Michigan · individual fact

Michigan prices and inflation

Compare Michigan’s price levels, category costs, and changes in its regional price deflator.

BLS does not publish a statewide Michigan CPI or a complete 50-state CPI cohort. The statewide comparisons here use BEA regional price parities and its implicit regional price deflator. They are explicitly labeled and are not CPI.

All-items price level96.22024 · #27 of 50 · highest first
Goods price level962024 · #36 of 50 · highest first
Housing-rent price level82.32024 · #28 of 50 · highest first

Michigan over time

Explore Michigan readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Michigan officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Michigan effect.

Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Michigan change.

Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear

Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.

All-items price level Michigan · source units
MichiganPublished U.S. benchmark

Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.

All-items price level2024: 96.291.796.4101Michigan, 2014: 95.5Michigan, 2015: 93.7Michigan, 2016: 93.6Michigan, 2017: 92.7Michigan, 2018: 94.5Michigan, 2019: 95.4Michigan, 2020: 94.4Michigan, 2021: 94.3Michigan, 2022: 93.6Michigan, 2023: 94.3Michigan, 2024: 96.2201420192024
✦ Major events & context · 27National context · Hurricanes Katrina and Rita disrupt fuel supplies · 2005-08-29Katrina / RitaNational context · Global food and energy price surge · 2008-07-15Food / energy surgeNational context · Great Financial Crisis and Great Recession · 2008-09-15Great Financial CrisisNational context · Fed cuts rates near zero during the crisis · 2008-12-16Fed near-zero ratesNational context · American Recovery and Reinvestment Act · 2009-02-17Recovery ActNational context · Renewed global food and oil price pressures · 2011-04-11Commodity pressuresNational context · U.S. drought damages crops and raises food costs · 2012-08-10U.S. droughtNational context · Oil-price collapse lowers energy inflation · 2014-11-27Oil-price collapseNational context · Fed raises rates after the near-zero period · 2015-12-16Fed rate liftoffNational context · Hurricanes Harvey and Irma disrupt fuel markets · 2017-08-25Harvey / IrmaNational context · U.S.–China tariff escalation · 2018-07-06U.S.–China tariffsNational context · Fed cuts rates amid muted inflation · 2019-07-31Fed cuts rates in 2019National context · COVID-19 pandemic · 2020-03-11COVID-19 pandemicNational context · Fed emergency rate cut and asset purchases · 2020-03-15Fed emergency easingNational context · CARES Act pandemic relief · 2020-03-27CARES Act reliefNational context · American Rescue Plan expands pandemic support · 2021-03-11American Rescue PlanNational context · Reopening demand meets supply and chip shortages · 2021-07-09Reopening / shortagesNational context · Avian influenza disrupts egg supplies · 2022-02-09Bird flu / egg supplyNational context · Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine · 2022-02-24Russia invades UkraineNational context · Federal Reserve begins 2022 rate increases · 2022-03-16Fed rate increases beginNational context · Banking stress raises credit and inflation uncertainty · 2023-03-22Banking stressNational context · Supply recovery and slower rent growth ease inflation pressures · 2023-08-25Supply / rent easingNational context · Red Sea shipping disruption raises supply risks · 2024-02-22Red Sea shippingNational context · Federal Reserve cuts rates in September 2024 · 2024-09-18Fed rate cutNational context · Broad U.S. tariff announcement · 2025-04-02U.S. tariff announcementNational context · Federal shutdown interrupts CPI collection · 2025-10-01Shutdown / CPI data gapNational context · Iran conflict and Strait of Hormuz energy disruption · 2026-02-28Iran / Hormuz shock● Michigan Legislature · 22● U.S. Congress · Michigan delegation · 1◆ Governor · 8■ Michigan agencies · 22005-08-012026-04-30

13 of 13 reviewed Michigan actions match · 12 date markers shown. 27 major events shown separately.

Michigan · 2024: 96.2 · Rank #27 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 100

BEA regional price parity, relative to the overall national price level. The U.S. all-items index equals 100 each year. Measures prices across places within the same year, rather than annual inflation. For all items, 103 means about 3% above the national level. Category benchmarks can differ from 100; compare Michigan with the published U.S. category value shown. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.

View observations and export data
Michigan All-items price level · source units
PeriodMichiganRankU.S. benchmark
202496.2#27 of 50100
202394.3#28 of 50100
202293.6#28 of 50100
202194.3#27 of 50100
202094.4#27 of 50100
201995.4#26 of 50100
201894.5#27 of 50100
201792.7#35 of 50100
201693.6#32 of 50100
201593.7#31 of 50100
201495.5#26 of 50100
How major events are selected

The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.

Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.

Michigan · state comparison

How does Michigan’s cost of living compare?

The U.S. all-items level is 100. Each category uses its own published U.S. benchmark. Compare the same category and year.

Michigan · 202496.2
Michigan rank#27among all 50 states
U.S. price level100Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

All-items price level

BEA regional price parity, relative to the overall national price level. The U.S. all-items index equals 100 each year.

Measures prices across places within the same year, rather than annual inflation. For all items, 103 means about 3% above the national level. Category benchmarks can differ from 100; compare Michigan with the published U.S. category value shown.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Michigan
All-items price level history in Michigan91.696.4101.120142024
2024 · Michigan: 96.2 · Rank #27 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 100 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Michigan All-items price level history
PeriodMichiganCompare
201495.5
201593.7
201693.6
201792.7
201894.5
201995.4
202094.4
202194.3
202293.6
202394.3
202496.2

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Michigan stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Michigan has a dark outline.

Lower value · 86.9Higher value · 110.7Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Michigan · 96.22024 · Rank #27 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Michigan with every state · 50 ranked
All-items price level · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California110.7—
#2Hawaii110—
#3New Jersey108.8—
#4New York107.9—
#5Washington107—
#6Massachusetts105.8—
#7Maryland105—
#8New Hampshire104.2—
#9Connecticut103.6—
#10Florida103.4—
#11Oregon103.4—
#12Colorado103.1—
#13Alaska102.4—
#14Rhode Island102.3—
#15Virginia101.1—
#16Arizona100.7—
#17Nevada100—
#18Illinois100—
#19Delaware99.8—
#20Utah98.9—
#21Minnesota98.6—
#22Vermont98—
#23Pennsylvania97.6—
#24Texas97.1—
#25Maine97.1—
#26Georgia96.3—
#27Michigan · your comparison96.2—
#28Idaho95.5—
#29Montana94.6—
#30North Carolina94.3—
#31Wisconsin94.1—
#32South Carolina93.7—
#33Indiana93.3—
#34Ohio92.8—
#35Wyoming92.7—
#36New Mexico92.2—
#37Tennessee91.9—
#38Missouri90.8—
#39Kentucky90.2—
#40Nebraska90.1—
#41Kansas90.1—
#42West Virginia89.5—
#43North Dakota89—
#44Alabama88.8—
#45South Dakota88.6—
#46Louisiana88.2—
#47Oklahoma87.8—
#48Iowa87.8—
#49Mississippi87—
#50Arkansas86.9—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Michigan · state comparison

How much have prices changed?

This is BEA’s implicit regional price deflator, derived from regional price parities and the national PCE price index.

Michigan · 20244.7%
Michigan rank#5among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark2.6%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Annual change in regional price deflator

Year-over-year change in the BEA implicit regional price deflator.

An annual regional inflation measure; different from BLS CPI-U. Changes can reflect regional price parity estimates and revisions as well as national inflation.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Michigan
Annual change in regional price deflator history in Michigan-2.9%2.4%7.8%20152024
2024 · Michigan: 4.7% · Rank #5 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 2.6% · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Michigan Annual change in regional price deflator history
PeriodMichiganCompare
2015-1.7%
20160.9%
20170.8%
20184%
20192.3%
20200.1%
20213.9%
20225.8%
20234.6%
20244.7%

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Michigan stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Michigan has a dark outline.

Lower value · 0.8%Higher value · 6.7%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Michigan · 4.7%2024 · Rank #5 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Michigan with every state · 50 ranked
Annual change in regional price deflator · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Montana6.7%—
#2Idaho6.2%—
#3Utah6%—
#4Nevada4.8%—
#5Michigan · your comparison4.7%—
#6New Mexico4%—
#7Indiana4%—
#8Wyoming3.9%—
#9Illinois3.9%—
#10Colorado3.8%—
#11Delaware3.7%—
#12Ohio3.6%—
#13Wisconsin3.6%—
#14North Dakota3.5%—
#15Vermont3.5%—
#16South Dakota3.1%—
#17Maryland3%—
#18Minnesota3%—
#19Kentucky2.9%—
#20South Carolina2.9%—
#21Hawaii2.9%—
#22Rhode Island2.8%—
#23Mississippi2.8%—
#24Kansas2.8%—
#25Pennsylvania2.8%—
#26Arkansas2.8%—
#27New York2.7%—
#28Arizona2.6%—
#29North Carolina2.5%—
#30Texas2.5%—
#31New Jersey2.5%—
#32West Virginia2.5%—
#33Nebraska2.4%—
#34Georgia2.4%—
#35Florida2.4%—
#36Virginia2.4%—
#37Tennessee2.4%—
#38Alabama2.3%—
#39Missouri2.3%—
#40Louisiana2%—
#41Connecticut2%—
#42Alaska1.7%—
#43Maine1.7%—
#44Oklahoma1.6%—
#45Iowa1.5%—
#46New Hampshire1.4%—
#47Washington1.3%—
#48California1.3%—
#49Oregon1.2%—
#50Massachusetts0.8%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Michigan · state comparison

Are incomes keeping up with prices?

