Individual income tax
4.25%Flat Michigan individual and fiduciary income-tax rate for the 2026 tax year.
Michigan income and taxes
Household income, income per person, purchasing power, and Michigan’s tax structure.
Median household income$72.88K2020–2024 · #35 of 50 · highest first
Per-capita money income$40.74K2020–2024 · #35 of 50 · highest first
Real personal income per person$53.57K2024 · #40 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.
Real personal income per person 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.
152 of 152 reviewed Michigan actions match · 127 date markers shown. 35 major events shown separately.
Michigan · 2024: $53,569 · Rank #40 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $59,195
BEA personal income per person adjusted for regional price parities and the national PCE price index. Constant 2017 dollars. A BEA measure, distinct from ACS per-capita money income. 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
| Period | Michigan | Rank | U.S. benchmark |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | $53,569 | #40 of 50 | $59,195 |
| 2023 | $53,903 | #39 of 50 | $58,088 |
| 2022 | $53,454 | #36 of 50 | $57,104 |
| 2021 | $55,679 | #39 of 50 | $59,365 |
| 2020 | $53,586 | #33 of 50 | $56,514 |
| 2019 | $49,306 | #38 of 50 | $53,683 |
| 2018 | $48,921 | #35 of 50 | $52,242 |
| 2017 | $48,928 | #29 of 50 | $51,006 |
| 2016 | $48,000 | #28 of 50 | $49,828 |
| 2015 | $47,218 | #30 of 50 | $49,396 |
| 2014 | $44,089 | #34 of 50 | $47,661 |
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.
Household resources
Compare the ACS five-year estimates using the same population and dollar period.
Michigan · 2020–2024$72,875
Michigan rank#35among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$80,734Same 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.
Median household income
Median before-tax income received by households; half are above and half below.
2024 dollars. ACS sampling error means nearby ranks may not be statistically distinguishable.
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 · $56.45KHigher value · $103.96KStriped: 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.
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
| Rank | State | Value | Comparison notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | Massachusetts | $103,960 | 90% CI: 103433–104487 |
| #2 | Maryland | $103,678 | 90% CI: 103081–104275 |
| #3 | New Jersey | $103,556 | 90% CI: 103043–104069 |
| #4 | Hawaii | $100,389 | 90% CI: 99268–101510 |
| #5 | California | $99,122 | 90% CI: 98812–99432 |
| #6 | New Hampshire | $99,031 | 90% CI: 97908–100154 |
| #7 | Washington | $98,141 | 90% CI: 97727–98555 |
| #8 | Connecticut | $95,781 | 90% CI: 95049–96513 |
| #9 | Colorado | $95,470 | 90% CI: 94892–96048 |
| #10 | Utah | $95,166 | 90% CI: 94392–95940 |
| #11 | Virginia | $93,170 | 90% CI: 92712–93628 |
| #12 | Alaska | $92,788 | 90% CI: 91556–94020 |
| #13 | Minnesota | $89,062 | 90% CI: 88653–89471 |
| #14 | Rhode Island | $87,796 | 90% CI: 86587–89005 |
| #15 | New York | $85,974 | 90% CI: 85572–86376 |
| #16 | Delaware | $84,954 | 90% CI: 83703–86205 |
| #17 | Illinois | $83,390 | 90% CI: 83028–83752 |
| #18 | Oregon | $83,011 | 90% CI: 82438–83584 |
| #19 | Vermont | $81,203 | 90% CI: 79864–82542 |
| #20 | Arizona | $79,964 | 90% CI: 79557–80371 |
| #21 | Texas | $78,476 | 90% CI: 78213–78739 |
| #22 | Nevada | $78,260 | 90% CI: 77664–78856 |
| #23 | Pennsylvania | $77,971 | 90% CI: 77629–78313 |
| #24 | Idaho | $77,800 | 90% CI: 77057–78543 |
| #25 | Wisconsin | $77,485 | 90% CI: 77030–77940 |
| #26 | Georgia | $77,353 | 90% CI: 76946–77760 |
| #27 | North Dakota | $76,657 | 90% CI: 75494–77820 |
| #28 | Nebraska | $76,475 | 90% CI: 75842–77108 |
| #29 | Wyoming | $76,176 | 90% CI: 75008–77344 |
| #30 | South Dakota | $75,081 | 90% CI: 74193–75969 |
| #31 | Iowa | $75,059 | 90% CI: 74641–75477 |
| #32 | Maine | $74,733 | 90% CI: 73938–75528 |
| #33 | Florida | $74,568 | 90% CI: 74284–74852 |
| #34 | Kansas | $74,275 | 90% CI: 73800–74750 |
| #35 | Michigan · your comparison | $72,875 | 90% CI: 72582–73168 |
| #36 | Montana | $72,509 | 90% CI: 71748–73270 |
| #37 | North Carolina | $72,388 | 90% CI: 72064–72712 |
| #38 | Indiana | $71,957 | 90% CI: 71605–72309 |
| #39 | Ohio | $71,389 | 90% CI: 71068–71710 |
| #40 | Missouri | $70,702 | 90% CI: 70377–71027 |
| #41 | Tennessee | $69,595 | 90% CI: 69166–70024 |
| #42 | South Carolina | $69,324 | 90% CI: 68754–69894 |
| #43 | Oklahoma | $65,039 | 90% CI: 64600–65478 |
| #44 | New Mexico | $64,059 | 90% CI: 63251–64867 |
| #45 | Alabama | $63,999 | 90% CI: 63600–64398 |
| #46 | Kentucky | $63,726 | 90% CI: 63297–64155 |
| #47 | Arkansas | $60,773 | 90% CI: 60306–61240 |
| #48 | Louisiana | $60,756 | 90% CI: 60348–61164 |
| #49 | West Virginia | $59,608 | 90% CI: 58917–60299 |
| #50 | Mississippi | $56,447 | 90% CI: 55908–56986 |
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Is income keeping up with prices?
