CMR is the leading provider of funding and management support for small to medium-sized businesses and entrepreneurs 

Here’s the short version of what it takes for a family of four to live comfortably in 2026 by state:

In Massachusetts, you’d need nearly $330,000 a year - the highest figure in the entire country. Only three states clear the $300,000 mark: Massachusetts, Hawaii, and California. At the other end of the spectrum, Mississippi is the most affordable at about $188,000. That’s a full $142,000 less than what you’d need in Massachusetts.

So… how much does a family of four need in your state?

This map shows the pre-tax income a household with two working adults and two kids needs to live comfortably in every U.S. state.

The numbers come from SmartAsset (as of February 2026). They’re based on the familiar 50/30/20 budget: 50% for necessities, 30% for discretionary spending, and 20% for savings or other goals. These aren’t bare-minimum survival numbers—they’re what it takes to live pretty well while still putting money aside.

And as Visual Capitalist notes, Massachusetts sits at the very top of that list. Massachusetts tops the ranking, with a family of four needing $329,555 per year to meet the 50/30/20 benchmark.

Hawaii follows at $313,165, while California ranks third at $302,682.

Rank State Income needed for family of four (2026)

• 1 - Massachusetts - $329,555
• 2 - Hawaii - $313,165
• 3 - California - $302,682
• 4 - Connecticut - $298,189
• 5 - New Jersey - $295,110
• 6 - New York - $291,533
• 7 - Colorado - $283,213
• 8 - Washington - $281,798
• 9 - Oregon - $280,966
• 10 - Vermont - $280,384
• 11 - Alaska - $272,064
• 12 - New Hampshire - $267,904
• 13 - Rhode Island - $264,659
• 14 - Minnesota - $263,078
• 15 - Maryland - $257,837
• 16 - Maine - $250,931
• 17 - Montana - $249,434
• 18 - Pennsylvania - $247,936
• 19 - Illinois - $244,109
• 20 - Virginia - $242,944
• 21 - Nevada - $242,278
• 22 - Indiana - $241,696
• 23 - Wisconsin - $238,451
• 24 - Arizona - $236,870
• 25 - Utah - $235,789
• 26 - Delaware - $228,134
• 27 - Ohio - $226,221
• 28 - Idaho - $226,054
• 29 - Florida - $223,392
• 30 - New Mexico - $223,142
• 31 - Nebraska - $223,059
• 32 - Missouri - $217,734
• 33 - Georgia - $214,573
• 34 - Michigan - $214,323
• 35 - South Carolina - $212,909
• 36 - North Carolina - $212,410
• 37 - Wyoming - $212,410
• 38 - Oklahoma - $211,910
• 39 - North Dakota - $210,496
• 40 - Kansas - $207,917
• 41 - Iowa - $204,422
• 42 - Texas - $203,424
• 43 - West Virginia - $202,592
• 44 - South Dakota - $201,760
• 45 - Alabama - $198,931
• 46 - Louisiana - $197,933
• 47 - Tennessee - $197,267
• 48 - Arkansas - $195,437
• 49 - Kentucky - $194,854
• 50 - Mississippi - $187,533

Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York aren't far behind, bringing the number of states with comfortable-income thresholds above $290,000 to six.

Colorado and Vermont Make the Top 10

As expected, many of the highest income thresholds are concentrated in the Northeast and along the West Coast.

However, Colorado has the seventh-highest threshold in the country at $283,213, ranking above Washington and Oregon.

Vermont rounds out the top 10 at $280,384, despite having the second-smallest population of any U.S. state. Meanwhile, nearby states like New Hampshire, Maine, and Rhode Island all fall outside the top 10.

Just Six States Come in Below $200,000

Despite the wide range in living costs across the country, only six states have a comfortable-income threshold below $200,000 for a family of four.

Mississippi ranks lowest at $187,533, followed by Kentucky. The states of Arkansas, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Alabama also fall below the $200,000 mark.

The gap between Massachusetts and Mississippi exceeds $142,000 per year, meaning the Massachusetts benchmark is about 76% higher.

A major consultancy firm under fire for misconduct in its audit business is cutting its local workforce following a suspension from applying for new government contracts.

KPMG - one of the "Big Four" accounting firms alongside Deloitte, PwC, and EY - revealed on Aug. 24 that its annual revenue dipped 1 percent to $2.26 billion (US$1.62 billion) in fiscal 2026. The firm also warned of a rocky road ahead, with new CEO John Sams noting, "We expect difficult market conditions to continue in financial year 2027 and beyond."

