Mississippi · individual fact

Mississippi real gross domestic product

Mississippi’s inflation-adjusted economic output, annual growth, industry structure, and employment context.

Real GDP$123.37B2025 · #36 of 50 · highest first
Annual real GDP growth1.3%2025 · #40 of 50 · highest first
Current-dollar GDP$162.82B2025 · #36 of 50 · highest first

Mississippi over time

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

Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Mississippi 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 GDP Mississippi · source units
MississippiPublished 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.

Real GDP2025: $123.37B$0$13.4T$26.8TMississippi, 2014: $109.3BMississippi, 2015: $109.4BMississippi, 2016: $109.91BMississippi, 2017: $110.28BMississippi, 2018: $110.15BMississippi, 2019: $111.17BMississippi, 2020: $111.05BMississippi, 2021: $116.07BMississippi, 2022: $114.72BMississippi, 2023: $118.76BMississippi, 2024: $121.75BMississippi, 2025: $123.37B201420192025
✦ Major events & context · 29National context · Hurricanes Katrina and Rita · 2005-08-29Katrina and RitaNational context · Great Financial Crisis and Great Recession · 2008-09-15Great Financial CrisisNational context · Federal Reserve moves rates close to zero · 2008-12-16Fed near-zero ratesNational context · American Recovery and Reinvestment Act · 2009-02-17Recovery ActNational context · Japan disaster disrupts U.S. auto production · 2011-05-17Japan / auto supplyNational context · Midwest drought reduces farm output · 2012-09-27Drought / farm outputNational context · Automatic federal spending cuts begin · 2013-03-01Federal spending cutsNational context · 2013 federal government shutdown · 2013-10-012013 shutdownNational context · Oil-price decline cuts drilling investment · 2015-02-24Oil investment downturnNational context · Hurricanes Harvey and Irma disrupt activity · 2017-08-25Harvey and IrmaNational context · 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act · 2017-12-222017 tax lawNational context · U.S.–China tariff escalation · 2018-07-06U.S.–China tariffsNational context · 2018–19 federal government shutdown · 2018-12-222018–19 shutdownNational context · Federal Reserve begins 2019 rate cuts · 2019-07-312019 Fed rate cutsNational context · COVID-19 pandemic · 2020-03-11COVID-19 pandemicNational context · Emergency rate cuts and asset purchases · 2020-03-15Fed emergency supportNational context · CARES Act pandemic relief · 2020-03-27CARES Act reliefNational context · American Rescue Plan · 2021-03-11American Rescue PlanNational context · Reopening recovery meets supply bottlenecks · 2021-07-09Reopening / shortagesNational context · Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act · 2021-11-15Infrastructure lawNational context · Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine · 2022-02-24Russia invades UkraineNational context · Federal Reserve begins 2022 rate increases · 2022-03-16Fed rate increasesNational context · Semiconductor and energy investment incentives · 2022-08-16CHIPS / energy incentivesNational context · Banking stress and credit conditions · 2023-03-22Banking / credit stressNational context · Federal Reserve begins 2024 rate cuts · 2024-09-182024 Fed rate cutsNational context · Broad U.S. tariffs and volatile trade flows · 2025-04-02Tariffs / trade timingNational context · 2025 tax and spending reconciliation law · 2025-07-042025 tax / spending lawNational context · 2025 shutdown reduces federal services · 2025-10-012025 shutdownNational context · Iran conflict and Strait of Hormuz disruption · 2026-02-28Iran / Hormuz disruption● Mississippi Legislature · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.● U.S. Congress · Mississippi delegation · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.◆ Governor · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.■ Mississippi agencies · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.2005-08-012026-02-28

0 of 0 reviewed Mississippi actions match · 0 date markers shown. 29 major events shown separately.

Mississippi · 2025: $123.37B · Rank #36 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $23.94T

Total value added produced in the state in millions of chained 2017 dollars. Annual estimates; the downloaded BEA snapshot is retained with a source hash. Revisions can change historical values and ranks. 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
Mississippi Real GDP · source units
PeriodMississippiRankU.S. benchmark
2025$123.37B#36 of 50$23.94T
2024$121.75B#36 of 50$23.39T
2023$118.76B#36 of 50$22.72T
2022$114.72B#36 of 50$22.08T
2021$116.07B#36 of 50$21.56T
2020$111.05B#36 of 50$20.28T
2019$111.17B#36 of 50$20.72T
2018$110.15B#36 of 50$20.19T
2017$110.28B#36 of 50$19.61T
2016$109.91B#36 of 50$19.14T
2015$109.4B#36 of 50$18.8T
2014$109.3B#36 of 50$18.26T
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.