Real income adjusts for price levels and inflation. Disposable income subtracts personal current taxes but does not subtract household living expenses.
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
BEA personal income per person adjusted for regional price parities and the national PCE price index.
Constant 2017 dollars. A BEA measure, distinct from ACS per-capita money income.
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
View history and select a period
| Period | Michigan | Compare |
|---|---|---|
| 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.
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
| Rank | State | Value | Comparison notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | Wyoming | $75,501 | — |
| #2 | Connecticut | $74,254 | — |
| #3 | Massachusetts | $71,629 | — |
| #4 | South Dakota | $69,153 | — |
| #5 | Nebraska | $65,297 | — |
| #6 | North Dakota | $65,271 | — |
| #7 | Colorado | $65,223 | — |
| #8 | New Hampshire | $64,632 | — |
| #9 | Washington | $64,421 | — |
| #10 | New York | $64,153 | — |
| #11 | New Jersey | $63,142 | — |
| #12 | California | $63,028 | — |
| #13 | Minnesota | $62,039 | — |
| #14 | Virginia | $61,914 | — |
| #15 | Maryland | $61,111 | — |
| #16 | Illinois | $60,333 | — |
| #17 | Alaska | $60,272 | — |
| #18 | Iowa | $60,144 | — |
| #19 | Montana | $59,203 | — |
| #20 | Kansas | $59,172 | — |
| #21 | Vermont | $58,893 | — |
| #22 | Oklahoma | $58,692 | — |
| #23 | Pennsylvania | $58,620 | — |
| #24 | Tennessee | $58,582 | — |
| #25 | Wisconsin | $58,273 | — |
| #26 | Texas | $58,219 | — |
| #27 | Missouri | $57,850 | — |
| #28 | Maine | $57,480 | — |
| #29 | Florida | $57,131 | — |
| #30 | Louisiana | $56,789 | — |
| #31 | Nevada | $56,503 | — |
| #32 | North Carolina | $56,310 | — |
| #33 | Ohio | $56,232 | — |
| #34 | Rhode Island | $55,878 | — |
| #35 | Indiana | $55,562 | — |
| #36 | Oregon | $55,451 | — |
| #37 | Arkansas | $55,219 | — |
| #38 | Delaware | $55,185 | — |
| #39 | Utah | $55,116 | — |
| #40 | Michigan · your comparison | $53,569 | — |
| #41 | Georgia | $52,952 | — |
| #42 | Arizona | $52,890 | — |
| #43 | Idaho | $52,816 | — |
| #44 | South Carolina | $52,463 | — |
| #45 | Kentucky | $52,290 | — |
| #46 | Hawaii | $52,272 | — |
| #47 | Alabama | $52,216 | — |
| #48 | New Mexico | $51,121 | — |
| #49 | West Virginia | $50,051 | — |
| #50 | Mississippi | $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.
How Michigan raises taxes
Flat Michigan individual and fiduciary income-tax rate for the 2026 tax year. Revenue comparisons rank dollars collected, not statutory tax rates or a particular household’s tax burden.
Michigan · FY2024$11.56B
Michigan rank#11among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$479.63BSame 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.
Personal income-tax collections
Revenue collected under the Census tax classification. Missing item codes in the complete state-level file mean no reported amount.
State governments only, Census level 2; amounts converted from thousands to dollars. Fiscal-year ending dates differ among states. Larger collections reflect population, income, tax bases, and rates; they are not inherently better.
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 · $0Higher value · $123.1BStriped: 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.
