U

SCEN

HelpingYouMa

U S C E N S U S B U R E A U 

he United States: 2001 Current Population Reports Consumer Income
This report was prepared under the direction of Edward J. 

Welniak Jr., Chief of the Income Surveys Branch. Shane L. Martin

made significant contributions to the preparation of this report.

Shirley L. Smith and Diana Marz provided statistical assistance.

Ruth E. Davis and Doris Sansbury provided clerical assistance.

Charles T. Nelson, Assistant Division Chief for Income, Poverty,

and Health Statistics, Housing and Household Economic Statistics

Division, provided overall direction.

David Nguyen and John Dinh, Demographic Surveys Division,

processed the March 2002 Annual Demographic Supplement Current

Population Survey file. Caroline S. Carbaugh, Chief of the Survey

Processing Branch, Stacy J. Lyons, Mary Thrift Bush, and Kirk E.

Davis programmed the detailed tables.

Aneesah Stephenson and Fred Meier of the Demographic

Statistical Methods Division conducted sampling review.

Tim J. Marshall, Demographic Surveys Division, and Andrew M.

Stevenson, Technologies Management Office, prepared and programmed the computer-assisted interviewing instrument used to

conduct the Annual Demographic Supplement.

U.S. Census Bureau field representatives and telephone interviewers

collected the data. Without their dedication, the preparation of this

report or any report from the Current Population Survey would be

impossible.

Greg Carroll, Penny Heiston, Jan Sweeney, and Mary Stinson

of the Administrative and Customer Services Division, Walter C.

Odom, Chief, provided publications and printing management,

graphics design and composition, and editorial review for print and

electronic media. General direction and production management

were provided by Gary J. Lauffer, Chief, Publications Services

Branch.

Acknowledgments

The Housing and Household Economic Statistics Division of the

Census Bureau recognizes Shirley L. Smith for her 31 years of

service with the Census Bureau. Ms. Smith spent the last 28

years working on income data collected in current surveys and

three decennial censuses. One particularly noteworthy accomplishment is the extensive series of historical tables available

on our web site. Her dedication, professionalism, and institutional knowledge will be sorely missed.
U.S. Department of Commerce

Donald L. Evans,

Secretary

Samuel W. Bodman,

Deputy Secretary

Economics and Statistics Administration

Kathleen B. Cooper, 

Under Secretary for Economic Affairs

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Charles Louis Kincannon,

Director

Money Income in the

United States: 2001

P60-218

Issued September 2002
Suggested Citation

DeNavas-Walt, Carmen and Robert

Cleveland, U.S. Census Bureau,

Current Population Reports, P60-218, 

Money Income in the United States:

2001, U.S. Government Printing

Office, Washington, DC, 

2002.

ECONOMICS

AND STATISTICS

ADMINISTRATION

Economics and Statistics

Administration

Kathleen B. Cooper,

Under Secretary for Economic Affairs

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Charles Louis Kincannon,

Director

William G. Barron, Jr.,

Deputy Director

Vacant,

Principal Associate Director for Programs

Nancy M. Gordon,

Associate Director for Demographic Programs

Daniel H. Weinberg,

Chief, Housing and Household Economic

Statistics Division

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll-free 866-512-1800; DC area 202-512-1800

Fax: 202-512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
U.S. Census Bureau Money Income in the United States: 2001 iii

TEXT

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Official Estimates of Money Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Experimental Estimates of Income Including Noncash 

Benefits and Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

User Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

TEXT TABLES

1. Comparison of Summary Measures of Income by Selected

Characteristics: 2000 and 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2. Income of Households by Race and Hispanic Origin 

Using 2- and 3-Year-Average Medians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

3. Distribution of Households by Selected Characteristics 

Within Income Quintiles: 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

4. Income of Households by State Using 2- and 

3-Year-Average Medians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

5. Median Household Income by Definition: 2000 and 2001 . . . . . 13

6. Percentage of Aggregate Income Received by Income 

Quintiles and Gini Index by Definition of Income: 2001 . . . . . 14

FIGURES

1. Median Household Income by Race and Hispanic 

Origin: 1967 to 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

2. Median Earnings of Full-Time, Year-Round Workers 

15 Years Old and Over by Sex: 1967 to 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3. Index of Change for Various Measures of Household 

Income Inequality: 1967 to 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

4. Percent Change in 2-Year-Average Median Household 

Income by State: 1999-2000 to 2000-2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Appendix A. 

HISTORICAL INCOME

A-1. Households by Total Money Income, Race, and 

Hispanic Origin of Householder: 1967 to 2001 . . . . . . . . 15

A-2. Share of Aggregate Income Received by Each Fifth and 

Top 5 Percent of Households: 1967 to 2001 . . . . . . . . . . 19

A-3. Selected Measures of Household Income Dispersion: 

1967 to 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Contents
iv Money Income in the United States: 2001 U.S. Census Bureau

Appendix B. 

SAMPLE EXPANSION AND INTRODUCTION OF CENSUS 2000-BASED 

POPULATION CONTROLS

B-1. Comparison of 2000 Median Income Using the Expanded Sample and 

the Original Sample by Selected Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

B-2. Comparison of 2000 Median Income by State Using the Expanded Sample 

and the Original Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

B-3. Comparison of 2000 Median Income Using Census 2000-Based Population 

Controls and 1990 Census-Based Population Controls 

by Selected Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
INTRODUCTION

The 2001 median household

income in the United States was

$42,228, representing a 2.2 percent decline in real income from its

2000 level of $43,162.1 This

decline in income coincides with

the recession that started in March

2001.2 The decline in median

household income between 2000

and 2001 was widespread. With

the exception of the Northeast, all

regions experienced a decline in

income. Each of the racial groups

and non-Hispanic Whites showed

declines in income; the income of

the Hispanic population remained

unchanged.3

HIGHLIGHTS

(Most of the estimates described in

this section are shown in Table 1,

Table 2, Table 3, and Appendix

Table A-1; the estimates for states

are shown in Table 4.)

• Real median household income

declined by 2.2 percent between

2000 and 2001 to a level of

$42,228. 

• The real median income of family

households and of nonfamily

households declined between

2000 and 2001. Overall, family

household income dropped 1.7

percent to $52,275. Nonfamily

households experienced a decline

of 1.5 percent, to $25,631.4

• Foreign-born households experienced a 5.3 percent decline in

median income between 2000

and 2001 (to $37,948), larger

than the 1.5 percent decline (to

$42,917) experienced by native

households.5

U.S. Census Bureau Money Income in the United States: 2001 1

Money Income in the United States: 2001

The estimates in this report are based on the 2000,

2001, and 2002 Current Population Survey Annual

Demographic Supplements (CPS ADS) and provide

information for calendar years 1999, 2000, and

2001, respectively. These estimates use population

estimates based on Census 2000. Earlier reports

presenting data for calendar years 1993 through

2000 used population estimates based on the 1990

census.

In 2001, the Census Bureau tested a sample expansion of 28,000 households to the CPS ADS. The

sample expansion was officially implemented in the

estimates presented here. It is primarily designed to

improve the reliability of state estimates of children’s

health insurance coverage, but the larger sample

size also improves the reliability of national estimates of other topics.

Because results presented in this report from the

2001 survey have been recalculated based on the

expanded sample and the Census 2000-based

weights, they may differ from earlier estimates that

did not incorporate the sample expansion and were

based on the 1990 census. Appendix B presents

more detail on the introduction of the sample expansion and new population controls based on Census

2000.

NEW POPULATION CONTROLS AND EXPANDED SAMPLE

1 All income values are in 2001 dollars.

Changes in real income refer to comparisons

after adjusting for inflation. The percentage

changes in prices between earlier years and

2001 were computed by dividing the annual

average Consumer Price Index for 2001 by

the annual average for earlier years. The

CPI-U values for 1947 to 2001 are available

on the Internet at:

www.census.gov/hhes/www/income01.html;

click on “Annual Average Consumer Price

Index (CPI-U-RS): 1947 to 2001.” Inflation

between 2000 and 2001 was 2.8 percent. 2 Recessions are determined by the

National Bureau of Economic Research, a private research organization.

3 Because Hispanics may be of any race,

data in this report for Hispanics overlap

slightly with data for the Black population

and the Asian and Pacific Islander population. About 10.9 percent of White households, 3.0 percent of Black households, 2.0

percent of Asian and Pacific Islander households, and 13.1 percent of American Indian

and Alaska Native households are maintained by a person of Hispanic origin.

4 The percent declines in median income

for family and nonfamily households are not

different. 5 Native households are those in which

the householder was born in the United

States, Puerto Rico, or an outlying area of

the United States or was born in a foreign

country but had at least one parent who was

a U.S. citizen. All other households are considered foreign-born regardless of the date

of entry into the United States or citizenship

status. The CPS does not interview households in Puerto Rico.
• While the real median income of

Hispanic-origin households

remained unchanged between

2000 and 2001 ($33,565), the

income of each race group

declined. Median household

income declined 1.3 percent for

non-Hispanic Whites, 3.4 percent

for Blacks, and 6.4 percent for

Asians and Pacific Islanders.6

• The Northeast was the only

region that did not experience a

decline in real median household

income between 2000 and 2001. 

• Real median income declined for

households in metropolitan

areas between 2000 and 2001,

going to a level of $45,219.

• The real median earnings of

women who worked full-time,

year-round increased for the

fifth consecutive year, rising to

$29,215. Men with similar work

experience did not experience a

statistical change in earnings

($38,275). As a result, the

female-to-male earnings ratio

reached 0.76, up from the previous all-time-high of 0.74, first

recorded in 1996.

• The most commonly used index

of household income inequality,

the Gini index, did not change

between 2000 and 2001, while

the share of aggregate income

received by the lowest household income quintile declined.

• Based on comparisons of 2-yearaverage medians (comparing

1999-2000 with 2000-2001), real

median household income rose

for 3 states (Arizona,

Massachusetts, and

Pennsylvania) and declined for

12 states. Five of the states that

experienced declines were in the

Midwest (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa,

Michigan, and Wisconsin), four in

the South (Alabama, Florida,

Mississippi, and Tennessee), two

in the Northeast (Maine and

Vermont), and one in the West

(Washington).

• An important finding of the

Census Bureau’s tax and noncash

benefit research is that government transfers have a greater

impact on lowering income

inequality than the tax system.

OFFICIAL ESTIMATES OF

MONEY INCOME

The official income estimates in this

report are based solely on money

income before taxes and do not

include the value of employmentbased fringe benefits nor of government-provided noncash benefits,

such as food stamps, medicare,

medicaid, and public or subsidized

housing. A separate section of this

report, “Experimental Estimates of

Income Including Noncash Benefits

and Taxes,” discusses the effect of

taxes and selected noncash benefits

on household income using modelbased approaches to estimating

taxes and valuing benefits. The

Census Bureau’s models of these

effects are based on information

collected in the 2002 CPS Annual

Demographic Supplement and other

sources, including the Internal

Revenue Service, the Food and

Nutrition Service, the Bureau of

Labor Statistics, and the Centers for

Medicare and Medicaid Services.7

Median household income

declined between 2000 and

2001.

Real median household income

declined by 2.2 percent between

2 Money Income in the United States: 2001 U.S. Census Bureau

6 The differences between the percent

declines in the median income of Black

households compared with that of nonHispanic White and Asian and Pacific Islander

households are not statistically significant.

What is . . .? Money Income data are collected for all people in

the sample 15 years old and over. Money income includes earnings,

unemployment compensation, workers’ compensation, social security, supplemental security income, public assistance, veterans’ payments, survivor benefits, pension or retirement income, interest, dividends, rents, royalties, estates, trusts, educational assistance,

alimony, child support, assistance from outside the household, and

other miscellaneous money income. It is income before deductions

for taxes or other expenses and does not include lump-sum payments or capital gains.

7 See Current Population Reports, Series

P60-186RD, “Measuring the Effect of Benefits

and Taxes on Income and Poverty: 1992,” for

more details.

Source of Estimates; Statistical Accuracy

The estimates in this report are based on data collected by the 2002

Current Population Survey Annual Demographic Supplement conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau. As with all surveys, the estimates

may differ from the actual values because of sampling variation or

other factors. All statements in this report have undergone statistical

testing, and all comparisons are significant at the 90-percent confidence level unless otherwise noted. For further information about

the source and accuracy of the estimates, go to www.census.gov/

hhes/income/income01/sa.pdf.
2000 ($43,162) and 2001

($42,228), coinciding with the

recession that started in March

2001. The last time household

income declined was in 1991,

which also coincided with a recession that lasted from July 1990 to

March 1991 (see Table 1 and

Appendix Table A-1). 

Family and nonfamily

households experienced

declines in median household

income.

The real median income of family

households declined between 2000

and 2001 (see Table 1). The drop

for family household median

income overall was 1.7 percent to

$52,275; for those maintained by

female householders with no husband present 3.1 percent to

$28,142; and for those with male

householders with no wife present

6.0 percent to $40,715. The percentage decline in income of nonfamily households was 1.5 percent

to $25,631.8 The income of

married-couple families remained

unchanged at $60,471.

Family and nonfamily households

have not experienced declines in

real median household income since

the early 1990s. Specifically, family

households had not experienced an

annual decline in real median

income since 1993, family households maintained by women with no

husband present since 1991, and

family households maintained by

men with no wife present and nonfamily households since 1992. 

Native and foreign-born

households experienced

declines in real median

household income between

2000 and 2001. 

Foreign-born households experienced a 5.3 percent decline (to

$37,948) in real median household

income, larger than the 1.5 percent

decline (to $42,917) experienced

by native households (see Table 1).

Of foreign-born households, those

maintained by a naturalized citizen

experienced a 5.4 percent decline

in income (to $43,968), not different from the 4.2 percent decline

(to $34,812) for those maintained

by householders who were not

United States citizens.9

The real median income of

Hispanic-origin households

remained unchanged between

2000 and 2001, but the

income of each of the race

groups declined. 10

Hispanic households had a median

income of $33,565 in 2001, not

statistically different from their

2000 median income (see Table 1).

Before 2001, Hispanic households

had experienced 5 years of annual

income increases (see Appendix

Table A-1). Their last decline in

median household income

occurred in 1995. 