A combination of soft market conditions and a continued drop in government reliance on consultants drove a 16.9 percent revenue decrease in KPMG's consulting business. However, the firm saw growth elsewhere, with revenue for its audit and assurance and its tax and legal arms rising 11 percent and 10.9 percent, respectively.

Following a review of its operating costs and the fallout from recent conduct and whistleblower controversies, KPMG will cut its workforce by 5 percent. The reduction will primarily impact the consulting and business services divisions, eliminating 27 partner roles and approximately 360 employees.

Despite overall revenue falling short of expectations, Sams noted that four out of the firm's five businesses grew. "This result reflects the resilience of our business and, above all, the commitment of our people in a very challenging year," he said. "We will continue to monitor performance closely, act when needed and consider carefully how the firm needs to be set up for the future."

The firm's leadership will not escape the financial hit, however, with average equity partner remuneration plunging 13 percent from the previous year.

KPMG is currently banned from bidding on federal government contracts until at least the end of September, pending the finance department's review of its conduct. Several state governments have similarly put the firm on ice.

The firm has been engulfed in an audit leak scandal since facing a federal parliamentary committee hearing in June. During the inquiry, it was revealed that some executives had misused confidential board papers - including Lendlease documents used to support audit bids for Westpac and Dexus - to win new work and mistreated a whistleblower who had raised concerns. Labor Senator Deborah O'Neill aired the allegations in parliament, and the firm was referred to the National Anti-Corruption Commission.

The scandal has already ousted numerous executives, including former CEO Andrew Yates and chair Martin Sheppard. Sams confirmed that several internal and external reviews will wrap up in the coming months.

"Their findings will inform the next phase of our action plan and help ensure we take all necessary action," Sams said. "We know there is more to do."

KPMG currently holds 297 active federal contracts worth $653 million.

Authored by Frank Shostak via Mises Institute,

It is common for commentators and economists to refer to something called the "economy," which sometimes performs well and, at other times, poorly. The "economy" is presented as an entity apart from individuals. Within this framework, the "economy" is assigned paramount importance, while the role of individuals is barely mentioned. It must be realized that, at no stage, does the so-called "economy" have a life of its own, independent from individuals.

According to this way of thinking, the "economy" produces goods and services. Once the output is produced by the "economy," what is required is its distribution among individuals in the fairest way.

In reality, goods and services are not produced in totality. Every individual is preoccupied with his own production and consumption of goods and services. Consequently, there is no such thing as the total real national output. Furthermore, it is not possible to establish the total real output given that, arithmetically, we cannot coherently add potatoes to tomatoes (i.e., heterogeneous goods). All that we could establish is the numerical amount of money spent on goods and services (i.e., the monetary turnover). The employment of the average price metric to convert the monetary turnover into the real output does not solve this issue since the average price cannot be meaningfully established.

For example, suppose two transactions are conducted. In the first transaction, one loaf of bread is exchanged for $2. In the second transaction, one gallon of milk is exchanged for $1. The price, or the rate of exchange, in the first transaction is $2 for one loaf of bread. The price in the second transaction is $1 one gallon of milk. In order to calculate an average price, we must add these two ratios and divide them by two; however, it is conceptually meaningless to add $2 exchanged for one loaf of bread to $1 exchanged for one gallon of milk. This in turn means that various macroeconomic indicators compiled by government statisticians are detached from the real world.

Consequently, various policies to influence an undefined entity-the "economy"-via undefined indicators inflict damage to the well-being of individuals. Even government statisticians admit that the whole thing is not real. According to J. Steven Landefeld and Robert P. Parker from the Bureau of Economic Analysis,

In particular, it is important to recognize that real GDP is an analytic concept. Despite the name, real GDP is not "real" in the sense that it can, even in principle, be observed or collected directly, in the same sense that current-dollar GDP cannot in principle be observed or collected as the sum of actual spending on final goods and services in the economy. Quantities of apples and oranges can in principle be collected, but they cannot be added to obtain the total quantity of "fruit" output in the economy.

By lumping the values of final goods and services together, government statisticians concretize the fiction of an "economy" by means of GDP statistics and other economic indicators. Once the "economy" is concretized, policymakers could navigate the "economy" along the growth path that is considered by the experts as desirable.

Thus, whenever the growth rate slips below the outlined path, government and central bank policymakers are expected to give the "economy" a suitable push by means of fiscal and monetary policies. According to Rothbard,

Bureaucrats as well as statist reformers. . . in order to get "into" the situation that they are trying to plan and reform, they must obtain knowledge that is not personal, day-to-day experience; the only form that such knowledge can take is statistics. Statistics are the eyes and ears of the bureaucrat, the politician, the socialistic reformer. Only by statistics can they know, or at least have any idea about, what is going on in the economy.