Mississippi · state comparison

Mississippi output and growth

Annual real GDP removes price changes. Annual growth compares annual levels; it is separate from an annualized quarterly growth rate.

Mississippi · 2025$123.37B
Mississippi rank#36among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$23.94TSame 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 GDP

Total value added produced in the state in millions of chained 2017 dollars.

Annual estimates; the downloaded BEA snapshot is retained with a source hash. Revisions can change historical values and ranks.

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.

Mississippi
Real GDP history in Mississippi$-3.47T$12.03T$27.52T20142025
2025 · Mississippi: $123.37B · Rank #36 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $23.94T · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Mississippi Real GDP history
PeriodMississippiCompare
2014$109.3B
2015$109.4B
2016$109.91B
2017$110.28B
2018$110.15B
2019$111.17B
2020$111.05B
2021$116.07B
2022$114.72B
2023$118.76B
2024$121.75B
2025$123.37B

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. Mississippi 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. Mississippi has a dark outline.

Lower value · $38.06BHigher value · $3.43TStriped: 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.

Mississippi · $123.37B2025 · Rank #36 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 Mississippi with every state · 50 ranked
Real GDP · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California$3.43T—
#2Texas$2.33T—
#3New York$1.89T—
#4Florida$1.38T—
#5Illinois$948.03B—
#6Pennsylvania$815.87B—
#7Ohio$738.49B—
#8Georgia$719.74B—
#9Washington$715.88B—
#10New Jersey$688.76B—
#11North Carolina$682.83B—
#12Massachusetts$640.79B—
#13Virginia$631.98B—
#14Michigan$575.4B—
#15Colorado$452.78B—
#16Arizona$451.49B—
#17Tennessee$447.66B—
#18Maryland$437.37B—
#19Indiana$422.47B—
#20Minnesota$392.31B—
#21Wisconsin$363.84B—
#22Missouri$362.46B—
#23Connecticut$297.35B—
#24South Carolina$287.16B—
#25Oregon$264.75B—
#26Louisiana$263.89B—
#27Alabama$259.46B—
#28Utah$243.04B—
#29Kentucky$239.51B—
#30Oklahoma$216.31B—
#31Nevada$210.1B—
#32Iowa$204.86B—
#33Kansas$178.51B—
#34Nebraska$156.61B—
#35Arkansas$147.93B—
#36Mississippi · your comparison$123.37B—
#37New Mexico$122.58B—
#38Idaho$103.62B—
#39New Hampshire$99.06B—
#40Hawaii$93.38B—
#41Delaware$89.92B—
#42West Virginia$84.94B—
#43Maine$77.23B—
#44Rhode Island$67.25B—
#45North Dakota$65.27B—
#46Montana$61.08B—
#47South Dakota$59.87B—
#48Alaska$56.34B—
#49Wyoming$40.16B—
#50Vermont$38.06B—

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

Mississippi · state comparison

What makes up Mississippi GDP?

Choose an industry to compare Mississippi’s output with every state. Nominal industry values can be added within a year.

Mississippi · 2025$2.99B
Mississippi rank#27among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$255.93BSame 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.

Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output

Industry value added, current dollars. The broad industries listed form an exhaustive partition of total GDP.

A large industry output rank can reflect the size of the state. Chained-dollar components should not be added.

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.

Mississippi
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output history in Mississippi$-42.09B$147.57B$337.24B20142025
2025 · Mississippi: $2.99B · Rank #27 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $255.93B · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Mississippi Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output history
PeriodMississippiCompare
2014$2.76B
2015$2.16B
2016$1.9B
2017$2.59B
2018$2.47B
2019$2.07B
2020$1.68B
2021$2.97B
2022$3.81B
2023$3.26B
2024$3.28B
2025$2.99B

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. Mississippi 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. Mississippi has a dark outline.

Lower value · $164.2MHigher value · $50.67BStriped: 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.