The real median incomes of nonHispanic White, Black, and Asian

and Pacific Islander households

declined between 2000 and 2001,

by 1.3 percent (to $46,305) for

non-Hispanic White households; by

3.4 percent (to $29,470) for Black

households; and by 6.4 percent (to

$53,635) for Asian and Pacific

Islander households. 11 12

Non-Hispanic White and Asian and

Pacific Islander households have

not experienced an annual decline

in median household income since

1991 and Black households since

1981 (see Appendix Table A-1).

Although Asians and Pacific

Islanders as a group had the highest median household income in

2001, their income per household

member ($24,933) was not statistically different from the income per

household member of nonHispanic White households

($25,751). Asian and Pacific

Islander households typically have

more people—2.93 people on average compared with 2.42 people for

non-Hispanic White households.

The income per household member for Black households (average

size of 2.68 people) was $14,635

and for Hispanic households (average size of 3.52) was $12,595.13

Table 2 shows income data for the

American Indian and Alaska Native

U.S. Census Bureau Money Income in the United States: 2001 3

8 The percentage declines in median

income for family households, nonfamily

households, and households maintained by

females with no husband present are not different. The percentage decline in median

income for households maintained by a

female with no husband present is not different from the percentage declines for nonfamily households and households maintained by males with no wife present.

11 Data users should exercise caution

when interpreting aggregate results for the

Asian and Pacific Islander (API) population

because the API population consists of many

distinct groups that differ in socio-economic

characteristics, culture, and recency of immigration. In addition, the CPS does not use

separate population controls for weighting

the API sample to national totals. 12 The differences between the percent

declines in the median household income of

Blacks compared with that of non-Hispanic

White and Asian and Pacific Islander households are not statistically significant. 13 For a discussion of standardizing

income by size of family using the official

poverty thresholds, see Current Population

Reports, Series P60-219, “Poverty in the

United States: 2001.”

9 The median household income of native

households was not different from the median for households maintained by a naturalized citizen. The difference between percentage changes for households with

noncitizen householders and households

with native, foreign-born, and naturalized

citizens were not statistically significant. In

addition, the differences between the percentage change for foreign-born households

and those with a naturalized householder

was not significant. 10 Data users should exercise caution

when interpreting aggregate results for the

Hispanic population because this population

consists of many distinct groups that differ

in socio-economic characteristics, culture,

and recency of immigration. Data were first

collected for Hispanics in 1972. 
4 Money Income in the United States: 2001 U.S. Census Bureau

Table 1.

Comparison of Summary Measures of Income by Selected Characteristics: 2000 and 2001

(Households and people as of March of the following year. For meaning of symbols, see text)

Characteristic

2001 Median income in 20001

(in 2001 dollars)

Percent

change in

real income

2000 to

2001

90-percent

confidence

interval2 (±)

of percent

change

Number

(thousands)

Median income

Value

(dollars)

90-percent

confidence

interval2 (±)

(dollars)

Value

(dollars)

90-percent

confidence

interval2 (±)

(dollars)

HOUSEHOLDS

All households ........................... 109,297 42,228 212 43,162 223 *–2.2 0.6

Type of Household

Family households .......................... 74,329 52,275 290 53,155 304 *–1.7 0.6

Married-couple families .................... 56,747 60,471 342 60,926 453 –0.7 0.8

Female householder, no husband present ..... 13,143 28,142 475 29,053 516 *–3.1 1.9

Male householder, no wife present ........... 4,438 40,715 860 43,332 854 *–6.0 2.2

Nonfamily households ....................... 34,969 25,631 278 26,012 279 *–1.5 1.2

Female householder....................... 19,390 20,264 347 21,052 323 *–3.7 1.8

Male householder ......................... 15,579 32,312 395 32,358 358 –0.1 1.3

Race and Hispanic Origin of Householder

All races3

................................ 109,297 42,228 212 43,162 223 *–2.2 0.6

White..................................... 90,682 44,517 344 45,142 328 *–1.4 0.8

Non-Hispanic White ....................... 80,818 46,305 316 46,896 309 *–1.3 0.8

Black ..................................... 13,315 29,470 571 30,495 665 *–3.4 2.3

Asian and Pacific Islander .................... 4,071 53,635 2,106 57,313 1,608 *–6.4 3.7

Hispanic origin4 ............................ 10,499 33,565 701 34,094 808 –1.6 2.1

Age of Householder

Under 65 years............................. 86,821 49,227 327 49,990 338 *–1.5 0.8

15 to 24 years............................ 6,391 28,196 799 28,624 656 –1.5 2.9

25 to 34 years............................ 18,988 45,080 614 45,654 712 –1.3 1.7

35 to 44 years............................ 24,031 53,320 689 55,263 619 *–3.5 1.3

45 to 54 years............................ 22,208 58,045 801 59,251 747 *–2.0 1.5

55 to 64 years............................ 15,203 45,864 699 46,105 742 –0.5 1.8

65 years and over......................... 22,476 23,118 314 23,727 294 *–2.6 1.4

Nativity of the Householder

Native born ................................ 95,884 42,917 339 43,578 250 *–1.5 0.8

Foreign born ............................... 13,413 37,948 943 40,055 977 *–5.3 2.7

Naturalized citizen ........................ 6,069 43,968 1,513 46,492 1,409 *–5.4 3.5

Not a citizen ............................. 7,344 34,812 872 36,345 827 *–4.2 2.6

Region

Northeast ................................. 21,128 45,716 615 44,971 720 1.7 1.7

Midwest................................... 25,755 43,834 574 45,496 560 *–3.7 1.4

South .................................... 39,151 38,904 507 39,460 473 *–1.4 1.4

West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,263 45,087 740 46,169 666 *–2.3 1.7

Residence

Inside metropolitan areas..................... 88,112 45,219 309 45,942 342 *–1.6 0.8

Inside central cities........................ 32,540 36,731 347 37,741 387 *–2.7 1.1

Outside central cities ...................... 55,572 50,697 337 51,606 358 *–1.8 0.8

Outside metropolitan areas ................... 21,185 33,601 604 33,832 692 –0.7 2.2

EARNINGS OF FULL-TIME,

YEAR-ROUND WORKERS

Male ..................................... 58,712 38,275 424 38,292 171 - -

Female ................................... 41,639 29,215 271 28,228 172 *3.5 1.0

PER CAPITA INCOME

All races3

................................ 282,082 22,851 174 22,970 193 –0.5 0.9

White..................................... 230,071 24,127 202 24,240 230 –0.5 1.0

Non-Hispanic White ....................... 194,822 26,134 234 26,242 265 –0.4 1.1

Black ..................................... 36,023 14,953 308 15,209 348 –1.7 2.4

Asian and Pacific Islander .................... 12,500 24,277 1,124 24,002 1,146 1.1 5.2

Hispanic origin4 ............................ 37,438 13,003 326 13,004 402 - -

*Statistically significant change at the 90-percent confidence level.

1

Consistent with 2001 data through implementation of Census 2000-based population controls and a 28,000 household sample expansion.

2

For an explanation of confidence intervals, see ‘‘Standard errors and their use’’ at www.census.gov/hhes/income/income01/sa.pdf. 3

Data for American Indians and Alaska Natives are not shown separately in this table because of the small sample of those households.

4

Hispanics may be of any race.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2002 and 2001 Annual Demographic Supplements.
population.14 Because of the small

size of this racial group, sampling

variability of income data is larger

than for the other racial groups

and causes single-year estimates to

fluctuate more widely. To reduce

the chances of misinterpreting

changes in income or comparison

of income with other groups, the

Census Bureau uses 2-year-average

medians for evaluating changes in

the income of American Indians

and Alaska Natives over time, and

3-year-average medians when comparing the income of this group

with other racial and ethnic origin

groups.15 These 2- and 3-yearaverage medians make the estimates less volatile. 

The 3-year-average (1999-2001)

median household income for

American Indians and Alaska

Natives was $32,116, higher than

the 3-year-average for Blacks

($29,870), not statistically different

from that for Hispanics ($33,439),

but lower than for non-Hispanic

Whites ($46,702) and Asians and

Pacific Islanders ($55,026) (see

Table 2). Based on comparisons of

2-year-average medians (1999-2000

U.S. Census Bureau Money Income in the United States: 2001 5

Figure 1.

Median Household Income by Race and Hispanic Origin: 1967 to 20011

1Hispanics may be of any race. Data for Hispanics not available before 1972. Data for Asians and Pacific Islanders 

not available before 1987.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 1968 to 2002 Annual Demographic Supplements.

Income in 2001 dollars Recession

$53,635

$29,470 

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

1967 1970 1973 1976 1979 1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2001

$46,305

$44,517

$33,565 

Asian and Pacific Islander

Non-Hispanic White

Hispanic origin

 White

Black

14 Data users should exercise caution

when interpreting aggregate results for the

American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN)

population because the AIAN population consists of groups that differ in economic characteristics. Data from the 1990 census show

that the median income of AIAN households

living on reservations or in Alaska Native villages was $18,466 (in 2001 dollars) compared with $30,521 (in 2001 dollars) for

households outside those areas. In addition,

the CPS does not use separate population

controls for weighting the AIAN sample to

national totals. 

15 The 2-year-average median is the sum

of 2 inflation adjusted single-year medians

divided by 2. The 3-year-average median is

the sum of 3 inflation adjusted single-year

medians divided by 3.

Detailed Tabulations

Detailed tabulations that provide income of households,

families, and people 15 years of

age and older are available on

the Internet at:

www.census.gov/hhes/www/

income.html. 

Income data are cross-tabulated by various characteristics

such as age, sex, race,

Hispanic origin, presence of

children, marital status, educational attainment, work experience, occupation, class of

worker, and source of income.

Historical data are available as

well. The historical tables

show income data for households, families, and people by

various characteristics. 
versus 2000-2001), the real median

household income of American

Indians and Alaska Natives did not

change statistically. Of the remaining race/ethnic origin groups, only

non-Hispanic Whites experienced a

change—a decline of 0.6 percent in

their 2-year-average median (see

Table 2).

The Northeast was the only

region that did not experience

a decline in real median

household income between

2000 and 2001.

The median household income of

the Northeast remained unchanged

between 2000 and 2001 at

$45,716, whereas households in

other regions experienced

declines—the Midwest 3.7 percent

to $43,834; the South 1.4 percent

to $38,904; and the West 

2.3 percent to $45,087 (see Table

1).16 The South continues to have

the lowest median household

income among the regions (see

Table 1). Before 2001, regions had

not experienced an annual decline

in median household income since

1992 for the Northeast and 1991

for the other regions. 

Real median income declined

for households in metropolitan

areas between 2000 and 2001.

The real median income of households in metropolitan areas

declined by 1.6 percent, to

$45,219 (see Table 1). The median

income of households inside central cities declined by 2.7 percent,

to $36,731, and 1.8 percent for

households outside central cities,

to $50,697. Households outside

metropolitan areas did not experience a change in income between

2000 and 2001.17

The percentage of men who

worked full-time, year-round

decreased between 2000 

and 2001.

Of the 80.3 million men aged 15

and over who worked in 2001,

73.1 percent worked full-time,

year-round, down from the 74.0

percent in 2000. Of the 71.3 million women in the same age group

who worked in 2001, 58.4 percent

6 Money Income in the United States: 2001 U.S. Census Bureau

Table 2.

Income of Households by Race and Hispanic Origin Using 2- and 3-Year-Average Medians

(Income in 2001 dollars. The 2000 and 2001 income data shown in this table reflect the implementation of Census 2000-based population

controls and a 28,000 household sample expansion. The 1999 income data reflect the use of Census 2000-based population controls. For

meaning of symbols, see text)

Race and Hispanic

origin

3-year-average

(1999-2001)

2-year-average medians2 Differences in 2-yearaverage medians

(2000-2001 less

1999-2000) 2000-2001 1999-2000

Number of

households

(thousands)

Median income1

Median

income

(dollars)

90-percent

confidence

interval3 (±)

(dollars)

Median

income

(dollars)

90-percent

confidence

interval3 (±)

(dollars) Difference

Percent

change

Value

(dollars)

90-percent

confidence

interval3 (±)

(dollars)

All races........ 107,980 42,873 180 42,695 179 43,195 230 *–500 *–1.2

White . . . ............ 89,868 44,872 242 44,829 276 45,050 288 –221 –0.5

Non-Hispanic White . 80,388 46,702 259 46,601 257 46,900 331 *–300 *–0.6

Black ............... 13,109 29,870 503 29,983 508 30,071 650 –88 –0.3

American Indian and

Alaska Native...... 1,077 32,116 1,782 32,143 1,393 32,133 2,396 10 -

Asian and Pacific

Islander ............ 3,925 55,026 1,591 55,474 1,532 55,722 1,998 –248 –0.4

Hispanic4............ 10,037 33,439 584 33,829 665 33,376 699 453 1.4

* Statistically significant at the 90-percent confidence level.

1

The 3-year-average median is the sum of 3 inflation-adjusted single-year medians divided by 3.

2

The 2-year-average median is the sum of 2 inflation-adjusted single-year medians divided by 2.

3

For an explanation of confidence intervals, see ‘‘Standard errors and their use’’ at www.census.gov/hhes/income/income01/sa.pdf. 4

Hispanics may be of any race.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2000, 2001, and 2002 Annual Demographic Supplements.

16 The percentage change in household

income for the West was not statistically different from those for the South and Midwest.

The difference between the 2001 median

household incomes for Northeast and the

West was not statistically significant. 

17 The percentage changes in median

household income among the four metropolitan/nonmetropolitan areas were not statistically different. 
worked full-time, year-round—

unchanged from 2000.

The real median earnings of

women who worked full-time,

year-round increased for the

fifth consecutive year. 

Between 2000 and 2001, the median earnings of women who worked

full-time, year-round increased by

3.5 percent, to $29,215 (see Table

1). Men with similar work experience did not experience a statistical

change in earnings between 2000

and 2001 ($38,275), or between

1999 and 2000, but experienced

annual increases for each of the

previous 3 years. This dissimilar

pattern in the annual changes in

earnings of men and women contributed to a rise in the female-tomale earnings ratio. In 2001, the

earnings ratio reached 0.76, up

from the previous all-time-high of

0.74, first recorded in 1996.

Per capita income remained

statistically unchanged.