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
| Rank | State | Value | Comparison notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | California | $123.1B | — |
| #2 | New York | $53.84B | — |
| #3 | Illinois | $22.63B | — |
| #4 | Massachusetts | $22.13B | — |
| #5 | New Jersey | $18.88B | — |
| #6 | Virginia | $17.64B | — |
| #7 | Pennsylvania | $17.08B | — |
| #8 | North Carolina | $16.66B | — |
| #9 | Georgia | $16.02B | — |
| #10 | Minnesota | $13.27B | — |
| #11 | Michigan · your comparison | $11.56B | — |
| #12 | Maryland | $10.65B | — |
| #13 | Connecticut | $10.03B | — |
| #14 | Ohio | $10.02B | — |
| #15 | Oregon | $9.54B | — |
| #16 | Wisconsin | $9.49B | — |
| #17 | Indiana | $8.1B | — |
| #18 | Missouri | $7.75B | — |
| #19 | Colorado | $7.52B | — |
| #20 | South Carolina | $6.15B | — |
| #21 | Utah | $5.72B | — |
| #22 | Alabama | $5.28B | — |
| #23 | Kentucky | $5.02B | — |
| #24 | Louisiana | $4.88B | — |
| #25 | Arizona | $4.81B | — |
| #26 | Oklahoma | $4.51B | — |
| #27 | Kansas | $4.5B | — |
| #28 | Iowa | $3.76B | — |
| #29 | Hawaii | $3.28B | — |
| #30 | Idaho | $2.89B | — |
| #31 | Arkansas | $2.76B | — |
| #32 | Delaware | $2.53B | — |
| #33 | Nebraska | $2.48B | — |
| #34 | Maine | $2.4B | — |
| #35 | Mississippi | $2.33B | — |
| #36 | West Virginia | $2.27B | — |
| #37 | Montana | $2.25B | — |
| #38 | New Mexico | $2.17B | — |
| #39 | Rhode Island | $1.59B | — |
| #40 | Vermont | $1.24B | — |
| #41 | North Dakota | $356.48M | — |
| #42 | Washington | $350.45M | — |
| #43 | New Hampshire | $183.36M | — |
| #44 | Tennessee | $2.12M | — |
| #45 | Alaska | $0 | — |
| #45 | Florida | $0 | — |
| #45 | Nevada | $0 | — |
| #45 | South Dakota | $0 | — |
| #45 | Texas | $0 | — |
| #45 | Wyoming | $0 | — |
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Sales and use tax
6% stateMichigan does not permit cities or other local units to impose a general local sales tax; certain residential energy sales use a reduced 4% rate.
Corporate income tax
6%The Corporate Income Tax applies to the apportioned corporate income-tax base, with separate tax systems for financial institutions and insurers.
Property tax
6 mills state + localThe State Education Tax is $6 per $1,000 of taxable value; additional local millages vary, and principal residences receive an exemption from up to 18 school-operating mills.
How federal income taxes work
A marginal rate applies only to taxable income within its band. Moving into a higher bracket does not apply that rate to all your income.
Base standard deduction
$16,100Tax year 2026 · Single
Marginal versus effective rate
The bracket table applies to ordinary taxable income after deductions, not to gross wages or Census household income.
| Marginal rate | Taxable income in this band |
|---|---|
| 10% | Up to $12,400 |
| 12% | Over $12,400 through $50,400 |
| 22% | Over $50,400 through $105,700 |
| 24% | Over $105,700 through $201,775 |
| 32% | Over $201,775 through $256,225 |
| 35% | Over $256,225 through $640,600 |
| 37% | Over $640,600 |
Selected filing statuses only. Rates exclude preferential capital-gain rules, credits, alternative minimum tax, payroll taxes and state/local taxes. The base deduction does not include extra amounts for age, blindness or other eligibility. Tax year 2026 returns are generally filed in 2027.
IRS · Tax schedules and deductions ↗Who pays corporate income taxes?
Compare federal corporate income tax after credits across company-size groups. IRS groups these returns by annual business receipts, not by household income or profit.
Tax year 2022 · Active corporation returns excluding S corporations, real estate investment trusts (REITs), and regulated investment companies (RICs). Latest available in this IRS table: 2022.
$448.50B corporate income tax after credits in this table1.56 million estimated returns
| Company-size group | Share of returns | Share of business receipts | Income tax after credits | Share of corporate income tax |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Under $100,000 | 44.6% | 0.1% | $5.93B | 1.3% |
| $100,000–under $1 million | 32.9% | 0.6% | $2.31B | 0.5% |
| $1 million–under $10 million | 17.6% | 2.9% | $8.78B | 2.0% |
| $10 million–under $100 million | 3.9% | 5.6% | $21.87B | 4.9% |
| $100 million–under $1 billion | 0.8% | 10.9% | $40.78B | 9.1% |
| $1 billion and above | 0.2% | 80.0% | $368.84B | 82.2% |
All six groups are separate. Blue bars show tax shares; gray bars show receipts shares, both on a 0–100% scale. Shares sum to approximately 100% after rounding. The smallest group includes zero receipts and receipts not reported.
How this differs from the individual income-tax breakdown
The individual section groups returns by adjusted gross income. This section groups corporate returns by business receipts; neither the income concepts nor the tax totals are interchangeable. No effective tax rate is calculated by dividing corporate tax by sales.
S corporations generally pass income through to owners and are excluded here, as are REITs and RICs. Their exclusion does not mean their owners pay no tax. This section therefore describes the IRS table’s covered corporations rather than every business or every dollar of corporate-tax revenue. It does not estimate how the economic burden is shared among shareholders, workers and customers.
FactVote combines adjacent IRS size bands and sums published amounts; no suppressed values are used. Figures are sample estimates. Returns may use different accounting periods, and company size and nominal dollar values change over time. Small differences from totals reflect source rounding.
IRS Statistics of Income, Publication 16, Table 3.3 · Latest release September 2025 · Checked 2026-09-14. Download 2022 IRS table ↗ · IRS coverage and methods ↗
The broader federal tax burden
Individual income tax is one part of a household’s federal taxes. Compare income, payroll, corporate and excise taxes as a percentage of each group’s income.