Moreover,

. . .one of the major reasons put forth for government intervention is that it "corrects" the market, and makes the market and the economy more rational. Obviously, if the government were deprived of all knowledge whatever of economic affairs, there could not even be a pretense of rationality in government intervention. Surely, the absence of statistics would absolutely and immediately wreck any attempt at socialistic planning.

The "Hampered" Environment and Macro-Economic Data

To succeed in a hampered market environment, entrepreneurs tend to respond to prevailing conditions, which are influenced by central bank and government policies. A businessperson cannot afford to ignore changes in various economic indicators such as GDP given that government and central bank officials react to changes in these indicators. For instance, if the central bank is expected to tighten its monetary stance in response to a strengthening in the GDP, a businessperson must take this into account in order to succeed in his business.

Note that the government-in order to construct various economic indicators-collects the data from businesses that are allocating resources to supply the government with the information. The construction of various economic indicators generates employment opportunities for economists and experts in other fields such as mathematics and statistics. These experts are employed not only to compile various economic data; they are also employed to interpret the data and provide guidance to businesses.

Do We Need to Know Macroeconomic Data in a Free Market Environment?

In a free market environment-free of government and central bank interference with businesses-it does not make much sense to measure and publish various economic indicators. This type of information will be of little use to entrepreneurs.

In a free market environment, what possible use can an entrepreneur make of information about the growth rate in gross domestic product (GDP)? Alternatively, what possible use can be made out of the data showing that the national balance of payments has moved into a deficit or a surplus? According to Rothbard,

The individual consumer, in his daily rounds, has little need of statistics; through advertising, through the information of friends, and through his own experience, he finds out what is going on in the markets around him. The same is true of the business firm. The businessman must also size up his particular market, determine the prices he has to pay for what he buys and charge for what he sells, engage in cost accounting to estimate his costs, and so on.

The only indicator to which entrepreneurs should pay attention to is profitability in their concerned activity. The higher the profit, the more a particular business activity is in tune with consumers' highest priorities.

Paying attention to consumers' wishes means that entrepreneurs have to organize the most suitable production structure for that purpose. The information on various macroeconomic indicators will be of little assistance in this regard.

What an entrepreneur requires is not general macroeconomic information, but rather specific information about consumers' demand for a product or a range of products. Government-aggregated macro-indicators will not be of much help to entrepreneurs. The entrepreneur would have to establish his own network of information concerning a particular venture. If a businessperson's assessment of consumers' demand is correct then he will make a profit. An incorrect assessment will result in a loss.

The profit-and-loss paradigm penalizes those businesses that have misjudged consumer's priorities and rewards those businesses who have exercised a correct appraisal. Hence, by the profit-and-loss framework, resources are withdrawn from those entrepreneurs who misjudged consumer's priorities to those entrepreneurs who accurately appraised consumer's priorities. According to Mises,

Thus, profit and loss are generated by success or failure in adjusting the course of production activities to the most urgent demand of the consumers.

We have seen that the construction of various economic indicators generates employment opportunities for economists and experts in other fields such as mathematics and statistics.

These experts are employed not only to compile various economic data, they are also employed to interpret the data and provide guidance to businesses. However, in a free unhampered market, businessmen in the pursuance of their goals are unlikely to require macroeconomic indicators. Therefore, there would be little interest in the services of economists, statisticians, and mathematicians in a free unhampered market.

Conclusion

Macroeconomic data is employed by government and central bank policymakers to navigate the so-called "economy" towards the growth path that was set by the policymakers. As a rule, this navigation culminates in the boom-bust cycle menace and a weakening in the process of wealth generation. By lumping the values of final goods and services together, government statisticians concretize the fiction of an "economy" by means of GDP statistics and other economic indicators.

President Donald Trump drew fresh attention to a long-running controversy on Sunday when he reposted a Just the News article on Truth Social headlined "ICE refuses to disclose records on Ilhan Omar fraud probe, cites ongoing 'enforcement proceedings.'" His decision to amplify the report, without comment, renewed scrutiny of allegations that have dogged Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) for years - though ICE's response stops short of confirming she is personally the target of any active proceeding.

The Trump administration has said for months it possesses evidence that Omar committed immigration fraud. What has remained unclear is whether that evidence translates into an indictment, a denaturalization proceeding, or nothing at all.

Just the News filed a Freedom of Information Act request in January 2026 for records related to Omar's marriage to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, a man whose identity, evidence suggests, is that of her brother. ICE's response cited a specific legal exemption rather than denying or providing a timeline. "ICE has determined that the information you requested is being withheld in full pursuant to Title 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(A)," the agency wrote. "Disclosure of any responsive records at this time could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings."