The per capita income of the overall population, of each of the race

groups, and of Hispanics, remained

unchanged between 2000 and

2001 (see Table 1). In 2001, per

capita income was $22,851 for the

overall population, $26,134 for

non-Hispanic Whites, $24,277 for

Asians and Pacific Islanders,

$14,953 for Blacks, and $13,003

for Hispanics.

The Gini index indicated no

change in household income

inequality between 2000 and

2001.

The Gini index has not shown an

annual change since 1993.

Comparisons with earlier years are

not recommended because of a

substantial methodological change

in the 1994 CPS Annual

U.S. Census Bureau Money Income in the United States: 2001 7

What are . . .? Full-time,

Year-round workers

worked 50 or more weeks

and 35 or more hours per

week during the calendar

year. Paid vacations are

counted as time worked.

Figure 2.

Median Earnings of Full-Time, Year-Round Workers 

15 Years Old and Over by Sex: 1967 to 2001 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 1968 to 2002 Annual Demographic Supplements.

Earnings in 2001 dollars Recession

$38,275 

$29,215

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

1967 1970 1973 1976 1979 1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2001

Female, full-time, year-round workers

Male, full-time, year-round workers

What is . . .? Earnings consists of: gross money wage or

salary income, including commissions, tips and cash

bonuses, before deductions;

net income from nonfarm

self-employment (gross

receipts minus business

expenses); and net income

from farm self-employment

(gross receipts minus farm

expenses).
Demographic Supplement.

However, it is clear that the 2001

Gini index (0.466) was higher than

in 1999 and earlier years.

In 2001, the share of aggregate

income received by the lowest quintile fell slightly from 3.6 percent in

2000 to 3.5 percent in 2001. All

other quintiles did not change—the

second quintile received 8.7 percent, the third quintile 14.6 percent,

the fourth quintile 23.0 percent,

and the top quintile 50.2 percent

(see Appendix Table A-3).

Another method of measuring

income inequality is to compare

selected positions in the income

distribution (see Appendix Table A3). The household at the 95th percentile in 2001 received $150,499

in income, 8.4 times that of the

household at the 20th percentile

($17,970). This ratio is higher than

it was in 2000 (8.1). However, the

ratio of the 90th percentile to the

10th percentile remained

unchanged at 10.6. Appendix 

Table A-3 presents other measures

of income inequality.18

Most measures of income inequality indicate that inequality rose substantially between 1967 and the

early 1990s and was largely 

8 Money Income in the United States: 2001 U.S. Census Bureau

What is . . .? The Gini

Index summarizes the dispersion of income across the

entire income distribution. It

ranges from 0, which indicates perfect equality (where

everyone receives an equal

amount), to 1, which denotes

perfect inequality (where all

the income is received by

only one recipient or group of

recipients). 

What are . . .? Aggregate

Shares are computed by

ranking households from lowest to highest income and

then dividing them into

groups of equal size, typically

quintiles. The aggregate

income of each group divided

by the overall aggregate

income is each group’s share. 

Figure 3.

Index of Change for Various Measures of Household Income 

Inequality: 1967 to 2001

Note: Because of changes in data collection methodology, 1992 and earlier estimates of income inequality are not 

comparable with those for 1993 and beyond. (See Current Population Reports, Series P60-204, “The Changing Shape of 

the Nation’s Income Distribution: 1947-1998” for more details.) 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 1968 to 2002 Annual Demographic Supplements. 

Percent change since 1967

Atkinson e=0.25

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

1967 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2001

Gini index of 

income inequality

Atkinson e=0.75

Theil

Mean logarithmic 

deviation of income

Recession

18 See Current Population Reports, Series

P60-204, “The Changing Shape of the

Nation’s Income Distribution, 1947-98,” for

trends in other income inequality measures.
unchanged through the late 1990s

(see Figure 3).19

High-income households

tended to be family households

that included two or more

earners, lived in the suburbs of

a large city, and had a working

householder between 35 and

54 years old. In contrast, 

low-income households tended

to be in a city with an elderly

householder who lived alone

and did not work. 

The 20 percent of households with

the highest income (the highest

quintile) received at least $83,500

during 2001. The lowest 20 percent of households (the lowest

quintile) received less than

$17,970 during 2001.

Half of households in the top quintile lived in a metropolitan area

outside a city of 1 million or more

people (see Table 3). Only 10.4

percent lived outside any metropolitan area. Among households in

the lowest income quintile, about

one-quarter (24.5 percent) lived in

a metropolitan area outside a city

of 1 million or more, and 

one-quarter (24.9 percent) lived

outside a metropolitan area.20

Nearly 9 out of 10 households

(87.3 percent) in the top quintile

were family households while 8

out of 10 (79.9 percent) were married-couple households. Among

low-income households, only

about 4 out of 10 (40.8 percent)

were family households, and only

2 out of 10 (19.6 percent) were

married-couple households. 

A high-income household in 2001

tended to have a householder in his

or her peak earning years— about 6

out of 10 householders (59.5 percent) were between 35 and 54 years

old. Among low-income households,

only one-quarter of householders

(25.0 percent) were between 35 and

54, and the largest proportion (39.7

percent) were over 65 years old.

Most high-income households

(78.0 percent) had two or more

earners contributing to household

income while only 2.6 percent of

households in the top quintile had

no earners. Among low-income

households, the majority (59.4 percent) had no earners, and 6.1 percent had two or more.

The majority of high-income

households (73.7 percent) had a

householder who worked full-time,

year-round; only 10.4 percent of

high-income households had a

nonworking householder. Among

low-income households, most

householders (64.7 percent) did

not work in 2001, and 13.5 percent worked full-time, year-round.

Real median household

income rose for 3 states and

declined for 12 states. 

Based on comparisons of 2-yearaverage medians (comparing 1999-

2000 with 2000-2001), real median

household income rose for 3 states

(Arizona, Massachusetts, and

Pennsylvania) and declined for 12

states (see Table 4 and Figure 4).21

Five of the states that experienced

declines were in the Midwest

(Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan,

and Wisconsin), four in the South

(Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, and

Tennessee), two in the Northeast

(Maine and Vermont), and one in

the West (Washington). 

Comparing the relative ranking of

states using 3-year-average medians for 1999-2001 shows that the

median household income for

Alaska, although not statistically

different from the median incomes

for Maryland, Connecticut, and

Minnesota, was higher than that

for the remaining 46 states and the

District of Columbia. Conversely,

the median household income for

West Virginia, although not

statistically different from the

median for Arkansas, was lower

than the incomes of the remaining

48 states and the District of

Columbia. The relative standing of

the remaining states and the

District of Columbia was less clear

because of sampling variability

surrounding the estimates. 

EXPERIMENTAL ESTIMATES

OF INCOME INCLUDING

NONCASH BENEFITS 

AND TAXES

Traditionally, income data presented

in the Census Bureau’s reports have

been based on the amount of

money received during a calendar

year before taxes and excluding

capital gains, but this restricted definition of income does not provide a

completely satisfactory measure of

income. Over time, tax laws may

change and affect the economic

well-being of the population. In the

early 1980s, the Census Bureau

embarked on a research program to

examine the effects of taxes on economic well being. Four types of

modeled tax data are included here:

federal individual income taxes,

state individual income taxes, property taxes on owner-occupied housing, and payroll taxes. 

Because noncash benefits increase

the income resources available to

individuals and families, this report

U.S. Census Bureau Money Income in the United States: 2001 9

21 To reduce the possibilities of misinterpreting changes in, or rankings of, income

estimates for states, the Census Bureau uses

2-year-average medians for evaluating

changes in state estimates over time, and 3-

year-average medians when comparing the

relative ranking of states.

19 A change in data collection methodology in 1993 affected income measurement and

overstated the increase in income inequality

that year. See Paul Ryscavage, “A Surge in

Growing Income Inequality?,” Monthly Labor

Review, August 1995, pp. 51-61. 20 The difference between the percent of

households living in suburbs and the percent

living outside of a metropolitan area was not

statistically significant.
also presents income measures

that include the valuation of various noncash benefits, such as food

stamps, school lunches, housing

subsidies, medicare, medicaid,

employer contributions to health

insurance, and net imputed returns

on home equity.22

Taxes, government transfers,

and other benefits affect the

distribution and the level of

income.

As shown in Table 5, there was a

decline in real income between

2000 and 2001 for 13 (definitions

1-13) of the 15 definitions of

income (only a few of which are

discussed below). 

Definition 1, the official definition

of income, is based on money

income before taxes and includes

government cash transfers.

Between 2000 and 2001, real

median income of households

declined, 2.2 percent, to $42,228.

Under Definition 1, the share of

aggregate household income

received by each quintile was 3.5

percent for the lowest, 8.8 percent

for the second, 14.5 percent for

the third, 23.1 percent for the

fourth, and 50.1 percent for the

highest. The Gini index for all

households under Definition 1 was

10 Money Income in the United States: 2001 U.S. Census Bureau

Table 3.

Distribution of Households by Selected Characteristics Within Income Quintiles: 2001

(Households as of March 2002)

Characteristic Lowest quintile Middle three quintiles Highest quintile

Type of Residence ............................................ 100.0 100.0 100.0

Inside metropolitan area. . ....................................... 75.1 79.5 89.6

Inside central cities ........................................... 36.4 29.3 24.6

Outside central cities ......................................... 38.7 50.2 65.0

Metropolitan area of 1 million or more . ....................... 24.5 33.6 50.2

Metropolitan area under 1 million............................. 14.2 16.6 14.8

Outside metropolitan area ....................................... 24.9 20.5 10.4

Type of Household ............................................ 100.0 100.0 100.0

Family households ............................................. 40.8 70.6 87.3

Married-couple families ....................................... 19.6 53.4 79.9

Other families ................................................ 21.2 17.3 7.4

Nonfamily households .......................................... 59.2 29.4 12.7

Householder living alone . . . ................................... 55.9 23.1 6.5

Age of Householder . . ......................................... 100.0 100.0 100.0

15 to 34 years ................................................. 21.9 25.9 16.4

35 to 54 years ................................................. 25.0 42.3 59.5

55 to 64 years ................................................. 13.4 13.4 16.2

65 years or older ............................................... 39.7 18.4 7.9

Number of Earners . . . . . ....................................... 100.0 100.0 100.0

No earners .................................................... 59.4 13.9 2.6

One earner .................................................... 34.5 41.0 19.4

Two or more earners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1 45.2 78.0

Work Experience of Householder .............................. 100.0 100.0 100.0

Worked ....................................................... 35.3 76.1 89.6

Worked full-time, year-round ................................... 13.5 56.7 73.7

Worked part-time or part-year. ................................. 21.7 19.4 15.8

Did not work ................................................... 64.7 23.9 10.4

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2002 Annual Demographic Supplement.

Model-Based State

Estimates

The Census Bureau also computes improved (in the sense of

having lower standard errors)

annual estimates of median

household income for states,

as well as biennial estimates

for counties, based on models

using data from the CPS, the

1990 decennial census, and

administrative records. Statelevel estimates for 1998 are

available on the Internet at:

www.census.gov/hhes/www/

saipe.html. Estimates for

income year 1999 will be available later this fall.

22 For more information on the methodology and procedures used to estimate taxes

and to value noncash benefits see Current

Population Reports, P60-186RD, “Measuring

the Effect of Benefits and Taxes on Income

and Poverty: 1992.”
U.S. Census Bureau Money Income in the United States: 2001 11

Table 4.

Income of Households by State Using 2- and 3-Year-Average Medians

(Income in 2001 dollars. The 2000 income data used in this table reflect the implementation of Census 2000-based population controls and

a 28,000 household sample expansion. The 1999 income data reflect the use of Census 2000-based population controls)

State

3-year-average median1

1999-2001

2-year-average medians2

2000-2001 average less

1999-2000 average 2000-2001 1999-2000

Median

income

(dollars)

90-percent

confidence

interval3 (±)

(dollars)

Median

income

(dollars)

90-percent

confidence

interval3 (±)

(dollars)

Median

income

(dollars)

90-percent

confidence

interval3 (±)