Calendar year 2022 · CBO estimates · Latest available in this release: 2022. These household groups use a different income definition from the IRS tax-return groups above.
| Income group | Individual income | Payroll | Corporate | Excise | Combined rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lowest fifth | −10.1% | 9.5% | 0.8% | 1.3% | 1.4% |
| Second fifth | −0.9% | 8.8% | 0.8% | 0.8% | 9.5% |
| Middle fifth | 3.1% | 8.8% | 0.9% | 0.6% | 13.4% |
| Fourth fifth | 6.8% | 9.3% | 1.0% | 0.5% | 17.6% |
| Highest fifth | 16.6% | 6.1% | 2.9% | 0.3% | 25.9% |
| All households | 10.6% | 7.5% | 2.1% | 0.4% | 20.6% |
Combined-rate bars share a fixed −30% to +30% scale, centered at zero. Blue = net tax; teal = net payment to households. Negative individual income tax reflects refundable credits. Components may differ from the combined rate by 0.1–0.2 points because CBO rounds each figure separately.
How this comparison is measured
CBO combines tax records and household survey data. Each rate divides the group’s total tax by its total income; it is not a simple average of individual rates. Income includes earnings, investment income and social insurance benefits, including some noncash benefits. The employer share of payroll taxes is attributed to workers. Corporate-tax allocation reflects modeling assumptions, not directly observed household payments.
The four tax types covered 90% of federal revenue in fiscal 2022. Estate and gift taxes, customs duties and other federal sources are outside this comparison, as are state/local taxes. Households with negative income are excluded from the five individual groups but included in “All households.” Do not average the five group rates to calculate the national rate.
CBO · Published 2026-01-21 · Checked 2026-09-14. Report and data ↗ · Methods and tax allocation ↗
Is after-tax income keeping up with prices?
Real disposable income per person tracks average income available for spending or saving after personal taxes, adjusted for inflation. A rise means average purchasing power increased; it does not mean every household is better off.
Real income per person
$52,849Jul 2026 · Chained 2017 dollars · Annual rate
Change from prior month
+0.3%Jun 2026 to Jul 2026 · Not an annualized change
Change from a year earlier
+0.2%Jul 2025 to Jul 2026
Per personchained 2017 dollars
Hover to inspect; click or tap to keep a reading selected. Use the arrow keys to explore, or Escape to clear.
Scroll the chart sideways to see the full timeline.
Jul 2026Per person: 52,849 chained 2017 dollars
View data: Purchasing power
| Period | Per person |
|---|---|
| Jul 2026 | 52,849 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jun 2026 | 52,666 chained 2017 dollars |
| May 2026 | 52,517 chained 2017 dollars |
| Apr 2026 | 52,402 chained 2017 dollars |
| Mar 2026 | 52,624 chained 2017 dollars |
| Feb 2026 | 52,694 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jan 2026 | 52,941 chained 2017 dollars |
| Dec 2025 | 52,610 chained 2017 dollars |
| Nov 2025 | 52,667 chained 2017 dollars |
| Oct 2025 | 52,684 chained 2017 dollars |
| Sep 2025 | 52,865 chained 2017 dollars |
| Aug 2025 | 52,829 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jul 2025 | 52,740 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jun 2025 | 52,529 chained 2017 dollars |
| May 2025 | 52,609 chained 2017 dollars |
| Apr 2025 | 53,077 chained 2017 dollars |
| Mar 2025 | 52,794 chained 2017 dollars |
| Feb 2025 | 52,465 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jan 2025 | 52,422 chained 2017 dollars |
| Dec 2024 | 52,376 chained 2017 dollars |
| Nov 2024 | 52,348 chained 2017 dollars |
| Oct 2024 | 52,252 chained 2017 dollars |
| Sep 2024 | 52,159 chained 2017 dollars |
| Aug 2024 | 52,136 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jul 2024 | 52,135 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jun 2024 | 52,192 chained 2017 dollars |
| May 2024 | 52,124 chained 2017 dollars |
| Apr 2024 | 51,946 chained 2017 dollars |
| Mar 2024 | 51,924 chained 2017 dollars |
| Feb 2024 | 51,902 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jan 2024 | 51,878 chained 2017 dollars |
| Dec 2023 | 51,637 chained 2017 dollars |
| Nov 2023 | 51,515 chained 2017 dollars |
| Oct 2023 | 51,302 chained 2017 dollars |
| Sep 2023 | 51,171 chained 2017 dollars |
| Aug 2023 | 51,195 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jul 2023 | 51,166 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jun 2023 | 51,106 chained 2017 dollars |
| May 2023 | 51,085 chained 2017 dollars |
| Apr 2023 | 50,936 chained 2017 dollars |
| Mar 2023 | 50,861 chained 2017 dollars |
| Feb 2023 | 50,594 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jan 2023 | 50,353 chained 2017 dollars |
| Dec 2022 | 49,403 chained 2017 dollars |
| Nov 2022 | 49,210 chained 2017 dollars |
| Oct 2022 | 49,165 chained 2017 dollars |
| Sep 2022 | 49,043 chained 2017 dollars |
| Aug 2022 | 48,912 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jul 2022 | 48,660 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jun 2022 | 48,071 chained 2017 dollars |
| May 2022 | 48,219 chained 2017 dollars |