Department of Justice guidance requires a two-step showing before an agency can invoke it. "First, there must be a 'reasonable likelihood' of a pending or contemplated law enforcement proceeding," the guidance states. "Second, release of the information must be reasonably expected to cause some articulable harm to that proceeding." ICE cleared both hurdles by its own estimation; whether that estimation holds up matters more now that the president has amplified it himself.

While no court has established as fact that Ahmed Nur Said Elmi is Omar's brother, the most detailed public claim comes from the government of Somaliland. This territory, which split from Somalia in 1991, claimed back in March that Omar's original last name was Elmi before it was changed, and that this evidence "was available, but the Obama Justice Department refused to investigate."

The allegations that Omar married her brother first surfaced during Omar's 2016 campaign for a seat in the Minnesota House, alongside a separate claim that she remained legally married to her first husband when she married Elmi.

Omar was born in Somalia and lived in a refugee camp in Kenya before coming to the United States in 1995. She applied for a marriage license with Ahmed Hirsi in 2002 but never married him civilly, only through a Muslim ceremony. The two separated in 2008. Omar married Elmi the following year, then split from him in 2011 through another Muslim divorce. She resumed her relationship with Hirsi in 2012, a year before she won her seat in the Minnesota House. Omar did not file for a formal divorce from Elmi until 2017, and she married Hirsi civilly in 2018, sixteen years after they first applied for that license.

Omar's campaign denied both allegations against her. "Allegations that she married her brother and is legally married to two people are categorically ridiculous and false," said then-campaign spokesman Ben Goldfarb.

Warnings on Wall Street about a confluence of stressors building deep within global agricultural supply chains are growing louder by the week, raising the risk of a food crisis next year.

JPMorgan analysts warned last week that the next global food crisis "won't be short-lived." HSBC analysts sounded a similar alarm, pointing to tightening grain supplies, El Niño, disruptions at maritime chokepoints, and a supply "squeeze" sending grain prices soaring.

HSBC economist Jamie Culling, who covers Australia, New Zealand, and global commodities, published a note Tuesday titled "Food Prices Rising Due to the Weather and Wars," warning that the supply squeeze is already showing up in spot markets. Cereal prices, including wheat, corn, barley, and rice, rose 22% year over year through July.

"Having strong supplies and stocks going into this year has helped keep prices from spiking higher, but the buffer is now starting to be run down quickly," Culling warned clients.

Culling continued:

Supply 'squeeze' underway

Agricultural supply chains face a number of shocks, including the impact of the Middle East conflict, a recent escalation of the Russia-Ukraine war and extreme weather events, including a Northern Hemisphere heatwave and strengthening El Niño. Having strong supplies and stocks going into this year has helped keep prices from spiking higher, but the buffer is now starting to be run down quickly.

On the USDA's latest forecasts, global grains production is expected to fall to be below consumption in 2026/27, its first shortfall since 2020/21 and largest shortfall since 2006/07. Stock-to-use ratios are set to tighten, alongside a fall in crop yields.

Agricultural prices have risen. Grains prices are up 22% y-o-y, and some 'finer foods' prices, such as cocoa and coffee, have spiked higher too.

The Middle East conflict has been a key disruptive factor for agricultural commodities (see Fertiliser, food, and the Middle East conflict, 17 April 2026). The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has continued to constrain fertiliser and sulphur supply, and kept broader input cost pressures elevated. Export restrictions from some economies in response to this 'squeeze' have been another source of pressure.

The recent escalation in the Russia-Ukraine war has seen a sharp drop in shipments from the Black Sea. The region supplies nearly a third of global wheat trade and one-fifth of global fertiliser trade, so this represents a key risk to supply, just as grain harvests are ramping up. Damage to refineries in Russia has also lifted diesel prices.

The weather has also been a big factor, with Northern Hemisphere heatwaves, an intensifying El Niño and a positive Indian Ocean Dipole posing downside risks to agri-commodity supply. The impact of previous El Niño episodes varies by region and commodity, but yields tend to decrease and prices increase. Weather-related risks have seen cocoa prices spike 50% in the past few months and lifted coffee prices. Weather risks can also deliver non-linearities, such as more disease outbreaks.

We see supply-side issues continuing to dominate developments in agricultural commodity prices, meaning risks of higher prices on average, increased price volatility, and greater instances of food insecurity in the coming period.

Professional subscribers can read the full note "Food prices rising due to the weather and wars" here on our new Marketdesk.ai portal.