Mississippi · $2.99B2025 · 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 Mississippi with every state · 50 ranked
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting · output · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California$50.67B—
#2Texas$16.95B—
#3Iowa$14.1B—
#4Nebraska$10.6B—
#5Illinois$9.52B—
#6Florida$8.33B—
#7Washington$8.05B—
#8Minnesota$8.01B—
#9Indiana$7.13B—
#10South Dakota$7.08B—
#11Kansas$7.02B—
#12Ohio$7B—
#13Wisconsin$6.58B—
#14Oregon$6.18B—
#15Michigan$6.02B—
#16Missouri$5.71B—
#17North Carolina$5.55B—
#18Idaho$5.41B—
#19Pennsylvania$4.97B—
#20North Dakota$4.71B—
#21Georgia$4.53B—
#22Oklahoma$4.26B—
#23Arkansas$4.13B—
#24Kentucky$3.75B—
#25New York$3.55B—
#26Alabama$3.29B—
#27Mississippi · your comparison$2.99B—
#28Colorado$2.98B—
#29Arizona$2.85B—
#30Montana$2.49B—
#31Louisiana$2.42B—
#32Virginia$2.37B—
#33Tennessee$2.01B—
#34New Mexico$1.7B—
#35South Carolina$1.63B—
#36Utah$1.59B—
#37Maryland$1.31B—
#38New Jersey$1.27B—
#39Maine$1.2B—
#40Wyoming$888.5M—
#41Massachusetts$869.6M—
#42Delaware$741.1M—
#43West Virginia$561.8M—
#44Hawaii$553.9M—
#45Nevada$551.2M—
#46Vermont$536.1M—
#47Alaska$488.1M—
#48Connecticut$341.8M—
#49New Hampshire$320.1M—
#50Rhode Island$164.2M—

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

Mississippi · state comparison

Does growth translate into more work?

BEA’s total employment counts jobs, including proprietors, rather than distinct people.

Mississippi · 20251,713,294
Mississippi rank#35among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark218,324,700Same 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.

Total employment · jobs

BEA annual total full-time and part-time employment, including proprietors. One person can hold multiple jobs.

Separate from residence-based civilian employment in BLS LAUS and from nonfarm payroll employment.

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.

Mississippi
Total employment · jobs history in Mississippi-30,957,674109,941,059250,839,79220142025
2025 · Mississippi: 1,713,294 · Rank #35 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 218,324,700 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Mississippi Total employment · jobs history
PeriodMississippiCompare
20141,557,418
20151,568,944
20161,582,203
20171,593,500
20181,604,755
20191,609,514
20201,576,213
20211,628,795
20221,671,018
20231,687,016
20241,710,194
20251,713,294

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. Mississippi 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. Mississippi has a dark outline.

Lower value · 439,349Higher value · 25,407,891Striped: 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.

Mississippi · 1,713,2942025 · Rank #35 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 Mississippi with every state · 50 ranked
Total employment · jobs · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1California25,407,891—
#2Texas20,639,097—
#3Florida15,174,955—
#4New York13,498,360—
#5Illinois8,197,037—
#6Pennsylvania8,150,272—
#7Ohio7,394,537—
#8Georgia7,184,433—
#9North Carolina6,864,520—
#10New Jersey6,095,348—
#11Michigan5,946,187—
#12Virginia5,789,397—
#13Massachusetts5,020,627—
#14Washington4,879,224—
#15Tennessee4,633,711—
#16Arizona4,455,141—
#17Colorado4,231,488—
#18Indiana4,213,622—
#19Maryland4,009,451—
#20Missouri3,998,549—
#21Minnesota3,914,167—
#22Wisconsin3,855,203—
#23South Carolina3,245,739—
#24Alabama2,966,686—
#25Louisiana2,831,737—
#26Kentucky2,718,290—
#27Oregon2,671,758—
#28Oklahoma2,466,719—
#29Utah2,458,247—
#30Connecticut2,424,541—
#31Nevada2,163,825—
#32Iowa2,122,389—
#33Kansas2,007,083—
#34Arkansas1,811,561—
#35Mississippi · your comparison1,713,294—
#36Nebraska1,410,465—
#37Idaho1,238,642—
#38New Mexico1,183,906—
#39New Hampshire942,254—
#40Hawaii925,451—
#41West Virginia910,570—
#42Maine898,379—
#43Montana761,061—
#44Rhode Island690,505—
#45Delaware678,218—
#46South Dakota665,420—
#47North Dakota605,276—
#48Alaska472,008—
#49Wyoming451,906—
#50Vermont439,349—

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 GDP, economic growth and production from FactVote’s Mississippi 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.