| Apr 2022 | 48,312 chained 2017 dollars |
| Mar 2022 | 48,344 chained 2017 dollars |
| Feb 2022 | 48,607 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jan 2022 | 48,616 chained 2017 dollars |
| Dec 2021 | 49,845 chained 2017 dollars |
| Nov 2021 | 50,093 chained 2017 dollars |
| Oct 2021 | 50,258 chained 2017 dollars |
| Sep 2021 | 50,266 chained 2017 dollars |
| Aug 2021 | 50,857 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jul 2021 | 50,982 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jun 2021 | 50,671 chained 2017 dollars |
| May 2021 | 50,939 chained 2017 dollars |
| Apr 2021 | 52,450 chained 2017 dollars |
| Mar 2021 | 61,793 chained 2017 dollars |
| Feb 2021 | 50,288 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jan 2021 | 54,791 chained 2017 dollars |
| Dec 2020 | 49,374 chained 2017 dollars |
| Nov 2020 | 49,323 chained 2017 dollars |
| Oct 2020 | 49,907 chained 2017 dollars |
| Sep 2020 | 50,099 chained 2017 dollars |
| Aug 2020 | 49,835 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jul 2020 | 51,838 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jun 2020 | 51,388 chained 2017 dollars |
| May 2020 | 51,575 chained 2017 dollars |
| Apr 2020 | 54,304 chained 2017 dollars |
| Mar 2020 | 47,344 chained 2017 dollars |
| Feb 2020 | 47,961 chained 2017 dollars |
| Jan 2020 | 47,800 chained 2017 dollars |
Monthly observations are seasonally adjusted and expressed at an annual rate; $52,849 is not one month’s income. BEA’s measure is broader than cash take-home pay and differs from Census money income and CBO household resources elsewhere on this page. Personal taxes include federal, state and local personal taxes; this is not calculated by subtracting the CBO table from Census income.
BEA via FRED · Updated 2026-08-26 · Checked 2026-09-14. Historical estimates may be revised. Series and data ↗ · Inflation adjustment ↗
Income before and after taxes and benefits
Compare average household resources within each income group: starting income, plus means-tested benefits, minus federal taxes. These are accounting comparisons, not predictions of what incomes would be without those programs.
Calendar year 2022 · Average per household · All amounts in 2022 dollars. Gray = before; blue = after. Both bar columns use the same zero-to-$450,000 scale.
| Income group | Before | + Benefits | − Taxes | After |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lowest fifth | $26,200 | $19,000 | $400 | $44,800 |
| Second fifth | $59,100 | $9,600 | $5,600 | $63,100 |
| Middle fifth | $94,000 | $5,600 | $12,600 | $87,000 |
| Fourth fifth | $143,100 | $3,000 | $25,100 | $121,100 |
| Highest fifth | $412,600 | $1,700 | $106,700 | $307,600 |
| All households | $143,000 | $7,900 | $29,400 | $121,500 |
“Before” already includes social insurance, including Social Security and Medicare. “Benefits” adds means-tested programs only, including cash and noncash assistance from federal, state and local governments. The tax column covers federal taxes only. CBO uses PCE inflation adjustment; amounts are rounded to the nearest $100, so the displayed equation can differ by $100–$200. Negative-income households appear in the national total, not the five separate groups.
CBO · Latest year in this release: 2022 · Published 2026-01-21. Report and household income data ↗
Tax credits and measured poverty
A deduction reduces taxable income. A credit reduces tax directly; a refundable credit can also result in a payment when the credit exceeds the tax owed. Census estimates how counting these payments changes the number of people below its Supplemental Poverty Measure threshold.
Original-release estimates: These figures use the thresholds in Census’s September 2025 report. Thresholds were corrected in July 2026; these are not revised credit-effect estimates. Read the revision notice ↗
| Age group | Fewer people below the threshold | 90% margin of error |
|---|---|---|
| All ages | 6,768,000 | ±462,000 |
| Under 18 | 3,704,000 | ±263,000 |
| Ages 18–64 | 2,985,000 | ±224,000 |
| Ages 65+ | 79,000 | ±25,000 |
Bars start at zero and share a fixed 0–7 million people scale. “All ages” includes the three age groups below it. Refundable credits combine EITC and the refundable Child Tax Credit; the CTC-only estimate overlaps and must not be added to the combined estimate or subtracted to infer an EITC-only effect.
The SPM counts taxes, selected noncash assistance and necessary expenses, with thresholds that vary with housing and location. This differs from the official poverty measure based on pretax money income. The 2023 and 2024 counts also use different population controls, so a difference combines demographic changes and methodological updates. No year-to-year effect is calculated here.
Census CPS ASEC · Table B-7 · Checked 2026-09-14. Source table and uncertainty ↗ · Report and data-vintage notice ↗
Understanding Michigan income
Median, average and per person
The median describes the middle household. Per-capita income is a population average, including children. BEA personal income also includes sources outside Census money income. These measures answer different questions.