(dollars) Difference

Percent

change

United States ..... 42,873 180 42,695 179 43,195 230 *–500 *–1.2

Alabama............ 36,693 1,294 35,786 1,425 37,460 1,600 *–1,673 *–4.5

Alaska ............. 55,426 2,103 55,842 2,199 54,458 2,465 1,385 2.5

Arizona............. 40,965 1,489 41,799 1,817 40,095 1,654 *1,704 *4.2

Arkansas ........... 31,798 1,146 31,932 1,320 31,027 1,280 905 2.9

California ........... 47,243 834 47,692 968 47,233 981 459 1.0

Colorado ........... 50,053 1,549 49,492 1,664 50,380 1,929 –889 –1.8

Connecticut ......... 52,887 1,979 52,460 1,782 52,657 2,636 –197 –0.4

Delaware ........... 50,301 2,099 50,686 2,040 50,650 2,716 36 0.1

District of Columbia. . . 41,539 1,476 41,771 1,436 41,724 1,913 47 0.1

Florida ............. 38,141 732 38,181 814 39,000 967 *–820 *–2.1

Georgia ............ 42,508 1,281 42,823 1,306 42,474 1,574 349 0.8

Hawaii ............. 49,232 1,700 50,212 1,677 50,129 2,170 83 0.2

Idaho .............. 38,310 1,430 38,451 1,486 38,344 1,847 107 0.3

Illinois.............. 47,578 1,140 46,760 1,266 48,281 1,410 *–1,521 *–3.1

Indiana ............. 41,921 1,352 41,192 1,118 42,692 1,786 –1,500 *–3.5

Iowa ............... 42,255 1,199 41,556 1,336 42,895 1,385 –1,339 *–3.1

Kansas............. 41,097 1,764 41,810 1,565 40,938 2,351 872 2.1

Kentucky ........... 37,184 1,325 37,857 1,272 36,557 1,687 1,300 3.6

Louisiana ........... 33,194 1,274 32,449 1,392 33,130 1,485 –682 –2.1

Maine .............. 38,733 1,236 37,459 1,236 39,793 1,559 *–2,334 *–5.9

Maryland ........... 55,013 2,079 54,794 2,091 55,755 2,600 –962 –1.7

Massachusetts....... 49,018 1,935 50,155 1,969 47,400 2,421 *2,755 *5.8

Michigan ........... 46,929 1,195 45,915 1,353 47,869 1,497 *–1,955 *–4.1

Minnesota .......... 52,804 1,765 54,223 1,971 52,865 2,280 1,358 2.6

Mississippi .......... 33,305 1,570 32,709 1,745 34,877 1,952 *–2,169 *–6.2

Missouri ............ 43,884 1,414 43,847 1,638 45,157 1,680 –1,309 –2.9

Montana............ 32,929 1,086 32,909 1,201 33,330 1,389 –422 –1.3

Nebraska ........... 42,518 1,379 43,263 1,462 41,972 1,698 1,291 3.1

Nevada ............ 45,493 1,556 46,219 1,466 45,538 2,007 681 1.5

New Hampshire...... 50,866 1,640 51,839 1,374 50,634 2,295 1,205 2.4

New Jersey ......... 52,137 1,328 51,791 1,319 52,320 1,711 –529 –1.0

New Mexico......... 34,599 1,681 34,598 1,704 35,337 2,137 –738 –2.1

New York . . . . . . . . . . . 42,157 819 41,998 809 42,179 1,046 –181 –0.4

North Carolina ....... 39,040 1,065 38,774 1,204 39,479 1,252 –705 –1.8

North Dakota ........ 35,830 1,314 36,397 1,290 35,848 1,741 549 1.5

Ohio ............... 42,631 951 42,973 956 43,053 1,226 –80 –0.2

Oklahoma .......... 34,554 1,186 34,473 959 34,027 1,613 446 1.3

Oregon............. 42,701 1,184 42,479 1,163 43,416 1,558 –937 –2.2

Pennsylvania ........ 42,320 1,025 43,426 978 41,730 1,328 *1,696 *4.1

Rhode Island ........ 44,825 1,665 44,549 1,483 44,376 2,185 173 0.4

South Carolina....... 38,362 1,479 38,177 1,342 38,675 1,935 –497 –1.3

South Dakota........ 38,407 974 38,582 1,058 37,775 1,163 807 2.1

Tennessee .......... 36,542 1,218 35,415 1,183 36,921 1,599 *–1,506 *–4.1

Texas .............. 40,547 948 40,273 902 40,391 1,284 –118 –0.3

Utah ............... 48,378 1,657 48,110 1,822 48,896 1,907 –787 –1.6

Vermont ............ 41,888 1,302 40,747 1,278 42,435 1,670 *–1,689 *–4.0

Virginia............. 49,085 1,587 49,360 1,516 48,508 2,044 853 1.8

Washington ......... 44,835 1,823 43,101 1,695 46,007 2,378 *–2,906 *–6.3

West Virginia ........ 30,342 990 29,952 903 30,676 1,299 –723 –2.4

Wisconsin .......... 46,734 1,583 45,846 1,422 47,427 2,065 – 1,581 *–3.3

Wyoming ........... 40,007 1,379 40,227 1,522 40,150 1,661 77 0.2

* Statistically significant at the 90-percent confidence level.

1

The 3-year-average median is the sum of 3 inflation-adjusted single-year medians divided by 3.

2

The 2-year-average median is the sum of 2 inflation-adjusted single-year medians divided by 2.

3

For an explanation of confidence intervals, see ‘‘Standard errors and their use’’ at www.census.gov/hhes/income/income01/sa.pdf.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2000, 2001, and 2002 Annual Demographic Supplements.
12 Money Income in the United States: 2001 U.S. Census Bureau

0.450 in 2001, unchanged from

2000.23

Definition 4 reflects income

generated by the private

sector and results in a more

unequal distribution than the

official definition of income.

Definition 4 excludes cash transfers, adds net capital gains, and

adds employer contributions to

health insurance. Under this definition of income, the shares of

income received by the lowest two

quintiles of households declined

from that of Definition 1 (from 

3.5 percent to 0.9 percent, and

from 8.8 percent to 6.9 percent,

respectively), while the share

received by the highest quintile

increased from 50.1 percent to

55.6 percent (see Table 6). The

Gini index under this definition of

income, 0.510, was 13.3 percent

higher (showing more income

inequality) than the index under

the official income definition

(0.450).

The 2001 median income for

Definition 4 was $41,346, 97.9

percent of the official definition.24

Between 2000 and 2001, real

median income under this definition declined 2.0 percent.

The net effect of deducting

social security payroll taxes,

federal and state income

taxes, and adding the earned

income tax credit was to

reduce income inequality.

This result is shown by Definition

8. The share of income going to

TX

NM

WA

-6.3

NV

MI

-4.1

IL

-3.1

MO

MT

WY

ID

UT

CO

HI

NE

AK

KS

OK

WI

-3.3

IA

-3.1

LA

ME

-5.9

VT

-4.0

IN

-3.5

KY

TN

-4.1

AL

-4.5

GA

OH

WV

NC

SC

NJ

MD

CT

RI

MA +5.8

DE

SD

VA

AR

CA

AZ

+4.2

NY

DC

OR

PA

+4.1

ND

MN

MS

-6.2

FL

-2.1

NH

Increase

No change

Decrease

Median Household Income Change 

Figure 4. 

Percent Change in 2-Year-Average Median Household 

Income by State: 1999-2000 to 2000-2001 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2000, 2001, and 2002 Annual Demographic Supplements. 

24 Differences among income definitions

are all significant because they come from

the same sample. 

23 This report presents Gini indexes and

shares of aggregate income received by each

quintile using two methods. The first

method, discussed in the text, sorts individual households by income yielding a Gini

index of 0.466 and quintile shares of 3.5, 8.8,

14.6, 23.0, and 50.2. The second method,

reported in Table 6, uses group data and

employs several interpolation routines resulting in a Gini index of 0.450 and quintile

shares of 3.5, 8.8, 14.5, 23.1, and 50.1. 
the bottom three quintiles

increased, and the share received

by the highest quintile declined.

The Gini index was 0.492, or 

3.5 percent below the value of

0.510 for Definition 4.

The 2001 median income for

Definition 8 was $34,927, 82.7

percent of the official definition.

Between 2000 and 2001, real

median income declined 1.6 percent under Definition 8. 

Nonmeans-tested cash

transfers reduced income

inequality more than taxes. 

Nonmeans-tested cash transfers,

such as social security, lowered the

Gini index by 13.4 percent, from

0.492 to 0.426, as shown by comparing Definition 11 estimates with

Definition 8 estimates. Including

the benefits increased the share of

income going to the lowest quintile (from 1.2 percent to 3.9 percent) and lowered the share going

to the highest quintile (from 51.8

percent to 47.7 percent).

The 2001 median income under

Definition 11 was $40,653, 96.3

percent of the official definition.

Between 2000 and 2001, real

median income declined 0.6 percent for Definition 11.

Means-tested noncash

transfers also reduced income

inequality, as shown by

Definition 14. 

When means-tested noncash transfers were included, the share of

income in the lowest quintile

increased (from 3.9 percent to 4.5

percent) while the share in the

highest quintile decreased (from

47.7 percent to 47.0 percent). The

Gini index declined 3.3 percent

from 0.426 to 0.412.25

The 2001 median income for

Definition 14 was $41,533, 98.4

percent of the official definition.

Between 2000 and 2001, real

median income did not change

under this definition of income.

An important finding of the

Census Bureau’s tax and

noncash benefit research is

that government transfers

have a greater impact on

lowering income inequality

than the tax system.

In 2001, subtracting taxes and

including the earned income credit

(EIC) lowered the Gini index by 

U.S. Census Bureau Money Income in the United States: 2001 13

Table 5.

Median Household Income by Definition: 2000 and 2001

(Income in 2001 dollars)

Definition of income

Median income

Percent change

2001-2000

Percent of

official definition

of income2 2001 2000

Income before taxes:

1. Money income excluding capital gains (official measure)...... 42,228 43,162 *–2.2 100.0

2. Definition 1 less government cash transfers ................. 39,010 39,811 *–2.0 92.4

3. Definition 2 plus capital gains ............................. 39,561 40,427 *–2.1 93.7

4. Definition 3 plus health insurance supplements to wage or

salary income . ......................................... 41,346 42,209 *–2.0 97.9

Income after taxes:

5. Definition 4 less social security payroll taxes . ............... 38,773 39,546 *–2.0 91.8

6. Definition 5 less federal income taxes (excluding the EIC) .... 35,885 36,458 *–1.6 85.0

7. Definition 6 plus the earned income credit (EIC)1 ............ 36,072 36,628 *–1.5 85.4

8. Definition 7 less state income taxes ........................ 34,927 35,495 *–1.6 82.7

9. Defintion 8 plus nonmeans-tested government cash transfers . 38,628 39,062 *–1.1 91.5

10. Definition 9 plus the value of medicare ..................... 40,635 40,903 *–0.7 96.2

11. Definition 10 plus the value of regular-price school lunches . . . 40,653 40,918 *–0.6 96.3

12. Definition 11 plus means-tested government cash transfers . . . 40,819 41,115 *–0.7 96.7

13. Definition 12 plus the value of medicaid . . .................. 41,373 41,517 –0.3 98.0

14. Definition 13 plus the value of other means-tested

government noncash transfers ........................... 41,533 41,654 –0.3 98.4

15. Definition 14 plus net imputed return on equity in own home . . 43,237 (NA) (NA) 102.4

* Statistically significant at the 90-percent confidence level. NA Not available.

1 Thirteen states (Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont,

and Wisconsin) and District of Columbia have an EIC that uses federal eligibility rules to compute the state credit. The remaining states do not have state EIC. 2 Differences between income definitions are all significant because they come from the same sample.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2001 and 2002 Annual Demographic Supplements.

25 There was no change in income

inequality between 2000 and 2001 using the

most comprehensive definition of income.

However, the 2001 Gini index for definition

14 is higher than in 1997.
3.5 percent (from 0.510 to 0.492),

while including transfers lowered

the Gini index by 16.3 percent

(from 0.492 to 0.412).

CPS Data Collection

The information in this report was

collected in the 50 states and the

District of Columbia and does not

include residents of Puerto Rico

and outlying areas. The estimates

in this report are controlled to

national population estimates by

age, race, sex, and Hispanic origin,

and to state population estimates

by age, and are based on the new

expanded CPS sample. For more

information on the CPS expansion,

see Appendix B. The population

controls used to prepare the estimates in this report are based on

results of Census 2000.

The CPS excludes armed forces

personnel living on military bases

and people living in institutions.

For further documentation about

the CPS Annual Demographic

Supplement, see

www.bls.census.gov/cps/ads/

adsmain.htm.

Rounding

The Census Bureau rounds percentages to the nearest tenth of a percent; therefore, the percentages in

a distribution do not always sum

to exactly 100.0 percent.

Symbols Used in Tables

- Represents zero or rounds to

zero.

B Base less than 75,000.

NA Not available.

r Revised.

X Not applicable.

USER COMMENTS

The Census Bureau welcomes the

comments and advice of users of

data and reports. If you have any

suggestions or comments, please

write to:

Edward J. Welniak, Jr.

Chief, Income Surveys Branch

Housing and Household Economic

Statistics Division

U.S. Census Bureau

Washington, DC 20233-8500

edward.j.welniak.jr@census.gov

14 Money Income in the United States: 2001 U.S. Census Bureau

What are . . .? Government

Cash Transfers include

social security, railroad retirement, black lung, unemployment compensation, workers’

compensation, veterans’ benefits, government educational

assistance, cash public assistance, and supplemental security income.

Table 6.

Percentage of Aggregate Income Received by Income Quintiles and Gini Index

by Definition of Income: 2001

Definition of income

Quintiles

Lowest Second Third Fourth Highest Gini index

Definition 1 (official measure) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5 8.8 14.5 23.1 50.1 .450

Definition 4 (definition 1 less government cash transfers

plus capital gains and employee health benefits) . . . . . . . . 0.9 6.9 13.7 22.8 55.6 .510

Definition 8 (definition 4 less taxes, plus EIC). . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 8.1 15.0 23.9 51.8 .492

Definition 11 (definition 8 plus nonmeans tested

government cash transfers, value of medicare, and value

of regular-price school lunches) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.9 10.0 15.6 22.8 47.7 .426

Definition 14 (definition 11 plus means-tested government

cash transfers, value of medicaid, and value of other

means-tested government noncash transfers) . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5 10.3 15.6 22.6 47.0 .412

Definition 15 (definition 14 plus return on home equity) . . . . 4.7 10.4 15.6 22.7 46.5 .407

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2002 Annual Demographic Supplement.

What are . . .? Nonmeanstested Cash Transfers

include social security, railroad retirement, black lung,

unemployment compensation,

workers’ compensation, nonmeans-tested veterans’ benefits, and government educational assistance.

What are . . .? Means-tested

Cash Transfers include cash

public assistance, supplemental

security income, and meanstested veterans’ benefits.
U.S. Census Bureau Money Income in the United States: 2001 15

Table A-1.