Real personal income accounts for national inflation and regional price differences.

Michigan · 2024$53,569
Michigan rank#40among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$59,195Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Real personal income per person

Regional price-adjusted and inflation-adjusted personal income per resident.

Constant 2017 dollars. This differs from household wages, disposable income, and the national real-hourly-earnings measure.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Michigan
Real personal income per person history in Michigan$41.8K$51.73K$61.66K20142024
2024 · Michigan: $53,569 · Rank #40 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $59,195 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Michigan Real personal income per person history
PeriodMichiganCompare
2014$44,089
2015$47,218
2016$48,000
2017$48,928
2018$48,921
2019$49,306
2020$53,586
2021$55,679
2022$53,454
2023$53,903
2024$53,569

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Michigan stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Michigan has a dark outline.

Lower value · $48.47KHigher value · $75.5KStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Michigan · $53,5692024 · Rank #40 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Michigan with every state · 50 ranked
Real personal income per person · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Wyoming$75,501—
#2Connecticut$74,254—
#3Massachusetts$71,629—
#4South Dakota$69,153—
#5Nebraska$65,297—
#6North Dakota$65,271—
#7Colorado$65,223—
#8New Hampshire$64,632—
#9Washington$64,421—
#10New York$64,153—
#11New Jersey$63,142—
#12California$63,028—
#13Minnesota$62,039—
#14Virginia$61,914—
#15Maryland$61,111—
#16Illinois$60,333—
#17Alaska$60,272—
#18Iowa$60,144—
#19Montana$59,203—
#20Kansas$59,172—
#21Vermont$58,893—
#22Oklahoma$58,692—
#23Pennsylvania$58,620—
#24Tennessee$58,582—
#25Wisconsin$58,273—
#26Texas$58,219—
#27Missouri$57,850—
#28Maine$57,480—
#29Florida$57,131—
#30Louisiana$56,789—
#31Nevada$56,503—
#32North Carolina$56,310—
#33Ohio$56,232—
#34Rhode Island$55,878—
#35Indiana$55,562—
#36Oregon$55,451—
#37Arkansas$55,219—
#38Delaware$55,185—
#39Utah$55,116—
#40Michigan · your comparison$53,569—
#41Georgia$52,952—
#42Arizona$52,890—
#43Idaho$52,816—
#44South Carolina$52,463—
#45Kentucky$52,290—
#46Hawaii$52,272—
#47Alabama$52,216—
#48New Mexico$51,121—
#49West Virginia$50,051—
#50Mississippi$48,465—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

What candidates are saying

Explore statements about inflation, consumer prices and the cost of living from FactVote’s Michigan candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.

23 statements from 13 candidates

2026 Michigan Governor of Michigan — General Election

2 candidates with matching statements · 4 statements

Jocelyn Benson

3 statements

Democratic Party · Governor of Michigan · MI

Consumer prices & cost-of-living context

As a mom, Jocelyn’s north star in this election is making sure Michigan is affordable for everyone so our young people, seniors, and everyone in between can stay and thrive in Michigan. She knows firsthand that government works best when it’s there when you need it, and gets out of the way when you …

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: As a mom, Jocelyn’s north star in this election is making sure Michigan is affordable for everyone so our young people, seniors, and everyone in between can stay and thrive in Michigan.

Candidate campaign source

As a mom, Jocelyn’s north star in this election is making sure Michigan is affordable for everyone so our young people, seniors, and everyone in between can stay and thrive in Michigan. She knows firsthand that government works best when it’s there when you need it, and gets out of the way when you don’t. The cost of living is crushing Michiganders but Jocelyn believes that government can make life easier with the right leader as governor who will use every tool available to expand rural healthcare options, build more housing, take on the utility companies who raise our rates, make childcare free, and ensure our agencies work, so anyone can afford to live in the best place to call home.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Jocelyn Benson — candidate-owned primary source 4 ↗
View 2 more statements from Jocelyn Benson
Consumer prices & cost-of-living context

Caring for our environment, protecting human health, creating good-paying jobs, and lowering costs for Michigan families aren't competing priorities. They're the same fight. Clean, renewable energy is the cheapest form of energy. When we invest in clean energy, we lower utility bills. When we hold p…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Environment, water, and clean energy

