Seventeen states and localities are increasing their minimum wage this July
On July 1, the minimum wage will increase in Alaska, Oregon, and Washington, D.C.—lifting wages for more than 361,000 workers and collectively raising their earnings by more than $221 million (see Figure A). In addition to these two states and D.C., 14 cities and counties are also increasing their minimum wage this summer, including Chicago, Los Angeles, and San Francisco.
More than 361,000 workers will get a raise this summer due to state minimum-wage increases: 2026 minimum-wage increase, type of increase, number of affected workers, and wage impacts by state
| State | 2026 minimum wage | 2026 tipped minimum wage | Type of change | Type of change indicator | Size of increase | Size of tipped minimum wage increase | Number of workers affected | Share of workforce affected | Total change in wage bill | Change in full-time worker average annual wages |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | ||||||||||
| Alaska | $14.00 | $14.00 | Ballot measure | 1 | $1.00 | $1.00 | 28,300 | 8.9% | $22,970,000 | $811 |
| Arizona | ||||||||||
| Arkansas | ||||||||||
| California | ||||||||||
| Colorado | ||||||||||
| Connecticut | ||||||||||
| Delaware | ||||||||||
| Washington D.C. | $18.40 | $10.30 | Inflation adjustment | 3 | $0.45 | $0.30 | 96,700 | 12.1% | $63,021,000 | $652 |
| Florida | ||||||||||
| Georgia | ||||||||||
| Hawaii | ||||||||||
| Idaho | ||||||||||
| Illinois | ||||||||||
| Indiana | ||||||||||
| Iowa | ||||||||||
| Kansas | ||||||||||
| Kentucky | ||||||||||
| Louisiana | ||||||||||
| Maine | ||||||||||
| Maryland | ||||||||||
| Massachusetts | ||||||||||
| Michigan | ||||||||||
| Minnesota | ||||||||||
| Mississippi | ||||||||||
| Missouri | ||||||||||
| Montana | ||||||||||
| Nebraska | ||||||||||
| Nevada | ||||||||||
| New Hampshire | ||||||||||
| New Jersey | ||||||||||
| New Mexico | ||||||||||
| New York | ||||||||||
| North Carolina | ||||||||||
| North Dakota | ||||||||||
| Ohio | ||||||||||
| Oklahoma | ||||||||||
| Oregon | $15.55 | $15.55 | Inflation adjustment | 3 | $0.50 | $0.50 | 236,900 | 12.7% | $135,840,000 | $573 |
| Pennsylvania | ||||||||||
| Rhode Island | ||||||||||
| South Carolina | ||||||||||
| South Dakota | ||||||||||
| Tennessee | ||||||||||
| Texas | ||||||||||
| Utah | ||||||||||
| Vermont | ||||||||||
| Virginia | ||||||||||
| Washington | ||||||||||
| West Virginia | ||||||||||
| Wisconsin | ||||||||||
| Wyoming |

Notes: “Legislation” indicates that the new rate was established by the legislature. “Ballot measure” indicates the new rate was set by a ballot initiative passed by voters. “Inflation adjustment” indicates that the new rate was established by a formula, reflecting the change in prices over the preceding year. Oregons's minimu- wage value only reflects basic state minimum wage. See Table 1 for minimum wage in Portland Urban Growth Boundary and nonurban counties. Average annual wage increases are for full-time workers.
Source: EPI compilation of minimum-wage data from state agency websites and state legislation. Estimated impacts produced by Economic Policy Institute Minimum Wage Simulation Model; see Technical Methodology by Dave Cooper, Zane Mokhiber, and Ben Zipperer.
These increases continue to be crucial for low-wage workers as they contend with the affordability crisis. The average increase in annual wages for a full-time, year-round worker resulting from these minimum-wage hikes ranges from $573 in Oregon to $811 in Alaska. These pay raises directly boost workers’ incomes, giving them a leg-up in the race against rising prices—a straightforward example of how policymakers can often more easily tackle affordability challenges through policy decisions that boost wages, such as setting strong wage floors.
A higher minimum wage has a positive impact on more than just the workers who currently earn the minimum wage; indirectly affected workers will see their pay go up too as employers adjust their wage ladders to the new wage floor. Our analysis of the increases in Alaska, Oregon, and Washington, D.C., accounts for these “spillover” effects and finds:
- Women make up more than half (56.3%) of affected workers.
- The wage increases disproportionately benefit Black and Hispanic workers. Black workers make up 15.3% of affected workers, despite making up 10.4% of the workforce across the three areas. Hispanic workers make up a similar percentage of the workforce (12.4%) but make up more than a fourth (26.0%) of affected workers.