Households by Total Money Income, Race, and Hispanic Origin of Householder:

1967 to 2001

(Income in 2001 CPI-U-RS adjusted dollars. Households as of March of the following year. For meaning of symbols, see text)

Race and

Hispanic origin

of householder

and year Number

(thousands)

Percent distribution Median income Mean income

Total

Under

$5,000

$5,000

to

$9,999

$10,000

to

$14,999

$15,000

to

$24,999

$25,000

to

$34,999

$35,000

to

$49,999

$50,000

to

$74,999

$75,000

to

$99,999

$100,000

and over

Value

(dollars)

Standard

error

(dollars)

Value

(dollars)

Standard

error

(dollars)

ALL RACES

2001 ....... 109,297 100.0 3.1 5.9 6.9 13.3 12.4 15.4 18.4 10.8 13.8 42,228 129 58,208 232

2000 1 ...... 108,209 100.0 2.9 5.8 6.9 13.0 12.5 15.4 18.6 10.8 14.1 43,162 136 58,730 225

2000 2 ...... 106,418 100.0 2.8 5.9 6.8 13.1 12.5 15.1 18.9 10.8 14.1 43,327 202 58,639 328

1999 ....... 104,705 100.0 2.7 5.8 7.0 13.3 12.3 15.5 18.6 10.8 14.0 43,355 204 58,254 305

1998 ....... 103,874 100.0 3.0 6.3 7.0 13.4 12.6 15.4 18.7 10.7 12.7 42,173 249 56,240 304

1997 ....... 102,528 100.0 3.1 6.7 7.3 13.9 12.5 16.0 18.5 10.2 11.8 40,699 188 54,653 306

1996 ....... 101,018 100.0 3.0 7.0 7.8 14.2 13.0 15.6 18.8 9.9 10.8 39,869 201 52,934 297

1995 3 ...... 99,627 100.0 3.1 6.9 7.8 14.5 12.9 16.3 18.4 9.8 10.3 39,306 227 51,835 284

1994 4 ...... 98,990 100.0 3.3 7.5 7.8 14.8 12.7 16.4 17.9 9.5 10.0 38,119 174 50,961 274

1993 5 ...... 97,107 100.0 3.6 7.7 7.9 14.4 13.3 16.4 17.9 9.2 9.7 37,688 176 49,977 270

1992 6 ...... 96,426 100.0 3.5 7.8 7.9 14.7 12.9 16.5 18.6 9.1 9.0 37,880 179 48,024 202

1991 ....... 95,669 100.0 3.1 7.8 7.5 14.3 13.6 16.7 18.7 9.4 9.0 38,183 184 48,064 198

1990 ....... 94,312 100.0 3.1 7.5 7.3 13.9 13.3 17.3 18.9 9.4 9.2 39,324 201 49,121 208

1989 ....... 93,347 100.0 2.9 7.3 7.2 14.1 12.8 16.8 19.3 9.7 9.8 39,850 219 50,347 219

1988 ....... 92,830 100.0 3.0 7.8 7.3 14.1 12.6 16.8 19.6 9.7 9.0 39,144 191 48,910 219

1987 7 ...... 91,124 100.0 3.2 7.9 7.4 14.0 13.1 16.8 19.3 9.6 8.7 38,835 185 48,297 198

1986 ....... 89,479 100.0 3.5 8.0 7.3 14.5 12.9 17.2 19.0 9.4 8.3 38,365 199 47,398 193

1985 8 ...... 88,458 100.0 3.4 8.1 7.7 14.6 13.9 17.2 18.7 9.1 7.3 37,059 201 45,607 180

1984 ....... 86,789 100.0 3.3 8.2 8.0 15.1 13.8 17.6 18.6 8.5 6.9 36,343 165 44,530 164

1983 9 ...... 85,290 100.0 3.5 8.3 8.0 15.5 14.3 17.6 18.6 8.0 6.2 35,438 160 43,179 160

1982 ....... 83,918 100.0 3.5 8.6 8.3 15.4 13.7 18.7 18.2 7.8 5.9 35,423 160 42,690 158

1981 ....... 83,527 100.0 3.2 8.7 8.1 15.8 13.6 18.1 19.1 7.8 5.5 35,478 186 42,384 154

1980 ....... 82,368 100.0 3.0 8.5 8.2 15.2 13.9 18.4 19.4 7.8 5.6 36,035 185 42,857 157

1979 10 ..... 80,776 100.0 2.9 8.4 7.6 14.9 13.7 18.3 20.2 8.0 6.0 37,192 176 44,181 167

1978 ....... 77,330 100.0 2.7 8.4 8.0 14.9 13.6 18.6 20.0 8.1 5.7 37,234 151 43,824 168

1977 ....... 76,030 100.0 2.9 8.9 8.5 15.5 14.2 18.9 19.4 7.0 4.7 34,989 131 41,506 126

1976 11 ..... 74,142 100.0 3.0 9.0 8.3 15.9 14.2 19.6 19.0 6.8 4.3 34,792 129 40,924 126

1975 12 ..... 72,867 100.0 3.1 9.2 8.6 15.8 15.0 19.4 18.6 6.3 4.0 34,219 139 39,958 125

1974 13 12 . . . 71,163 100.0 3.0 8.8 7.8 15.2 15.4 19.5 19.1 6.9 4.4 35,159 135 41,116 129

1973 ....... 69,859 100.0 3.5 8.0 8.1 14.7 14.6 19.5 19.7 7.1 4.8 36,278 138 41,955 128

1972 14 ..... 68,251 100.0 3.9 8.4 7.9 14.6 14.8 20.2 19.1 6.6 4.6 35,560 136 41,387 128

1971 15 ..... 66,676 100.0 4.5 8.8 7.5 15.4 15.5 20.9 17.8 5.8 3.7 34,126 132 39,248 125

1970 ....... 64,778 100.0 4.6 8.6 7.4 15.0 15.4 21.5 18.0 5.9 3.7 34,481 126 39,483 126

1969 ....... 63,401 100.0 4.6 8.5 7.2 14.8 15.8 21.7 18.3 5.6 3.6 34,714 128 39,493 124

1968 ....... 62,214 100.0 4.9 8.5 7.6 15.1 17.4 21.4 17.4 4.8 2.9 33,436 121 37,828 121

1967 16 ..... 60,813 100.0 5.7 8.9 7.7 15.9 16.9 22.1 15.3 4.4 2.9 32,081 117 35,881 117

WHITE

2001 ....... 90,682 100.0 2.4 5.2 6.7 13.0 12.2 15.5 18.8 11.4 14.8 44,517 209 60,512 260

2000 1 ...... 90,030 100.0 2.3 5.2 6.7 12.6 12.4 15.5 19.1 11.3 14.9 45,142 199 60,908 254

2000 2 ...... 88,543 100.0 2.3 5.3 6.4 12.7 12.6 15.0 19.4 11.4 14.9 45,467 283 60,935 373

1999 ....... 87,671 100.0 2.2 5.0 6.6 13.1 12.2 15.7 19.2 11.4 14.7 45,148 255 60,449 344

1998 ....... 87,212 100.0 2.4 5.4 6.6 13.0 12.6 15.6 19.5 11.3 13.6 44,372 222 58,791 346

1997 ....... 86,106 100.0 2.5 5.8 6.9 13.6 12.4 16.2 19.1 10.8 12.7 42,863 272 57,083 348

1996 ....... 85,059 100.0 2.3 6.1 7.4 13.8 13.0 15.8 19.5 10.4 11.6 41,743 216 55,036 326

1995 3 ...... 84,511 100.0 2.4 6.0 7.4 14.2 12.8 16.6 19.1 10.2 11.1 41,255 216 53,900 313

1994 4 ...... 83,737 100.0 2.7 6.4 7.4 14.5 12.6 16.8 18.5 10.1 10.8 40,204 226 53,207 310

1993 5 ...... 82,387 100.0 2.8 6.6 7.4 14.2 13.2 16.8 18.8 9.7 10.4 39,762 232 52,217 302

1992 6 ...... 81,795 100.0 2.7 6.7 7.5 14.4 13.0 16.9 19.5 9.7 9.7 39,825 193 50,192 224

1991 ....... 81,675 100.0 2.4 6.7 7.1 14.0 13.7 17.0 19.5 9.9 9.7 40,012 194 50,094 218

1990 ....... 80,968 100.0 2.4 6.4 6.9 13.8 13.4 17.8 19.7 10.0 9.9 41,016 188 51,103 229

1989 ....... 80,163 100.0 2.3 6.2 6.8 13.8 12.8 17.1 20.3 10.2 10.5 41,918 204 52,444 243

1988 ....... 79,734 100.0 2.5 6.6 6.7 13.7 12.6 17.3 20.6 10.2 9.7 41,382 244 50,996 240

See footnotes at end of table.

Appendix A. DETAILED TABLES
16 Money Income in the United States: 2001 U.S. Census Bureau

Table A-1.

Households by Total Money Income, Race, and Hispanic Origin of Householder:

1967 to 2001—Con.

(Income in 2001 CPI-U-RS adjusted dollars. Households as of March of the following year. For meaning of symbols, see text)

Race and

Hispanic origin

of householder

and year Number

(thousands)

Percent distribution Median income Mean income

Total

Under

$5,000

$5,000

to

$9,999

$10,000

to

$14,999

$15,000

to

$24,999

$25,000

to

$34,999

$35,000

to

$49,999

$50,000

to

$74,999

$75,000

to

$99,999

$100,000

and over

Value

(dollars)

Standard

error

(dollars)

Value

(dollars)

Standard

error

(dollars)

WHITE—Con.

1987 7 ...... 78,519 100.0 2.5 6.7 7.0 13.6 13.1 17.3 20.3 10.3 9.3 40,917 207 50,360 218

1986 ....... 77,284 100.0 2.7 7.1 6.8 14.0 12.9 17.7 19.9 10.0 8.9 40,334 196 49,372 211

1985 8 ...... 76,576 100.0 2.8 7.1 7.3 14.2 13.9 17.7 19.6 9.6 7.9 39,083 209 47,479 199

1984 ....... 75,328 100.0 2.7 7.2 7.4 14.7 13.8 18.1 19.6 9.0 7.4 38,341 193 46,367 180

1983 9 ...... 74,170 100.0 2.8 7.3 7.4 15.2 14.4 18.2 19.5 8.5 6.7 37,153 167 44,983 174

1982 ....... 73,182 100.0 2.9 7.6 7.7 14.9 13.9 19.1 19.0 8.4 6.4 37,084 169 44,449 174

1981 ....... 72,845 100.0 2.7 7.6 7.6 15.3 13.8 18.7 20.0 8.3 6.0 37,485 173 44,161 167

1980 ....... 71,872 100.0 2.5 7.5 7.6 14.8 14.0 18.9 20.4 8.3 6.1 38,017 195 44,587 171

1979 10 ..... 70,766 100.0 2.5 7.4 7.0 14.4 13.7 18.7 21.2 8.6 6.5 38,995 185 45,923 183

1978 ....... 68,028 100.0 2.4 7.3 7.5 14.5 13.6 19.0 21.0 8.6 6.1 38,707 171 45,447 183

1977 ....... 66,934 100.0 2.6 7.9 8.0 14.9 14.2 19.5 20.4 7.5 5.1 36,793 155 43,127 139

1976 11 ..... 65,353 100.0 2.6 8.0 7.7 15.4 14.3 20.1 20.0 7.2 4.7 36,446 151 42,499 137

1975 12 ..... 64,392 100.0 2.7 8.2 8.1 15.5 14.9 19.9 19.6 6.7 4.3 35,785 130 41,434 136

1974 13 12 . . . 62,984 100.0 2.6 7.9 7.3 14.6 15.4 20.1 20.0 7.3 4.7 36,770 138 42,639 138

1973 ....... 61,965 100.0 3.1 7.3 7.5 14.1 14.5 20.0 20.8 7.6 5.1 38,021 145 43,578 138

1972 14 ..... 60,618 100.0 3.4 7.7 7.3 13.9 14.7 20.9 20.0 7.1 5.0 37,306 143 42,997 139

1971 15 ..... 59,463 100.0 4.0 8.0 7.0 14.8 15.4 21.7 18.8 6.2 4.0 35,695 136 40,670 132

1970 ....... 57,575 100.0 4.1 7.9 6.9 14.3 15.4 22.2 18.9 6.2 4.0 35,914 138 40,865 134

1969 ....... 56,248 100.0 4.1 7.9 6.7 14.0 15.8 22.5 19.4 5.9 3.9 36,229 132 40,958 137

1968 ....... 55,394 100.0 4.4 7.8 7.0 14.4 17.5 22.2 18.4 5.1 3.2 34,814 130 39,188 130

1967 16 ..... 54,188 100.0 5.2 8.3 7.1 15.2 17.1 23.1 16.2 4.7 3.2 33,456 121 37,192 126

BLACK

2001 ....... 13,315 100.0 6.8 10.9 8.7 16.5 14.3 14.9 15.4 6.8 5.6 29,470 347 39,248 414

2000 1 ...... 13,174 100.0 6.0 10.7 8.9 16.6 13.9 15.7 14.9 6.8 6.4 30,495 404 40,271 397

2000 2 ...... 13,355 100.0 6.0 10.2 9.2 16.4 12.8 16.5 15.4 6.8 6.5 31,285 473 41,185 661

1999 ....... 12,849 100.0 5.9 11.5 9.9 15.6 13.9 14.5 14.8 6.6 7.2 29,646 552 40,840 584

1998 ....... 12,579 100.0 6.8 13.3 9.6 17.1 13.5 14.6 13.6 6.3 5.3 27,495 431 37,026 495

1997 ....... 12,474 100.0 6.6 13.2 9.7 16.9 14.1 14.7 14.4 5.8 4.5 27,551 474 36,254 520

1996 ....... 12,109 100.0 7.0 13.2 10.8 17.3 13.6 14.6 14.1 5.1 4.3 26,378 519 36,463 712

1995 3 ...... 11,577 100.0 7.1 13.5 11.0 17.3 14.2 14.2 12.9 6.4 3.4 25,830 441 35,065 600

1994 4 ...... 11,655 100.0 7.5 15.2 10.5 17.3 13.1 13.4 13.2 5.4 4.4 24,843 462 34,569 496

1993 5 ...... 11,281 100.0 8.8 15.4 11.8 16.4 13.8 13.5 11.5 4.8 3.9 23,564 466 32,848 545

1992 6 ...... 11,269 100.0 9.2 16.2 10.9 16.9 13.3 13.7 12.3 4.4 3.2 23,190 474 31,468 427

1991 ....... 11,083 100.0 8.2 16.3 10.7 16.5 13.3 14.3 12.7 4.8 3.1 23,837 501 31,741 414

1990 ....... 10,671 100.0 8.0 16.1 11.0 15.7 13.4 14.6 13.1 4.8 3.4 24,527 559 32,588 440

1989 ....... 10,486 100.0 7.9 15.7 9.9 17.0 13.2 14.6 12.5 5.7 3.4 24,929 507 33,080 449

1988 ....... 10,561 100.0 7.2 17.0 11.6 16.5 13.2 13.1 12.7 5.5 3.2 23,590 492 32,318 472

1987 7 ...... 10,192 100.0 7.8 17.1 10.9 17.0 14.2 13.1 12.3 4.4 3.2 23,354 450 31,534 434

1986 ....... 9,922 100.0 9.2 15.4 10.9 17.7 12.8 14.0 12.7 4.3 3.0 23,237 456 31,176 424

1985 8 ...... 9,797 100.0 7.4 16.8 11.1 18.2 14.0 13.8 12.1 4.6 2.1 23,252 452 30,338 394

1984 ....... 9,480 100.0 7.6 17.0 12.4 18.6 13.8 13.5 10.9 4.2 2.0 21,842 420 29,130 358

1983 9 ...... 9,243 100.0 8.4 17.0 12.9 18.4 13.5 13.4 11.0 3.8 1.6 21,030 393 28,012 344

1982 ....... 8,916 100.0 8.1 17.2 12.4 19.3 12.6 15.0 11.4 2.6 1.4 21,017 337 27,654 346

1981 ....... 8,961 100.0 7.6 18.0 12.8 19.2 12.7 13.8 11.4 3.4 1.1 21,035 353 27,633 335

1980 ....... 8,847 100.0 7.1 16.8 13.0 18.9 13.8 14.2 11.0 3.7 1.5 21,902 413 28,425 350

1979 10 ..... 8,586 100.0 6.6 16.2 12.5 19.2 13.4 14.7 12.3 3.7 1.5 22,895 418 29,377 362

1978 ....... 8,066 100.0 5.5 17.3 12.3 18.3 13.7 15.5 11.7 4.1 1.6 23,261 492 29,727 388

1977 ....... 7,977 100.0 5.6 17.2 13.0 20.7 14.4 14.1 10.8 3.1 1.1 21,712 291 27,819 247

1976 11 ..... 7,776 100.0 5.6 17.4 13.2 19.7 14.0 15.5 10.9 2.8 1.0 21,672 269 27,689 247

1975 12 ..... 7,489 100.0 6.5 17.6 13.7 18.8 15.6 14.4 10.2 2.6 0.8 21,482 316 26,815 238

1974 13 12 . . . 7,263 100.0 6.3 16.6 12.6 20.3 15.7 14.3 10.9 2.4 0.9 21,867 264 27,196 242

1973 ....... 7,040 100.0 6.9 14.7 13.7 20.0 15.3 15.0 10.2 2.8 1.3 22,381 349 27,792 276

1972 14 ..... 6,809 100.0 8.0 15.1 12.7 20.0 15.6 13.9 11.4 2.1 1.3 21,775 326 27,507 293

1971 15 ..... 6,578 100.0 8.6 16.0 12.0 20.9 16.1 14.4 8.9 2.3 0.8 21,085 314 26,128 268

See footnotes at end of table.
U.S. Census Bureau Money Income in the United States: 2001 17

Table A-1.