Income, taxes and living costs
Before-tax money income is not take-home pay. Disposable personal income subtracts personal current taxes. Real personal income adjusts for prices. A state income-tax rate does not describe sales taxes, local property taxes, federal taxes or a household’s complete tax burden.
Annual and five-year estimates
The Michigan ACS comparison pools 2020–2024 and expresses income in 2024 dollars. BEA annual history describes individual calendar years. A difference between the two series is not an income change.
Rankings and uncertainty
#1 means the highest measured value, not the best state. Survey ranks use point estimates; nearby values may not be distinguishable after sampling uncertainty. Larger tax collections can simply reflect a larger population or tax base.
What candidates are saying
Explore statements about income, wages and tax policy 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.
2026 Michigan Governor of Michigan — General Election
Anthony Hudson
3 statementsTaxes & tax policy
County Tax Revenue vs. Property and State Income taxes
Read exact statement & source
County Tax Revenue vs. Property and State Income taxesAnthony Hudson campaign source 4 ↗
View 2 more statements from Anthony Hudson
Taxes & tax policy
Eliminate State Income Tax
Taxes & tax policy
Reducing the gas tax and prioritizing small business growth will drive economic development in Michigan. A lower tax burden will make Michigan more competitive and allow local businesses to thrive.
Read exact statement & source
Reducing the gas tax and prioritizing small business growth will drive economic development in Michigan. A lower tax burden will make Michigan more competitive and allow local businesses to thrive.Anthony Hudson — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Jocelyn Benson
2 statementsTaxes & tax policy
My Affordable Michigan agenda will tackle the costs hitting families hardest. I will work to increase housing availability and affordability by streamlining regulations that slow down construction, incentivizing development of starter homes and affordable units, and cracking down on corporate invest…
Read exact statement & source
My Affordable Michigan agenda will tackle the costs hitting families hardest. I will work to increase housing availability and affordability by streamlining regulations that slow down construction, incentivizing development of starter homes and affordable units, and cracking down on corporate investors who buy up properties and drive up rents. I will fight to lower healthcare costs by increasing transparency in medical billing, passing a $5,000 caregiver tax credit, and ensuring that pharmaceutical companies can't price gouge Michigan families. And I will make childcare more accessible and affordable by bringing Rx Kids statewide and removing barriers that prevent qualified providers from opening their doors.Jocelyn Benson — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
View 1 more statement from Jocelyn Benson
Taxes & tax policy
Today, Jocelyn Benson is out with her latest statewide television ad, “Michigan First,” where she pledges to put people over profits as the next Governor — calling for a moratorium on data center projects in Michigan, an end to tax breaks for data center companies, and safeguards that ensure data ce…
Read exact statement & source
Today, Jocelyn Benson is out with her latest statewide television ad, “Michigan First,” where she pledges to put people over profits as the next Governor — calling for a moratorium on data center projects in Michigan, an end to tax breaks for data center companies, and safeguards that ensure data centers don’t raise electricity bills for Michiganders. Jocelyn called for a moratorium on data centers until we can put strict, enforceable guardrails in place to protect Michiganders, and require them to hire Michigan union workers.Jocelyn Benson — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
John James
1 statementTaxes & tax policy
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
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.John James — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
2026 Michigan Michigan Attorney General — General Election
Eli Savit
4 statementsIncome & wages
Eli has been a steadfast champion for working people. In Washtenaw County, he built the State’s only stand-alone unit in a prosecutor’s office dedicated to workers’ and consumers’ rights. As Attorney General, Eli will have no higher priority than ensuring that workers are paid the money they are owe…
Read exact statement & source
Eli has been a steadfast champion for working people. In Washtenaw County, he built the State’s only stand-alone unit in a prosecutor’s office dedicated to workers’ and consumers’ rights. As Attorney General, Eli will have no higher priority than ensuring that workers are paid the money they are owed; have access to the benefits they’ve earned; and enjoy safe and dignified working conditions. He will fight back against wage theft, payroll fraud, labor trafficking, and unsafe working conditions. In addition, Eli will stand with workers against any attempts to deprive them of their right to organize or to raise claims of unfair labor practices.Eli Savit — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
View 3 more statements from Eli Savit
Taxes & tax policy
Negotiated a deal that allowed thousands of low-income Detroit families to avoid tax foreclosure and remain in their home, working with the ACLU, the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, and housing advocates.
Read exact statement & source
Negotiated a deal that allowed thousands of low-income Detroit families to avoid tax foreclosure and remain in their home, working with the ACLU, the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, and housing advocates.Eli Savit — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗
Income & wages
Use Attorney General authority to ensure workers receive wages and benefits owed to them and have safe, dignified working conditions.
Read exact statement & source
Use Attorney General authority to ensure workers receive wages and benefits owed to them and have safe, dignified working conditions.Eli Savit — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Income & wages
Fight wage theft, payroll fraud, labor trafficking, and other exploitation of workers.
Read exact statement & source
Fight wage theft, payroll fraud, labor trafficking, and other exploitation of workers.Eli Savit — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Jason Dye
3 statementsTaxes & tax policy
Two working Michiganders who watched both parties grow the same machine — more taxes, more insiders, more corruption, more excuses — and decided the fight before the fight starts now.
