success exists alongside high poverty rates in Native communities.

Factors Influencing These Rates

Education plays a significant role. For instance, New Hampshire boasts a graduation rate of 90 percent among high school students, which facilitates access to higher education and improved employment opportunities.

In contrast, Mississippi has a graduation rate of only 80 percent, which correlates with a poverty rate of 18.8 percent. Employment opportunities are also crucial.

States with a strong technology sector experience an average poverty rate of 9 percent, whereas those reliant on agriculture face rates as high as 16 percent.

Additionally, migration patterns tend to direct talent towards areas with lower poverty levels, resulting in a drain on regions with higher poverty.

A notable example is the exodus of young individuals from West Virginia, where 16.7 percent relocate to Virginia in search of better prospects.

Policies significantly shape these outcomes. The welfare reforms implemented in the 1990s led to a reduction in welfare rolls; however, some states, such as Utah, have introduced work requirements that have proven effective.

Conversely, states like California have opted to expand aid programs, albeit at the expense of incurring high costs. The structure of families also contributes to these dynamics.

The prevalence of single-parent households, which is more common in states with high poverty rates, increases national poverty rates by 20 percent.

Data from the Census indicates that two-parent families can reduce the risk of poverty by half.

Geographical factors present additional challenges. For example, rural areas in South Dakota cover extensive territories with limited access to services.

In contrast, urban Washington D.C., with a poverty rate of 17.3 percent, conceals significant wealth disparities amidst a landscape dominated by government employment.

Climate-related issues also have a profound impact; for instance, storms in Louisiana displace workers, leading to an increase in poverty.

Consequences and Future Directions

States with low poverty rates are able to invest in superior educational systems and healthcare services.

Children in New Hampshire achieve high scores on standardized tests, thereby breaking cycles of poverty.

Conversely, high poverty rates exert pressure on state budgets. In Mississippi, lower spending per student perpetuates existing challenges.

Families in Alabama often find themselves in situations where they must skip meals or postpone medical appointments.

In total, approximately 40 million Americans are living in poverty, resulting in billions of dollars lost in productivity.

Source

• U.S. Census Bureau. (2025). Income and poverty in the United States: 2024 (American Community Survey 1-year estimates). U.S. Department of Commerce.