Households by Total Money Income, Race, and Hispanic Origin of Householder:

1967 to 2001—Con.

(Income in 2001 CPI-U-RS adjusted dollars. Households as of March of the following year. For meaning of symbols, see text)

Race and

Hispanic origin

of householder

and year Number

(thousands)

Percent distribution Median income Mean income

Total

Under

$5,000

$5,000

to

$9,999

$10,000

to

$14,999

$15,000

to

$24,999

$25,000

to

$34,999

$35,000

to

$49,999

$50,000

to

$74,999

$75,000

to

$99,999

$100,000

and over

Value

(dollars)

Standard

error

(dollars)

Value

(dollars)

Standard

error

(dollars)

BLACK—Con.

1970 ....... 6,180 100.0 9.2 14.7 12.1 20.8 15.3 15.1 9.5 2.5 0.8 21,860 300 26,692 288

1969 ....... 6,053 100.0 9.2 14.7 11.9 21.7 16.2 15.1 8.5 2.0 0.6 21,899 323 26,070 277

1968 ....... 5,870 100.0 9.6 14.7 13.0 22.4 16.1 13.8 7.8 1.9 0.5 20,529 298 25,003 263

1967 16 ..... 5,728 100.0 11.1 15.6 13.5 22.2 15.4 13.1 6.4 1.8 0.9 19,425 323 23,341 260

ASIAN &

PACIFIC

ISLANDER

2001 ....... 4,071 100.0 4.2 3.9 4.2 10.0 9.9 14.3 19.0 12.5 21.9 53,635 1280 73,159 1,727

2000 1 ...... 3,963 100.0 3.6 3.4 4.3 9.4 9.9 13.6 19.3 13.5 23.0 57,313 978 74,829 1,511

2000 2 ...... 3,527 100.0 3.5 3.1 4.3 10.7 9.5 13.2 20.1 11.5 24.0 57,075 1524 72,191 1,930

1999 ....... 3,337 100.0 4.0 4.1 5.1 8.7 10.1 15.4 17.0 12.5 23.2 54,391 1994 71,819 1,925

1998 ....... 3,308 100.0 4.4 4.3 4.8 10.2 11.2 14.6 18.0 14.5 18.1 50,581 1408 65,299 1,886

1997 ....... 3,125 100.0 4.4 4.8 5.5 9.7 9.8 16.0 19.9 11.8 18.0 49,766 1384 64,769 2,007

1996 ....... 2,998 100.0 3.9 6.1 5.6 9.8 10.5 15.7 18.0 13.6 16.9 48,612 1742 63,520 2,278

1995 3 ...... 2,777 100.0 4.8 4.3 6.7 10.7 10.8 15.9 19.6 12.0 15.1 46,847 1175 63,704 2,570

1994 4 ...... 2,040 100.0 4.4 5.1 5.8 11.1 10.6 15.2 19.8 12.4 15.6 47,829 1812 62,101 2,213

1993 5 ...... 2,233 100.0 4.6 6.5 6.6 11.7 10.6 13.5 18.1 13.5 14.8 46,260 2275 60,613 2,440

1992 6 ...... 2,262 100.0 4.3 5.2 6.0 12.5 9.4 16.8 18.8 12.3 14.7 46,739 1349 57,928 1,593

1991 ....... 2,094 100.0 3.8 5.6 5.3 11.7 12.6 14.8 19.2 12.8 14.3 46,197 1491 58,655 1,729

1990 ....... 1,958 100.0 3.8 4.3 5.4 11.0 9.9 15.0 21.0 13.9 15.7 50,496 1496 60,953 1,726

1989 ....... 1,988 100.0 3.0 4.2 6.1 10.3 10.7 16.6 21.1 12.0 16.1 49,771 1346 61,872 1,800

1988 ....... 1,913 100.0 3.1 4.8 6.2 13.3 10.0 15.4 20.3 12.0 14.9 46,394 1907 58,003 1,733

HISPANIC

ORIGIN 17

2001 ....... 10,499 100.0 3.9 6.7 8.3 17.5 15.4 17.3 16.5 7.5 7.0 33,565 426 44,383 561

2000 1 ...... 10,034 100.0 3.4 7.1 8.3 17.2 15.4 17.3 16.9 7.8 6.5 34,094 491 45,205 633

2000 2 ...... 9,663 100.0 3.3 7.2 8.0 17.8 14.9 17.4 17.5 7.9 6.1 34,389 697 43,595 677

1999 ....... 9,319 100.0 3.7 7.3 9.4 17.4 15.8 16.9 15.6 7.5 6.4 32,647 482 42,969 772

1998 ....... 9,060 100.0 4.5 9.4 9.4 17.8 15.6 15.8 15.1 6.5 5.9 30,726 592 41,517 883

1997 ....... 8,590 100.0 4.8 10.3 10.1 18.3 14.7 16.7 13.9 5.9 5.3 29,286 522 39,465 796

1996 ....... 8,225 100.0 4.5 10.5 10.6 19.7 15.0 15.6 13.7 5.7 4.6 27,977 543 38,198 884

1995 3 ...... 7,939 100.0 5.1 11.6 11.4 19.6 15.1 14.8 13.3 4.9 4.1 26,368 574 35,989 807

1994 4 ...... 7,735 100.0 5.0 11.9 10.8 18.5 14.7 15.9 13.0 5.7 4.5 27,672 514 37,314 931

1993 5 ...... 7,362 100.0 4.5 10.9 11.6 18.9 15.7 16.1 13.0 5.5 3.8 27,609 555 36,542 768

1992 6 ...... 7,153 100.0 5.1 10.8 10.9 19.0 15.5 16.3 13.4 5.3 3.9 27,940 577 35,637 560

1991 ....... 6,379 100.0 4.4 10.5 10.6 18.1 15.5 16.8 14.1 5.8 4.2 28,760 598 36,594 586

1990 ....... 6,220 100.0 4.5 10.2 10.8 18.2 15.1 17.3 14.3 5.5 4.0 29,326 601 36,736 605

1989 ....... 5,933 100.0 4.8 10.1 9.0 17.8 15.0 16.4 16.2 6.0 4.6 30,221 586 38,590 663

1988 ....... 5,910 100.0 5.3 10.3 9.6 18.8 14.6 16.1 15.6 5.4 4.3 29,272 722 37,373 792

1987 7 ...... 5,642 100.0 5.1 11.0 10.6 17.6 15.5 15.8 15.1 5.0 4.3 28,814 632 36,935 684

1986 ....... 5,418 100.0 5.0 10.9 10.2 19.1 14.4 16.5 14.2 6.1 3.6 28,279 737 35,708 587

1985 8 ...... 5,213 100.0 4.8 11.3 11.3 18.4 15.7 16.3 13.8 5.6 2.8 27,404 640 34,242 557

1984 ....... 4,883 100.0 5.5 11.5 10.5 19.0 13.9 17.8 14.0 4.8 2.9 27,551 691 34,258 668

1983 9 ...... 4,666 100.0 5.1 11.8 11.8 18.5 15.8 16.9 13.3 4.3 2.5 26,630 679 32,619 627

1982 ....... 4,085 100.0 5.2 11.4 12.4 18.4 15.5 17.0 13.2 4.7 2.2 26,655 704 32,896 667

1981 ....... 3,980 100.0 4.1 10.7 10.6 18.7 16.4 18.2 14.5 4.6 2.2 28,458 779 34,174 653

1980 ....... 3,906 100.0 4.7 10.4 10.3 20.1 16.2 16.5 14.9 4.4 2.5 27,776 753 33,927 676

1979 10 ..... 3,684 100.0 3.5 10.2 9.3 19.7 15.7 19.1 14.8 4.9 2.8 29,467 850 35,654 716

1978 ....... 3,291 100.0 3.6 9.9 10.0 19.3 17.1 18.6 15.1 4.2 2.2 29,174 707 34,461 697

1977 ....... 3,304 100.0 3.4 10.2 11.5 20.1 18.3 18.1 12.9 3.7 1.8 27,448 482 32,393 500

1976 11 ..... 3,081 100.0 3.8 12.3 11.0 20.9 16.8 18.2 12.8 2.7 1.5 26,243 559 31,013 505

1975 12 ..... 2,948 100.0 4.2 11.9 10.9 21.8 17.3 18.7 11.1 2.6 1.3 25,708 568 30,518 542

1974 13 12 . . . 2,897 100.0 3.3 9.6 11.2 20.7 18.0 19.4 12.7 3.5 1.6 27,965 612 32,396 528

1973 ....... 2,722 100.0 3.5 8.7 10.1 21.5 18.4 18.3 14.6 3.6 1.4 28,106 638 32,655 531

1972 14 ..... 2,655 100.0 3.7 8.1 11.6 20.8 20.1 19.9 11.4 2.9 1.5 28,153 550 32,359 550

See footnotes at end of table.
18 Money Income in the United States: 2001 U.S. Census Bureau

Table A-1.

Households by Total Money Income, Race, and Hispanic Origin of Householder:

1967 to 2001—Con.

(Income in 2001 CPI-U-RS adjusted dollars. Households as of March of the following year. For meaning of symbols, see text)

Race and

Hispanic origin

of householder

and year Number

(thousands)

Percent distribution Median income Mean income

Total

Under

$5,000

$5,000

to

$9,999

$10,000

to

$14,999

$15,000

to

$24,999

$25,000

to

$34,999

$35,000

to

$49,999

$50,000

to

$74,999

$75,000

to

$99,999

$100,000

and over

Value

(dollars)

Standard

error

(dollars)

Value

(dollars)

Standard

error

(dollars)

NONHISPANIC

WHITE

2001 ....... 80,818 100.0 2.3 5.0 6.5 12.4 11.8 15.2 19.1 11.8 15.7 46,305 192 62,444 283

2000 1 ...... 80,527 100.0 2.2 5.0 6.5 12.0 12.0 15.2 19.4 11.7 15.9 46,896 188 62,761 282

2000 2 ...... 79,375 100.0 2.2 5.1 6.3 12.0 12.3 14.7 19.6 11.8 15.9 47,191 270 62,949 408

1999 ....... 78,819 100.0 2.0 4.7 6.3 12.6 11.8 15.5 19.7 11.8 15.6 47,126 297 62,416 372

1998 ....... 78,577 100.0 2.2 5.0 6.3 12.4 12.2 15.6 20.0 11.8 14.5 46,028 265 60,674 371

1997 ....... 77,936 100.0 2.3 5.4 6.6 13.1 12.1 16.1 19.6 11.3 13.5 44,628 233 58,912 356

1996 ....... 77,240 100.0 2.1 5.7 7.0 13.2 12.8 15.8 20.1 10.9 12.3 43,570 299 56,700 343

1995 3 ...... 76,932 100.0 2.2 5.5 7.0 13.6 12.6 16.8 19.7 10.8 11.8 42,884 224 55,658 333

1994 4 ...... 77,004 100.0 2.5 6.0 7.2 14.2 12.4 16.9 19.0 10.4 11.3 41,501 220 54,562 324

1993 5 ...... 75,697 100.0 2.6 6.3 7.1 13.8 13.0 16.9 19.4 10.1 10.9 41,225 241 53,594 320

1992 6 ...... 75,107 100.0 2.5 6.3 7.2 14.0 12.7 17.0 20.1 10.1 10.2 41,161 255 51,467 237

1991 ....... 75,625 100.0 2.2 6.4 6.8 13.7 13.6 17.0 19.9 10.3 10.1 40,968 202 51,167 228

1990 ....... 75,035 100.0 2.2 6.1 6.6 13.4 13.2 17.8 20.1 10.3 10.3 41,953 196 52,230 236

1989 ....... 74,495 100.0 2.1 5.9 6.7 13.5 12.6 17.2 20.6 10.5 10.9 42,820 210 53,490 262

1988 ....... 74,067 100.0 2.2 6.4 6.5 13.4 12.5 17.4 21.0 10.6 10.1 42,522 239 52,034 244

1987 7 ...... 73,120 100.0 2.4 6.4 6.7 13.3 12.9 17.4 20.6 10.6 9.6 42,042 244 51,351 238

1986 ....... 72,067 100.0 2.6 6.8 6.6 13.7 12.8 17.7 20.3 10.3 9.2 41,251 213 50,358 231