Read exact statement & source
Two working Michiganders who watched both parties grow the same machine — more taxes, more insiders, more corruption, more excuses — and decided the fight before the fight starts now.Jason Dye — candidate-owned primary source 1 ↗
View 2 more statements from Jason Dye
Taxes & tax policy
Defend homeowners, landowners, small businesses, and ordinary people from predatory government practices — from property-tax foreclosure abuse to regulatory takings dressed up as policy.
Read exact statement & source
Defend homeowners, landowners, small businesses, and ordinary people from predatory government practices — from property-tax foreclosure abuse to regulatory takings dressed up as policy.Jason Dye — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Taxes & tax policy
A nonprofit hospital should not act like a charity when requesting tax advantages and like a collection agency when dealing with a patient who cannot pay. Using the Attorney General’s charitable-oversight authority, my office will scrutinize charity-care denials, collection lawsuits against low-inco…
Read exact statement & source
A nonprofit hospital should not act like a charity when requesting tax advantages and like a collection agency when dealing with a patient who cannot pay. Using the Attorney General’s charitable-oversight authority, my office will scrutinize charity-care denials, collection lawsuits against low-income patients, property liens, facility fees, executive compensation, related-party transactions, transfers of money to parent organizations, hospital conversions and sales, and whether promised community investments were actually made. A hospital that receives charitable treatment must be able to demonstrate charitable conduct.Jason Dye — candidate-owned primary source 4 ↗
2026 Michigan U.S. House — District 1 — General Election
Callie Barr
1 statementIncome & wages
Rent is too high, wages have not kept up, and too many houses are being turned into investments instead of homes. MI-01 needs a housing policy that works for year-round residents.
Read exact statement & source
Rent is too high, wages have not kept up, and too many houses are being turned into investments instead of homes. MI-01 needs a housing policy that works for year-round residents.Callie Barr — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Jack Bergman
1 statementIncome & wages
Additionally, Congressman Bergman is proud to fight for apple, dairy, potato, sugar, and the entire spectrum of products from Northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula. Each sector and profession throughout our agricultural industry has unique needs, but one prevalent issue is guest labor. The H-2A …
Read exact statement & source
Additionally, Congressman Bergman is proud to fight for apple, dairy, potato, sugar, and the entire spectrum of products from Northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula. Each sector and profession throughout our agricultural industry has unique needs, but one prevalent issue is guest labor. The H-2A program has proven to be costly and difficult to use for many employers, which is why Rep. Bergman is supporting legislation to tame skyrocketing wage rates through cosponsorship of H.R.5887 - Keep Food Local and Affordable Act of 2021.Jack Bergman — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Race groups · Page 1 of 5
How statements are selected
This section matches specific income, wages and tax policy 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.
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.
141 matching sponsorships or proposals · 66 Michigan incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.
Rep. Alabas Farhat
Michigan House · District 3 · D–MI
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Alabas Farhat
Corporate income tax: flow-through entities; dates to make election to pay the tax and submit certain information; modify. Amends secs. 813, 831 & 839 of 1967 PA 281 (MCL 206.813 et seq.).
Dec 31, 2024 · Enacted · Public Act 216 of 2024
Rep. Alabas Farhat · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The bill would make election to pay the tax and submit certain information; modify. Amends secs. 813, 831 & 839 of 1967 PA 281 (MCL 206.813 et seq.).
The official Michigan Legislature history entry dated December 31, 2024 records: assigned PA 216'24. This is the journal entry date; the governor's approval, filing and effective dates require the complete history and act.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses voter registration, ballots, voting access, or election administration. It does not establish an effect on Michigan's displayed turnout rate.
Retained Michigan evidence context: Registered-voter turnout. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Corporate income tax: flow-through entities; dates to make election to pay the tax and submit certain information; modify.Review official supporting evidence ↗
Rep. Alicia St. Germaine
Michigan House · District 62 · R–MI
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Alicia St. Germaine
Employment security: administration; unemployment insurance agency reporting requirements on shared-work plans; modify to include benefit error rate. Amends sec. 28l of 1936 (Ex Sess) PA 1 (MCL 421.28l).
Sep 1, 2026 · bill electronically reproduced 08/27/2026
Rep. Alicia St. Germaine · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The bill addresses wages, income support, employment services, apprenticeships, or workforce development.
The latest retained Michigan Legislature history entry dated September 1, 2026 records: bill electronically reproduced 08/27/2026.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses wages, income support, employment services, apprenticeships, or workforce development. It does not establish an effect on Michigan's median household income.
Retained Michigan evidence context: Median household income. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Employment security: administration; unemployment insurance agency reporting requirements on shared-work plans; modify to include benefit error rate.Review official supporting evidence ↗
Rep. Angela Witwer
Michigan House · District 76 · D–MI
3 proposalsView proposals from Rep. Angela Witwer
Individual income tax: retirement or pension benefits; limitations and restrictions on deductions of certain retirement or pension benefits, revenue distributions, earned income tax credit, rebate payments, rebate and revitalization and placemaking funds; revise, increase, and provide for. Amends title & secs. 30, 51, 272 & 695 of 1967 PA 281 (MCL 206.30 et seq.) & adds secs. 51h, 476 & 696.