Candidate campaign source

Caring for our environment, protecting human health, creating good-paying jobs, and lowering costs for Michigan families aren't competing priorities. They're the same fight. Clean, renewable energy is the cheapest form of energy. When we invest in clean energy, we lower utility bills. When we hold polluters accountable, we protect the drinking water families depend on. When we lead in clean manufacturing, we create the union jobs that keep Michigan's economy strong. Every choice we make about our natural resources is a choice about what kind of state we're building — and who it's built for. If we make the right choices now, we can leave the next generation a Michigan that's more affordable, prosperous, cleaner, safer, and stronger than the one we inherited.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Jocelyn Benson — candidate-owned primary source 12 ↗
Consumer prices & cost-of-living context

Utility companies ask for rate increases while Michiganders wonder where the money they are putting aside to pay these skyrocketing bills is going. Will it eliminate outages and modernize our energy grid? Or is it only going to increase the profits of corporations and CEOs?As governor I will use eve…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Energy and utility costs

Candidate campaign source

Utility companies ask for rate increases while Michiganders wonder where the money they are putting aside to pay these skyrocketing bills is going. Will it eliminate outages and modernize our energy grid? Or is it only going to increase the profits of corporations and CEOs?As governor I will use every tool available to me to bring our energy costs down.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Jocelyn Benson — candidate-owned primary source 9 ↗

John James

1 statement

Republican Party · Governor of Michigan · MI

Consumer prices & cost-of-living context

Affordability is John’s top priority. He’s committed to making Michigan a place where families can thrive by tackling rising housing costs, lowering the tax burden, and addressing healthcare expenses. John’s vision for Michigan is clear and disciplined: academic excellence, economic opportunity, and…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Affordability, education, public safety, and government accountability

Candidate campaign source

Affordability is John’s top priority. He’s committed to making Michigan a place where families can thrive by tackling rising housing costs, lowering the tax burden, and addressing healthcare expenses. John’s vision for Michigan is clear and disciplined: academic excellence, economic opportunity, and safe communities where families feel secure. He’ll put kids and families first when it comes to education, cut job-killing regulations, fully fund and support law enforcement, and prioritize Michigan workers and families. In Lansing, John will audit wasteful DEI programs, eliminate foreign influence in our institutions, and rebuild trust in government.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026

John James — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗

2026 Michigan U.S. House — District 13 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement

Donavan McKinney

1 statement

Democratic Party · U.S. House District 13 · MI

Consumer prices & cost-of-living context

Our district is the poster child for communities in need of the Green New Deal. It’s no secret to every person in this district that we have lead in our water and some of the most polluted air in the country. No one can be expected to raise a family without clean air & water. My grandmother, my moth…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Environmental & Climate Justice

Candidate campaign source

Our district is the poster child for communities in need of the Green New Deal. It’s no secret to every person in this district that we have lead in our water and some of the most polluted air in the country. No one can be expected to raise a family without clean air & water. My grandmother, my mother, my brother, and I all have the same asthmatic cough that is all too common for anyone who grew up in the shadow of our city’s smokestacks and factories. I’m not willing to let another generation of my family or yours suffer the same fate that we have while the fossil fuel companies who are driving this crisis — like DTE and Consumers Energy — raise our utility prices, make record profits year after year, and buy our politicians’ inaction. It’s time to break the cycle and understand that we need a solution as large as the climate crisis itself. A Green New Deal transitioning to 100% clean and renewable energy, would protect our planet’s future and create millions of good-paying green union jobs in Michigan. It’s also a more efficient and sustainable source of energy that will lower energy requirements and consumer costs, while improving our community’s health and cleaning our air & water. And one critical aspect of that for us in metro Detroit is investment to build and expand public transit, so people have the freedom and mobility to get to work, go to the supermarket, and pick up their kids without having to buy a car and pay some of the highest car insurance rates in the country. We deserve choices that corporations won’t let us have. We’re paying the price for this crisis built by greedy CEOs — but they’re the ones who should be paying to fix it.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Donavan McKinney — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗

2026 Michigan U.S. House — District 2 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement

John Moolenaar

1 statement

Republican Party · U.S. House District 2 · MI

Consumer prices & cost-of-living context

Michigan families deserve a state where hard work goes further and the cost of living is lower. I believe making Michigan more affordable starts with policies that let families keep more of what they earn, reduce unnecessary government costs, ensure reliable and affordable energy, and create an envi…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Affordability, taxes, energy, and economic growth