1985 8 ...... 71,540 100.0 2.7 6.8 7.1 13.9 13.8 17.8 20.0 9.8 8.2 39,961 204 48,406 220

1984 ....... 70,586 100.0 2.6 6.9 7.2 14.4 13.8 18.2 19.9 9.3 7.7 39,137 217 47,166 211

1983 9 ...... 69,648 100.0 2.7 7.0 7.1 15.0 14.3 18.3 19.9 8.7 7.0 37,878 202 45,777 202

1982 ....... 69,214 100.0 2.8 7.4 7.5 14.7 13.8 19.2 19.3 8.6 6.6 37,706 190 45,097 193

1981 ....... 68,996 100.0 2.6 7.5 7.4 15.1 13.6 18.7 20.3 8.5 6.2 38,026 193 44,715 186

1980 ....... 68,106 100.0 2.3 7.4 7.5 14.5 13.8 19.0 20.7 8.5 6.3 38,690 108 45,171 203

1979 10 ..... 67,203 100.0 2.4 7.3 6.9 14.1 13.6 18.7 21.5 8.8 6.7 39,544 219 46,454 203

1978 ....... 64,836 100.0 2.3 7.2 7.4 14.3 13.4 19.0 21.3 8.8 6.3 39,436 208 45,974 198

1977 ....... 63,721 100.0 2.5 7.8 7.8 14.6 14.0 19.5 20.8 7.6 5.3 37,523 211 43,671 206

1976 11 ..... 62,365 100.0 2.6 7.8 7.5 15.2 14.2 20.1 20.3 7.4 4.8 37,189 217 43,058 192

1975 12 ..... 61,533 100.0 2.6 8.1 7.9 15.2 14.8 20.0 20.0 6.9 4.5 36,054 191 41,932 203

1974 13 12 . . . 60,164 100.0 2.6 7.8 7.1 14.3 15.3 20.1 20.4 7.5 4.9 37,084 182 43,113 188

1973 ....... 59,236 100.0 3.0 7.2 7.4 13.8 14.3 20.1 21.1 7.8 5.3 38,356 179 44,064 186

1972 14 ..... 58,005 100.0 3.4 7.6 7.1 13.6 14.5 21.0 20.4 7.3 5.1 37,838 180 43,496 194

NA Not available.

1

Implementation of Census 2000-based population controls and a 28,000 household sample expansion.

2

Reflects a correction to the March 2001 CPS weighting.

3

Full implementation of 1990 census-based sample design and metropolitan definitions, 7,000 household sample reduction, and revised race edits.

4

Introduction of 1990 census sample design.

5

Data collection method changed from paper and pencil to computer-assisted interviewing. In addition, the March 1994 income supplement was revised to

allow for the coding of different income amounts on selected questionnaire items. Limits either increased or decreased in the following categories: earnings limits increased to $999,999; social security limits increased to $49,999; supplemental security income and public assistance limits increased to $24,999; veterans

benefits limits increased to $99,999; child support and alimony limits decreased to $49,999. 6

Implementation of 1990 census population controls.

7

Implementation of a new March CPS processing system.

8

Recording of amounts for earnings from longest job increased to $299,999. Full implementation of 1980 census-based sample design.

9

Implementation of Hispanic population weighting controls and introduction of 1980 census-based sample design.

10Implementation of 1980 census population controls. Questionnaire expanded to show 27 possible values from 51 possible sources of income. 11First year medians were derived using both Pareto and linear interpolation. Before this year all medians were derived using linear interpolation. 12Some of these estimates were derived using Pareto interpolation and may differ from published data which were derived using linear interpolation. 13Implementation of a new March CPS processing system. Questionnaire expanded to ask 11 income questions. 14Full implementation of 1970 census-based sample design. 15Introduction of 1970 census sample design and population controls. 16Implementation of a new March CPS processing system. 17People of Hispanic origin may be of any race.

Source: U. S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 1968 to 2002 Annual Demographic Supplements.
U.S. Census Bureau Money Income in the United States: 2001 19

Table A-2.

Share of Aggregate Income Received by Each Fifth and Top 5 Percent of Households:

1967 to 2001

(Households as of March of the following year. Income in 2001 CPI-U-RS adjusted dollars)

Year Number

(thousands)

Upper limit of each fifth

(dollars)

Lower

limit of

top 5

percent

(dollars)

Share of aggregate income

Mean

income

(dollars)

Gini

Lowest Second Third Fourth Lowest Second Third Fourth Highest ratio

Top 5

percent

2001 ..... 109,297 17,970 33,314 53,000 83,500 150,499 3.5 8.7 14.6 23.0 50.1 22.4 58,208 0.466

20001 ..... 108,209 18,420 33,921 53,630 84,048 149,273 3.6 8.9 14.8 23.0 49.8 22.1 58,730 0.462

20002 ..... 106,418 18,456 33,927 53,731 84,248 149,588 3.6 8.9 14.9 23.0 49.6 21.9 58,639 0.460

1999 ..... 104,705 18,266 33,991 53,663 84,313 150,857 3.6 8.9 14.9 23.2 49.4 21.5 58,254 0.457

1998 ..... 103,874 17,479 32,979 52,424 81,342 143,378 3.6 9.0 15.0 23.2 49.2 21.4 56,240 0.456

1997 ..... 102,528 16,937 32,115 50,592 78,638 139,183 3.6 8.9 15.0 23.2 49.4 21.7 54,653 0.459

1996 ..... 101,018 16,589 31,183 49,432 76,402 134,281 3.7 9.0 15.1 23.3 49.0 21.4 52,934 0.455

19953 ..... 99,627 16,610 31,044 48,448 75,118 130,342 3.7 9.1 15.2 23.3 48.7 21.0 51,835 0.450

19944 ..... 98,990 15,863 29,773 47,378 74,246 129,752 3.6 8.9 15.0 23.4 49.1 21.2 50,961 0.456

19935 ..... 97,107 15,643 29,772 46,798 72,744 126,233 3.6 9.0 15.1 23.5 48.9 21.0 49,977 0.454

19926 ..... 96,426 15,579 29,848 46,861 71,723 122,433 3.8 9.4 15.8 24.2 46.9 18.6 48,024 0.434

1991 ..... 95,669 15,955 30,419 46,984 71,941 122,182 3.8 9.6 15.9 24.2 46.5 18.1 48,064 0.428

1990 ..... 94,312 16,416 31,075 47,541 72,501 124,432 3.9 9.6 15.9 24.0 46.6 18.6 49,121 0.428

1989 ..... 93,347 16,676 31,708 48,734 74,045 126,487 3.8 9.5 15.8 24.0 46.8 18.9 50,347 0.431

1988 ..... 92,830 16,365 30,913 48,175 72,743 123,134 3.8 9.6 16.0 24.3 46.3 18.3 48,910 0.427

19877 ..... 91,124 16,094 30,549 47,686 72,069 120,597 3.8 9.6 16.1 24.3 46.2 18.2 48,297 0.426

1986 ..... 89,479 15,961 30,485 47,084 71,068 120,542 3.9 9.7 16.2 24.5 45.7 17.5 47,398 0.425

19858 ..... 88,458 15,691 29,580 45,538 68,740 114,956 4.0 9.7 16.3 24.6 45.3 17.0 45,607 0.419

1984 ..... 86,789 15,565 29,029 44,598 67,450 112,832 4.1 9.9 16.4 24.7 44.9 16.5 44,530 0.415

19839 ..... 85,290 15,175 28,280 43,362 65,585 108,920 4.1 10.0 16.5 24.7 44.7 16.4 42,828 0.414

1982 ..... 83,918 14,962 28,116 43,131 64,397 107,312 4.1 10.1 16.6 24.7 44.5 16.2 42,690 0.412

1981 ..... 83,527 15,178 27,964 43,517 64,357 104,720 4.2 10.2 16.8 25.0 43.8 15.6 42,384 0.406

1980 ..... 82,368 15,374 28,690 43,970 64,501 104,788 4.3 10.3 16.9 24.9 43.7 15.8 42,857 0.403

197910 .... 80,776 15,836 29,452 45,245 65,742 107,243 4.2 10.3 16.9 24.7 44.0 16.4 44,181 0.404

1978 ..... 77,330 15,779 29,661 44,852 65,315 105,226 4.3 10.3 16.9 24.8 43.7 16.2 43,824 0.402

1977 ..... 76,030 14,986 28,100 42,617 62,130 100,441 4.4 10.3 17.0 24.8 43.6 16.1 41,506 0.402

197611 .... 74,142 15,026 27,790 42,298 60,863 97,037 4.4 10.4 17.1 24.8 43.3 16.0 40,924 0.398

197512 .... 72,867 14,572 27,404 41,312 59,436 94,771 4.4 10.5 17.1 24.8 43.2 15.9 39,958 0.397

197413 12 . . 71,163 15,459 28,556 42,077 61,084 97,609 4.4 10.6 17.1 24.7 43.1 15.9 41,116 0.395

1973 ..... 69,859 15,247 28,965 42,967 62,069 98,388 4.2 10.5 17.1 24.6 43.6 16.6 41,955 0.397

197214 .... 68,251 14,852 28,604 42,282 60,508 97,399 4.1 10.5 17.1 24.5 43.9 17.0 41,387 0.401

197115 .... 66,676 14,364 27,383 40,295 57,457 91,243 4.1 10.6 17.3 24.5 43.5 16.7 39,248 0.396

1970 ..... 64,778 14,556 27,888 40,569 57,881 91,505 4.1 10.8 17.4 24.5 43.3 16.6 39,483 0.394

1969 ..... 63,401 14,789 28,387 41,049 57,519 90,209 4.1 10.9 17.5 24.5 43.0 16.6 39,493 0.391

1968 ..... 62,214 14,350 27,205 38,994 54,790 85,717 4.2 11.1 17.5 24.4 42.8 16.6 37,828 0.388

196716 .... 60,813 13,474 26,274 37,305 53,181 85,334 4.0 10.8 17.3 24.2 43.8 17.5 35,881 0.399

1

Implementation of Census 2000-based population controls and a 28,000 household sample expansion.

2

Reflects a correction to the March 2001 CPS weighting.

3

Full implementation of 1990 census-based sample design and metropolitan definitions, 7,000 household sample reduction, and revised race edits.

4

Introduction of 1990 census sample design.

5

Data collection method changed from paper and pencil to computer-assisted interviewing. In addition, the March 1994 income supplement was revised to

allow for the coding of different income amounts on selected questionnaire items. Limits either increased or decreased in the following categories: earnings limits increased to $999,999; social security limits increased to $49,999; supplemental security income and public assistance limits increased to $24,999; veterans

benefits limits increased to $99,999; child support and alimony limits decreased to $49,999. 6

Implementation of 1990 census population controls.

7

Implementation of a new March CPS processing system.

8

Recording of amounts for earnings from longest job increased to $299,999. Full implementation of 1980 census-based sample design.

9

Implementation of Hispanic population weighting controls and introduction of 1980 census-based sample design.

10Implementation of 1980 census population controls. Questionnaire expanded to show 27 possible values from 51 possible sources of income. 11First year medians were derived using both Pareto and linear interpolation. Before this year all medians were derived using linear interpolation. 12Some of these estimates were derived using Pareto interpolation and may differ from published data which were derived using linear interpolation. 13Implementation of a new March CPS processing system. Questionnaire expanded to ask 11 income questions. 14Full implementation of 1970 census-based sample design. 15Introduction of 1970 census sample design and population controls. 16Implementation of a new March CPS processing system.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 1968 to 2002 Annual Demographic Supplements.
20 Money Income in the United States: 2001 U.S. Census Bureau Table A-3. Selected Measures of Household Income Dispersion: 1967 to 2001 (In 2001 dollars. For further explanation of income inequality measures, see Current Population Reports, Series P60-204, ‘‘The Changing Shape of the N

1947-1998’’) Measures of income dispersion 2001 20001 20002 1999 1998 1997 1996 19953 19944 19935 1992 1991 1990 1989 

Household Income at Selected Percentiles 10th percentile upper limit ...... 10,913 10,877 10,896 11,022 10,520 10,135 10,009 10,007 9,485 9,272 9,286 9,407 9,613 9,926 20th percentile upper limit ...... 17,970 18,416 18,456 18,266 17,479 16,937 16,589 16,610 15,863 15,643 15,579 15,955 16,416 16,676 50th (median) ............... 42,228 43,162 43,327 43,355 42,173 40,699 39,869 39,306 38,119 37,688 37,880 38,183 39,324 39,850 80th percentile upper limit ...... 83,500 84,048 84,248 84,313 81,342 78,638 76,402 75,118 74,246 72,744 71,723 71,941 72,501 74,045 90th percentile upper limit ...... 116,105 115,126 114,717 114,648 109,866 107,412 103,401 101,158 100,288 98,609 96,443 96,178 97,315 99,196 

95th percentile lower limit ...... 150,499 149,273 149,588 150,857 143,378 139,183 134,281 130,342 129,752 126,233 122,433 122,182 124,432 126,487 Household Income Ratios of Selected Percentiles 90th/10th ................... 10.64 10.58 10.53 10.40 10.44 10.60 10.33 10.11 10.57 10.64 10.39 10.22 10.12 9.99 

95th/20th ................... 8.38 8.11 8.11 8.26 8.20 8.22 8.09 7.85 8.18 8.07 7.86 7.66 7.58 7.59 

95th/50th ................... 3.56 3.46 3.45 3.48 3.40 3.42 3.37 3.32 3.40 3.35 3.23 3.20 3.16 3.17 

80th/50th ................... 1.98 1.95 1.94 1.94 1.93 1.93 1.92 1.91 1.95 1.93 1.89 1.88 1.84 1.86 

80th/20th ................... 4.65 4.56 4.56 4.62 4.65 4.64 4.61 4.52 4.68 4.65 4.60 4.51 4.42 4.44 

20th/50th ................... 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.42 0.41 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.41 0.42 0.42 0.42 

Mean Household Income of Quintiles Lowest quintile............... 10,136 10,440 10,474 10,558 10,003 9,758 9,656 9,631 9,171 8,942 9,011 9,206 9,449 9,679 

Second quintile .............. 25,468 26,069 26,041 25,956 25,257 24,304 23,699 23,527 22,713 22,506 22,480 23,003 23,679 23,989 