Jul 3, 2025 · Enacted · Public Act 4 of 2023
Rep. Angela Witwer · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The bill addresses wages, income support, employment services, apprenticeships, or workforce development.
The official Michigan Legislature history entry dated July 3, 2025 records: assigned PA 4'23. This is the journal entry date; the governor's approval, filing and effective dates require the complete history and act.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses wages, income support, employment services, apprenticeships, or workforce development. It does not establish an effect on Michigan's median household income.
Retained Michigan evidence context: Median household income. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Individual income tax: retirement or pension benefits; limitations and restrictions on deductions of certain retirement or pension benefits, revenue distributions, earned income tax credit, rebate payments, rebate and revitalization and placemaking funds; revise, increase, and provide for.Review official supporting evidence ↗
Individual income tax: credit; earned income tax credit; restore. Amends sec. 272 of 1967 PA 281 (MCL 206.272).
Sep 21, 2022 · Session ended · final outcome unverified
Rep. Angela Witwer · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The bill addresses wages, income support, employment services, apprenticeships, or workforce development.
The 2021-2022 Legislature adjourned on December 28, 2022. The retained official history entry dated September 21, 2022 records: notice given to discharge committee. Its final disposition still requires the complete official history; this older measure is not shown as currently pending.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses wages, income support, employment services, apprenticeships, or workforce development. It does not establish an effect on Michigan's median household income.
Retained Michigan evidence context: Median household income. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Individual income tax: credit; earned income tax credit; restore.Review official supporting evidence ↗
Individual income tax; credit; earned income tax credit; restore. Amends sec. 272 of 1967 PA 281 (MCL 206.272).
Mar 7, 2019 · Session ended · final outcome unverified
Rep. Angela Witwer · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The bill addresses wages, income support, employment services, apprenticeships, or workforce development.
The 2019-2020 Legislature adjourned on December 23, 2020. The retained official history entry dated March 7, 2019 records: bill electronically reproduced 02/26/2019. Its final disposition still requires the complete official history; this older measure is not shown as currently pending.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses wages, income support, employment services, apprenticeships, or workforce development. It does not establish an effect on Michigan's median household income.
Retained Michigan evidence context: Median household income. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Individual income tax; credit; earned income tax credit; restore.Review official supporting evidence ↗
Rep. Ann Bollin
Michigan House · District 49 · R–MI
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Ann Bollin
Employment security: administration; quarterly report to the unemployment insurance agency ombudsman related to rulings appealed and forwarded to the Board of Appeals Commission; require. Amends 1936 (Ex Sess) PA 1 (MCL 421.1 - 421.75) by adding sec. 32f. TIE BAR WITH: HB 4372'23
Apr 12, 2023 · Session ended · final outcome unverified
Rep. Ann Bollin · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The bill addresses wages, income support, employment services, apprenticeships, or workforce development.
The 2023-2024 Legislature adjourned on January 1, 2025. The retained official history entry dated April 12, 2023 records: bill electronically reproduced 04/11/2023. Its final disposition still requires the complete official history; this older measure is not shown as currently pending.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses wages, income support, employment services, apprenticeships, or workforce development. It does not establish an effect on Michigan's median household income.
Retained Michigan evidence context: Median household income. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Employment security: administration; quarterly report to the unemployment insurance agency ombudsman related to rulings appealed and forwarded to the Board of Appeals Commission; require.Review official supporting evidence ↗
Rep. Bill Huizenga
U.S. representative for Michigan, District 4 · R–MI
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Bill Huizenga
American Manufacturing Revitalization Exchange Program Act of 2026
Jun 2, 2026 · Introduced
Rep. Bill Huizenga · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The bill addresses wages, income support, employment services, apprenticeships, or workforce development.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses wages, income support, employment services, apprenticeships, or workforce development. It does not establish an effect on Michigan's median household income.
Retained Michigan evidence context: Median household income. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Sense of Congress It is the sense of Congress that— (1) the manufacturing industry requires a skilled workforce across all educational and training levels, including skilled technicians, production workers, engineers, scientists, and laboratory personnel; (2) the United States manufacturing sector faces significant challenges due to an aging workforce, labor shortages, difficulty recruiting and retaining skilled workers, and the long-term effects of offshoring; (3) in 1979, there were 19,600,000 workers in…Review official supporting evidence ↗
Rep. Bill Schuette
Michigan House · District 95 · R–MI
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Bill Schuette
Individual income tax: credit; earned income tax credit; restore. Amends sec. 272 of 1967 PA 281 (MCL 206.272).
Apr 19, 2023 · Session ended · final outcome unverified
Rep. Bill Schuette · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The bill addresses wages, income support, employment services, apprenticeships, or workforce development.
The 2023-2024 Legislature adjourned on January 1, 2025. The retained official history entry dated April 19, 2023 records: motion to discharge committee postponed for day. Its final disposition still requires the complete official history; this older measure is not shown as currently pending.
Why this record is included
The official record directly addresses wages, income support, employment services, apprenticeships, or workforce development. It does not establish an effect on Michigan's median household income.
Retained Michigan evidence context: Median household income. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Individual income tax: credit; earned income tax credit; restore.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.