Candidate campaign source

Michigan families deserve a state where hard work goes further and the cost of living is lower. I believe making Michigan more affordable starts with policies that let families keep more of what they earn, reduce unnecessary government costs, ensure reliable and affordable energy, and create an environment where businesses can grow, invest, and create good-paying jobs. Growth is driven by free markets, lower taxes, responsible spending, reduced regulations, and policies that encourage innovation, entrepreneurship, and investment in American workers and manufacturers.That’s why I supported the Working Families Tax Cuts, which put more money back into the pockets of hardworking Michiganders by making the 2017 tax cuts permanent, eliminating taxes on tips and overtime, expanding the child tax credit, enhancing tax relief for seniors, and boosting domestic energy production to help lower costs for families. These policies help make Michigan a more affordable place to live, work, raise a family, and build a future. Under President Trump’s leadership, I look forward to continuing to fight for lower taxes and increased opportunity for Michigan families.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

John Moolenaar — candidate-owned primary source 8 ↗
Race groups · Page 1 of 3
How statements are selected

This section matches specific inflation, consumer prices and the cost of living terms in retained, attributed source text from published Michigan candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.

Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.

Michigan incumbents

What incumbents are proposing

Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Michigan legislators and Michigan’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Michigan’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.

3 matching sponsorships or proposals · 3 Michigan incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.

Rep. Donni Steele

Michigan House · District 54 · R–MI

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Donni Steele
Michigan Legislature · HB 4180

Sales tax: exemptions; motor fuel sales; exempt. Amends secs. 6a & 25 of 1933 PA 167 (MCL 205.56a & 205.75) & adds sec. 4gg. TIE BAR WITH: HB 4181'25, HB 4182'25, HB 4183'25, SB 0578'25

Oct 7, 2025 · Enacted · Public Act 17 of 2025

Rep. Donni Steele · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 4180 removed Michigan's sales tax from motor-fuel purchases beginning January 1, 2026, as part of the enacted road-funding tax swap.

Governor Whitmer approved HB 4180 on October 7, 2025; its motor-fuel sales-tax exemption took effect January 1, 2026.

Why this record is included

HB 4180 exempted motor fuel from Michigan's sales tax beginning January 1, 2026, as one side of the state's fuel-tax swap. The exemption directly changed the state-tax component of Michigan pump prices, but it does not govern the other market components or explain EIA's 15-state Midwest average.

Retained Michigan evidence context: Midwest regular gasoline price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

Public Act 17 of 2025 ended prepaid sales tax on motor fuel purchased on or after January 1, 2026.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Rashida Tlaib

U.S. representative for Michigan, District 12 · D–MI

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Rashida Tlaib
U.S. Congress · Michigan delegation · H.R.5612

Cost-of-Living Fairness Act

Sep 26, 2025 · Introduced

Rep. Rashida Tlaib · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The bill addresses rental housing, tenant protections, housing assistance, homelessness, or housing supply.

Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Why this record is included

The official record directly addresses rental housing, tenant protections, housing assistance, homelessness, or housing supply. It does not establish an effect on Michigan's median gross rent.

Retained Michigan evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

Income determination with respect to payments for insurance policies (a) In general Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a payment made by an individual for a covered insurance policy that provides a specified benefit to the individual or a member of the household of the individual shall be deducted from the income and resources of the individual in determining the eligibility of the individual, or any member of the household of the individual, for benefits or assistance (or the amount or extent of…
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Tom Kunse

Michigan House · District 100 · R–MI

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Tom Kunse
Michigan Legislature · HB 4183

Transportation: motor fuel tax; motor fuel tax; increase.

Oct 7, 2025 · Enacted · Public Act 20 of 2025

Rep. Tom Kunse · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 4183 reset Michigan's motor-fuel-tax base for 2026 and retained an annual inflation adjustment, as part of the enacted road-funding tax swap.

Governor Whitmer approved HB 4183 on October 7, 2025; the new rate formula applied beginning January 1, 2026.

Why this record is included

HB 4183 established a 51-cent-per-gallon base for Michigan's 2026 motor-fuel tax and continued annual inflation adjustments, yielding a 52.4-cent rate for 2026. The motor-fuel tax is a direct component of Michigan's tax-inclusive retail gasoline price, while the law neither sets non-tax costs nor explains the full Midwest average.

Retained Michigan evidence context: Midwest regular gasoline price. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

Public Act 20 of 2025 sets the 2026 rate as 51 cents multiplied by one plus the lesser of 5% or the statutory inflation rate, rounded up to one-tenth of a cent.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us

Only current Michigan officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.

Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Michigan statistic. Collection reviewed Oct 6, 2026.