- The vast majority (89.3%) of affected workers are age 20 or older, and more than 3 in 5 workers (62.1%) are 25 or older.
- More than half (52.9%) of the affected workers work full-time.
- The increases will raise wages for those who need it the most. Half (50.5%) of affected workers belong to households whose incomes are less than 200% of the poverty line.
- More than 1 in 5 (23.6%) of affected workers are parents.
Summer 2026 state minimum-wage increases, size of increase, and type of increase
| State | 2025 minimum wage | 2026 minimum wage | Minimum wage increase | 2025 tipped minimum wage | 2026 tipped minimum wage | Tipped minimum wage increase | Type of increase |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alaska | $13.00 | $14.00 | $1.00 | $13.00 | $14.00 | $1.00 | Ballot measure |
| District of Columbia | $17.95 | $18.40 | $0.45 | $10.00 | $10.30 | $0.30 | Inflation adjustment |
| Oregon | $15.05 | $15.55 | $0.50 | $15.05 | $15.55 | $0.50 | Inflation adjustment |
| Oregon (Portland Urban Growth Boundary) | $16.30 | $16.80 | $0.50 | $16.30 | $16.80 | $0.50 | Inflation adjustment |
| Oregon (Nonurban counties) | $14.05 | $14.55 | $0.50 | $14.05 | $14.55 | $0.50 | Inflation adjustment |

Notes: “Legislation” indicates that the new rate was established by the legislature. “Ballot measure” indicates the new rate was set by a ballot initiative passed by voters. “Inflation adjustment” indicates that the new rate was established by a formula, reflecting the change in prices over the preceding year. Oregon has separate minimum wages by region of the state.
Source: EPI compilation of minimum-wage data from state agency websites and state legislation.
State and local policymakers should combat cost-of-living challenges with minimum wages
Because costs of living can vary significantly within a state, local policymakers should establish strong wage floors if the state minimum wage is inadequate for their area. In June, city councilors in Albuquerque, New Mexico, took an important step in that direction, passing a minimum-wage increase to $15 an hour by 2029. Whereas the current state minimum in New Mexico is $12 an hour, EPI’s Family Budget Calculator shows that a living wage for a single adult working full-time in Albuquerque is $17.56 an hour.1 The proactive step taken by local elected officials will provide significantly more economic security for low-wage workers in the city.
This summer, the minimum wage will increase in localities in California, Illinois, and Maryland (Table 2) due to “indexing”—automatic annual adjustments written into the minimum-wage law that require the wage floor be adjusted for price increases each year. Without indexing, the minimum wage is worth less and less every year as prices rise. With time, this can dramatically erode the value of the minimum wage. For example, the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour—which has not increased since 2009—has now lost 30% of its purchasing power.
Summer 2026 locality minimum-wage increases, tipped minimum wage increases, and type of increase
| Locality | State | 2025 minimum wage | 2026 minimum wage | Minimum wage increase | 2025 tipped minimum wage | 2026 tipped minimum wage | Tipped minimum wage increase | Type of increase |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alameda | California | $17.46 | $17.76 | $0.30 | – | – | – | Inflation adjustment |
| Berkeley | California | $19.18 | $19.61 | $0.43 | – | – | – | Inflation adjustment |
| Emeryville | California | $19.90 | $20.34 | $0.44 | – | – | – | Inflation adjustment |
| Fremont | California | $17.75 | $18.05 | $0.30 | – | – | – | Inflation adjustment |
| Los Angeles | California | $17.87 | $18.42 | $0.55 | – | – | – | Inflation adjustment |
| Los Angeles County | California | $17.81 | $18.47 | $0.66 | – | – | – | Inflation adjustment |
| Malibu | California | $17.27 | $17.91 | $0.64 | – | – | – | Inflation adjustment |
| Milpitas | California | $18.20 | $18.50 | $0.30 | – | – | – | Inflation adjustment |
| Pasadena | California | $18.04 | $18.57 | $0.53 | – | – | – | Inflation adjustment |
| San Francisco | California | $19.18 | $19.61 | $0.43 | – | – | – | Inflation adjustment |
| Santa Monica | California | $17.81 | $18.47 | $0.66 | – | – | – | Inflation adjustment |
| Chicago | Illinois | $16.60 | $17.05 | $0.45 | $12.62 | $12.96 | $0.34 | Inflation adjustment / City ordinance |
| Cook County | Illinois | $15.00 | $15.40 | $0.40 | $9.00 | $9.25 | $0.25 | Inflation adjustment |
| Montgomery County | Maryland | $17.65 | $18.00 | $0.35 | $4.00 | $4.00 | $0.00 | Inflation adjustment |

Notes: “Ballot measure” indicates the new rate was set by a ballot initiative passed by voters. “City ordinance” indicates that the new rate was set by the city council. “Inflation adjustment” indicates that the new rate was established by a formula, reflecting the change in prices over the preceding year. Chicago's regular minimum wage is increasing due to inflation adjustment, but the tipped minimum wage is increasing due to a city ordinance.