8 statements from 6 candidates

2026 Mississippi U.S. House — District 1 — General Election

2 candidates with matching statements · 2 statements

Cliff Johnson

1 statement

Democratic · U.S. House District 1 · MS

Economic growth & production context

Ensure that North Mississippi gets its fair share of federal dollars for economic development, infrastructure, and struggling Mississippi schools

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Cliff’s Priorities for Mississippi

Candidate campaign source

Ensure that North Mississippi gets its fair share of federal dollars for economic development, infrastructure, and struggling Mississippi schools

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026

Cliff Johnson — candidate-owned primary source ↗

Trent Kelly

1 statement

Republican · U.S. House District 1 · MS

GDP mention

I support an all-of-the above energy strategy. Americans deserve access to reliable and affordable energy, and the federal government does not need to be in the business of picking winners and losers. Technological advances in extracting oil and natural gas from shale, specifically a technique known…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Issues

Candidate campaign source

I support an all-of-the above energy strategy. Americans deserve access to reliable and affordable energy, and the federal government does not need to be in the business of picking winners and losers. Technological advances in extracting oil and natural gas from shale, specifically a technique known as fracking, has increased our GDP, reduced prices for consumers, expanded investment in the energy sector, created jobs, and is the leading contributing factor for improvements in the economy. This is the type of energy renaissance that needs to be embraced and emulated across the industry. f t # e

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 18, 2026

Trent Kelly campaign source 6 ↗

2026 Mississippi U.S. House — District 3 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement

Democratic · U.S. House District 3 · MS

Economic growth & production context

Material tax increases should be limited in the short term while the federal government commits significant investment to form industrial capital using debt. Our focus should be to increase real domestic production enough that it will more than offset the weakening purchasing power of our currency o…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Learn more by clicking the dropdown menu:

Candidate campaign source

Material tax increases should be limited in the short term while the federal government commits significant investment to form industrial capital using debt. Our focus should be to increase real domestic production enough that it will more than offset the weakening purchasing power of our currency over time.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Michael A. Chiaradio — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗

2026 Mississippi U.S. House — District 4 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 3 statements

Carl Boyanton

3 statements

Independent · U.S. House District 4 · MS

GDP mention

I am deeply concerned about the federal budget and the runaway spending that threatens our nation’s future. Our national debt now exceeds $38.5 trillion—with interest payments alone becoming one of the fastest-growing expenses in the budget—and the debt-to-GDP ratio hovers around 124%. This is unsus…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Position on Federal Budget

Candidate campaign source

I am deeply concerned about the federal budget and the runaway spending that threatens our nation’s future. Our national debt now exceeds $38.5 trillion—with interest payments alone becoming one of the fastest-growing expenses in the budget—and the debt-to-GDP ratio hovers around 124%. This is unsustainable.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Carl Boyanton — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
View 2 more statements from Carl Boyanton
GDP mention

I am deeply concerned about the federal budget and the runaway spending that threatens our nation's future. Our national debt now exceeds $38.5 trillion—with interest payments alone becoming one of the fastest-growing expenses in the budget—and the debt-to-GDP ratio hovers around 124%. This is unsus…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Position on Federal Budget

Candidate campaign source

I am deeply concerned about the federal budget and the runaway spending that threatens our nation's future. Our national debt now exceeds $38.5 trillion—with interest payments alone becoming one of the fastest-growing expenses in the budget—and the debt-to-GDP ratio hovers around 124%. This is unsustainable.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Carl Boyanton — candidate-owned primary source 5 ↗
GDP mention

Ultimately, the only way to enforce fiscal discipline in the long term is a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. This would require the federal government to balance its budget each year, with limited exceptions for emergencies such as war or recession, and to cap spending as a percentage …

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Position on Federal Budget

Candidate campaign source

Ultimately, the only way to enforce fiscal discipline in the long term is a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. This would require the federal government to balance its budget each year, with limited exceptions for emergencies such as war or recession, and to cap spending as a percentage of GDP. Many states, including Mississippi, already operate under balanced budget requirements—Washington needs to follow suit.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Carl Boyanton — candidate-owned primary source 5 ↗
Race groups · Page 1 of 2
How statements are selected

This section matches specific GDP, economic growth and production terms in retained, attributed source text from published Mississippi 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.

Mississippi incumbents

What incumbents are proposing

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

0 matching sponsorships or proposals · 0 Mississippi incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.

No retained proposals match these filters. A missing record does not mean an incumbent has taken no action.

What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us

Only current Mississippi 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 Mississippi statistic. Collection reviewed Sep 16, 2026.