Source: EPI compilation of minimum-wage data from state agency websites and state legislation.
Indexing to inflation is a commonsense policy enacted in dozens of cities and states across the country, but it is not the strongest way to protect the value of the minimum wage. Adjusting for price increases mostly protects the real value of a low-wage worker’s paycheck (although low-wage workers are more vulnerable to inflation than top-of-the-line inflation measures indicate). However, in a well-functioning economy, wages for most workers—especially higher wage workers—will grow faster than inflation. If the minimum wage only rises at the rate of price growth, then over time, this can increase inequality between low-wage workers and everyone else.
One way to address this issue and ensure that low-wage workers do not fall further away from the middle class is to index the minimum wage to median wage growth. EPI’s latest vision for a federal minimum wage explicitly targets a wage floor that rises to two-thirds of the median wage and remains indexed there thereafter. This policy both creates a high floor that provides significantly higher wages for workers across the country and protects the minimum wage’s value against price increases and increases in wage inequality over time.
Oklahoma fails to pass minimum-wage ballot measure
In June, a minority of eligible Oklahoma voters rejected a ballot initiative (State Question 832) that would have increased the state’s minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2029. The initiative’s failure is a costly missed opportunity to increase wages for Oklahoma workers. More than 1 in 5 workers in the state earn less than $15 an hour, and if passed, the ballot initiative would have provided more than $783 million in increased earnings for low-wage workers.
During a time when cost of living and inflation are some of the most important concerns for voters, Oklahomans might have worried that increasing the minimum wage would have hurt affordability in the state. In fact, the opposite is true. Although raising the minimum wage can lead some affected businesses to increase prices, the resulting price increases are extremely modest—far smaller than the increase in pay that would go to low-wage workers. Even some of the most ambitious wage floor policies, such as California’s $20 fast food minimum wage, only increased fast-food prices 2.1% (around eight cents for a $4 item). A 10% increase in the minimum wage is associated with a 0.14 percentage point increase in CPI increase. In contrast, a 10% minimum-wage increase boosts income at the 10th percentile by around 3.6%, an order of magnitude greater. The average full-time, year-round Oklahoman worker affected by SQ 832 would have gained $2,322 in annual wages if voters had approved the initiative.
It is also important to highlight SQ 832’s winding path to the ballot. Ballot initiatives have historically been an important mechanism for passing minimum-wage increases in states with conservative-dominated legislatures like Florida, Missouri, and Nebraska. While Oklahoma is one of only three states in the South that has a ballot initiative process, conservative politicians have been increasingly curtailing it.
The Oklahoma minimum-wage ballot initiative is a prime example of this. Advocates originally began collecting signatures for SQ 832 in the lead-up to the November 2024 general election. Despite collecting nearly twice the necessary signatures in enough time to qualify for the ballot, advocates were thwarted when Governor Kevin Stitt delayed the State Question until the June 2026 gubernatorial primary election, a low turnout election in contrast to a general election with presidential candidates on the ballot. Voter turnout in the 2026 primary election was 26%, around half of what it was in the 2024 election.
In response to the emergence of SQ 832, the Oklahoma legislature also passed restrictions on the signature-gathering process, limiting the number of signatures that can be gathered from populous areas like Tulsa and Oklahoma City. These restrictions will make it more costly and logistically challenging to pass a future minimum-wage increase in Oklahoma. With such low voter turnout and marked interference in the ballot initiative process, it is difficult to say that SQ 832’s failure reflects a lack of popular support for minimum-wage increases in Oklahoma. Regardless of the cause, without a future minimum-wage increase, the issue of low pay in Oklahoma is only going to grow.
When policymakers like those in Oklahoma fail to adequately set the wage floor, it suppresses worker pay, not just for the lowest-paid workers, but for low-wage workers in general. Workers need a raise to help them overcome the affordability crisis, and the minimum wage is an evidence-backed tool under policymakers’ control to help them do that.
1. Assuming 81% of income comes from wages.
Enjoyed this post?
Sign up for EPI's newsletter so you never miss our research and insights on ways to make the economy work better for everyone.