Third quintile ................ 42,629 43,412 43,543 43,422 42,262 40,888 39,862 39,340 38,262 37,725 37,874 38,210 39,111 39,876 

Fourth quintile ............... 66,839 67,485 67,564 67,509 65,362 63,330 61,695 60,475 59,541 58,628 58,139 58,248 58,968 60,318 

Highest quintile .............. 145,970 146,240 145,573 143,825 138,313 135,019 129,758 126,202 125,172 122,148 112,653 111,701 114,437 117,911 

Shares of Household Income of Quintiles Lowest quintile. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.8 3.8 3.9 3.8 Second quintile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.7 8.9 8.9 8.9 9.0 8.9 9.0 9.1 8.9 9.0 9.4 9.6 9.6 9.5 Third quintile ................ 14.6 14.8 14.9 14.9 15.0 15.0 15.1 15.2 15.0 15.1 15.8 15.9 15.9 15.8 

Fourth quintile ............... 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.3 23.3 23.4 23.5 24.2 24.2 24.0 24.0 

Highest quintile .............. 50.2 49.8 49.7 49.4 49.2 49.4 49.0 48.7 49.1 48.9 46.9 46.5 46.6 46.8 Summary Measures Gini index of income inequality . . 0.466 0.462 0.460 0.457 0.456 0.459 0.455 0.450 0.456 0.454 0.434 0.428 0.428 0.431 Mean logarithmic deviation of income.................... 0.515 0.490 0.485 0.475 0.488 0.484 0.464 0.452 0.471 0.467 0.416 0.411 0.402 0.406 

Theil ...................... 0.414 0.404 0.402 0.385 0.389 0.396 0.389 0.378 0.387 0.385 0.323 0.313 0.317 0.324 

Atkinson: e=0.25 ................... 0.098 0.096 0.095 0.092 0.093 0.094 0.093 0.090 0.092 0.092 0.080 0.078 0.078 0.080 

e=0.50 ................... 0.189 0.185 0.184 0.180 0.181 0.183 0.179 0.175 0.180 0.178 0.160 0.156 0.156 0.158 e=0.75 ................... 0.282 0.275 0.273 0.268 0.271 0.272 0.266 0.261 0.268 0.266 0.242 0.237 0.236 0.239 See footnotes at end of table.
U.S. Census Bureau Money Income in the United States: 2001 21 Table A-3. Selected Measures of Household Income Dispersion: 1967 to 2001—Con (In 2001 dollars. For further explanation of income inequality measures, see Current Population Reports, Series P60-204. ‘‘The Changing Shape of the N

1947-1998’’) Measures of income dispersion 1984 19839 1982 1981 1980 197910 1978 1977 197611 197512 197412 13 1973 197214 197115 

Household Income at Selected Percentiles 10th percentile upper limit ...... 9,237 8,864 8,888 9,040 9,156 9,275 9,439 9,028 8,924 8,874 9,128 9,070 8,651 8,120 20th percentile upper limit ...... 15,565 15,175 14,962 15,178 15,374 15,836 15,779 14,986 15,026 14,572 15,459 15,247 14,852 14,364 50th (median) ............... 36,343 35,214 35,423 35,478 36,035 37,192 37,234 34,989 34,792 34,219 35,159 36,278 35,560 34,126 80th percentile upper limit ...... 67,450 65,585 64,397 64,357 64,501 65,742 65,315 62,130 60,863 59,436 61,084 62,069 60,508 57,457 90th percentile upper limit ...... 88,252 85,172 84,300 83,339 83,220 84,816 84,038 78,913 77,614 75,687 78,279 79,376 77,747 73,711 95th percentile lower limit ...... 112,832 108,920 107,312 104,720 104,788 107,243 105,226 100,441 97,037 94,771 97,609 98,388 97,399 91,243 

Household Income Ratios of Selected Percentiles 90th/10th ................... 9.55 9.61 9.48 9.22 9.09 9.14 8.90 8.74 8.70 8.53 8.58 8.75 8.99 9.08 

95th/20th ................... 7.25 7.18 7.17 6.90 6.82 6.77 6.67 6.70 6.46 6.50 6.31 6.45 6.56 6.35 

95th/50th ................... 3.10 3.09 3.03 2.95 2.91 2.88 2.83 2.87 2.79 2.77 2.78 2.71 2.74 2.67 

80th/50th ................... 1.86 1.86 1.82 1.81 1.79 1.77 1.75 1.78 1.75 1.74 1.74 1.71 1.70 1.68 

80th/20th ................... 4.33 4.32 4.30 4.24 4.20 4.15 4.14 4.15 4.05 4.08 3.95 4.07 4.07 4.00 

20th/50th ................... 0.43 0.43 0.42 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.42 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.44 0.42 0.42 0.42 

Mean Household Income of Quintiles Lowest quintile............... 9,089 8,833 8,786 8,995 9,122 9,295 9,410 9,057 8,990 8,798 9,141 8,863 8,493 8,036 

Second quintile .............. 22,106 21,575 21,492 21,556 22,014 22,642 22,522 21,374 21,337 20,891 21,896 21,970 21,629 20,900 

Third quintile ................ 36,557 35,584 35,465 35,603 36,232 37,269 37,100 35,244 35,000 34,181 35,188 35,899 35,296 33,888 

Fourth quintile ............... 55,036 53,393 52,730 53,033 53,349 54,662 54,328 51,606 50,795 49,637 50,810 51,608 50,669 48,177 

Highest quintile .............. 99,955 96,617 95,119 92,894 93,705 97,133 95,880 90,465 88,639 86,443 88,735 91,528 90,967 85,365 Shares of Household Income of Quintiles Lowest quintile. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.2 4.1 4.1 Second quintile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.9 10.0 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.5 10.5 10.6 

Third quintile ................ 16.4 16.5 16.6 16.8 16.9 16.9 16.9 17.0 17.1 17.1 17.1 17.1 17.1 17.3 Fourth quintile ............... 24.7 24.7 24.7 25.0 24.9 24.7 24.8 24.8 24.8 24.8 24.7 24.6 24.5 24.5 Highest quintile .............. 44.9 44.7 44.5 43.8 43.7 44.0 43.7 43.6 43.3 43.2 43.1 43.6 43.9 43.5 

See footnotes at end of table.
22 Money Income in the United States: 2001 U.S. Census Bureau Table A-3. Selected Measures of Household Income Dispersion: 1967 to 2001—Con (In 2001 dollars. For further explanation of income inequality measures, see Current Population Reports, Series P60-204. ‘‘The Changing Shape of the 

1947-1998’’) Measures of income dispersion 1984 19839 1982 1981 1980 197910 1978 1977 197611 197512 197412 13 1973 197214 197115 

Summary Measures Gini index of income inequality . . 0.415 0.414 0.412 0.406 0.403 0.404 0.402 0.402 0.398 0.397 0.395 0.397 0.401 0.396 Mean logarithmic deviation of income.................... 0.391 0.397 0.401 0.387 0.375 0.369 0.363 0.364 0.361 0.361 0.352 0.355 0.370 0.370 

Theil ...................... 0.290 0.288 0.287 0.277 0.274 0.279 0.275 0.276 0.271 0.270 0.267 0.270 0.279 0.273 Atkinson: e=0.25 ................... 0.073 0.072 0.072 0.070 0.069 0.070 0.069 0.069 0.068 0.067 0.067 0.068 0.070 0.068 

e=0.50 ................... 0.147 0.147 0.146 0.141 0.140 0.141 0.139 0.139 0.137 0.136 0.134 0.136 0.140 0.138 e=0.75 ................... 0.225 0.226 0.226 0.220 0.216 0.216 0.213 0.213 0.211 0.210 0.207 0.210 0.216 0.214 

1Implementation of Census 2000-based population controls and a 28,000 household sample expansion. 2 Reflects a correction to the March 2001 CPS weighting. 3 Full implementation of 1990 census-based sample design and metropolitan definitions, 7,000 household sample reduction, and revised race edits. 4 Introduction of 1990 census sample design. 5 Data collection method changed from paper and pencil to computer-assisted interviewing. In addition, the March 1994 income supplement was revised to allow for the c

selected questionnaire items. Limits either increased or decreased in the following categories: earnings limits increased to $999,999; social security limits increased to $49,99public assistance limits increased to $24,999; veterans’ benefits limits increased to $99,999; child support and alimony limits decreased to $49,999. 6 Implementation of 1990 census population controls. 7 Implementation of a new March CPS processing system. 8 Recording of amounts for earnings from longest job increased to $299,999. Full implementation of 1980 census-based sample design. 9 Implementation of Hispanic population weighting controls and introduction of 1980 census-based sample design. 10 Implementation of 1980 census population controls. Questionnaire expanded to show 27 possible values from 51 possible sources of income. 11 First year medians were derived using both Pareto and linear interpolation. Before this year all medians were derived using linear interpolation. 12 Some of these estimates were derived using Pareto interpolation and may differ from published data which were derived using linear interpolation. 13 Implementation of a new March CPS processing system. Questionnaire expanded to ask 11 income questions. 14 Full implementation of 1970 census-based sample design. 15 Introduction of 1970 census sample design and population controls. 16 Implementation of a new March CPS processing system. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 1968 to 2002 Annual Demographic Supplements.
U.S. Census Bureau Money Income in the United States: 2001 23

The 2001 Current Population

Survey (CPS) served as a tool for

testing a sample expansion of the

Annual Demographic Supplement

and as a bridge to introduce new

Census 2000-based population

controls. The following section

discusses the effects these

methodological changes had on

measures of income and earnings.

Sample Expansion

In 2001, the Census Bureau tested

a 28,000 household expansion in

the sample for the CPS Annual

Demographic Supplement. The

original sample size of approximately 50,000 interviewed households for the March 2001 CPS was

increased to approximately

78,000. The primary goal of the

sample expansion was to produce

more reliable state estimates of the

number of low-income children

without health insurance for the

State Children’s Health Insurance

Program (SCHIP) through reduced

variances. Although the SCHIP

sample expansion was specifically

targeted toward producing better

children’s health insurance estimates at the state level, other state

estimates, as well as national estimates, improved. Further information about the SCHIP sample

expansion is available on the

internet at: www.bls.census.gov/

cps/ads/adsmain.htm.

Tables B-1 (at the national level)

and B-2 (at the state level) present

two sets of data for 2000 to show

the effect of the sample expansion.

One set of estimates is based on

the “Expanded” sample and the

other set is based on the “Original”

sample. 

Effects of the Sample

Expansion on National

Estimates of Income

Nationally, median household

income based on the expanded

sample was not statistically different from the median derived from

the original sample (see Table B-1).

With few exceptions, median

income did not change significantly for subgroups of the population.

The exceptions, with lower median

incomes based on the expanded

sample, are non-family households

with a female householder, households with a Black householder,

and households in the Northeast.

Households with a householder

between the ages of 35 and 44

years was the one demographic

group in which the expanded sample median income was higher

than the one derived from the original sample. The median earnings

of women working full-time, yearround derived from the expanded

sample was also higher. The per

capita income of Blacks was lower,

and the per capita income of

Hispanics was higher, when based

on the expanded sample.

Effects of the Sample

Expansion on State Estimates

of Household Income

Although no changes in state rankings were statistically significant,

the sample expansion produced

significantly different median

household income estimates for 19

states and the District of Columbia

(see Table B-2). Ten states and the

District of Columbia had higher

median incomes, while nine states

had lower median incomes. The

expanded sample ranked Maryland

($54,717), although not statistically different from Minnesota or

Alaska, higher than the remaining

47 states and the District of

Columbia. West Virginia ($29,526),

although not statistically different

from Arkansas and Louisiana, was

ranked lower than the remaining

47 states and the District of

Columbia. In comparison, the

median income based on the original sample showed that Maryland

($51,601) was not statistically different from New Jersey, Minnesota,

Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware,

Virginia, New Hampshire,

Colorado, or Hawaii, but was

ranked higher than the remaining

40 states and the District of

Columbia, while West Virginia

($29,041) was not statistically different from Arkansas and

Louisiana, but was ranked lower

than the remaining 47 and the

District of Columbia.

Introduction of Census 2000-

Based Population Controls

The procedure used in developing

estimates for the entire civilian

noninstitutional population for the

Current Population Survey (CPS)

involves the weighting of sample

results to independent estimates of

the population by sex, age, race,

and Hispanic/non-Hispanic categories. These independent estimates are developed by using civilian noninstitutional population

counts from the decennial censuses and projecting them forward to

current years using data on births,

deaths, and net migration.

Beginning with the 2002 CPS

Annual Demographic Supplement,

the independent estimates used as

Appendix B. 

SAMPLE EXPANSION AND INTRODUCTION OF CENSUS 2000-BASED

POPULATION CONTROLS
24 Money Income in the United States: 2001 U.S. Census Bureau

control totals for the CPS are based

on civilian noninstitutional population benchmarks established by

Census 2000.

Table B-3 shows two sets of data

for 2000 to show the effect of

introducing new population controls—one set using new Census

2000-based population controls

and the other set using controls

based on the 1990 census. The

following is a brief discussion of

the effects of the new population

controls on income.

With few exceptions, the use of new

Census 2000-based population

controls resulted in lower 2000

calendar year median household

income estimates, although the

drops in income were all less than

1.0 percent, median household

income dropped for all regions in

the country, for households that

were located inside and outside

metropolitan areas, and for all race

groups. Use of the new controls

also lowered the income of most

types of households and most of

the age groups of householders

shown in Table B-3. Similar to the

experience of most households, the

use of the new Census 2000-based

population controls lowered the

median earnings of full-time, yearround workers.

In contrast, use of the new Census

2000-based controls raised the

median household income of

Hispanics, family households maintained by women with no husband

present, and those maintained by

householders 15 to 24 and 55 to 64

years of age. The median income

of households maintained by a man

with no wife present remained statistically unchanged. The Census

2000-based population controls also

raised the per capita income of

most population groups. The

exception was the per capita

income of Blacks, which dropped by

0.4 percent.
U.S. Census Bureau Money Income in the United States: 2001 25

Table B-1.

Comparison of 2000 Median Income Using the Expanded Sample and the Original Sample

by Selected Characteristics

(Households and people as of March 2001)

Characteristics

Expanded sample Original sample Difference (expanded

sample minus

original sample)

Percent

change in

median

income

Number

(thousands)

Median income

Number

(thousands)

Median income

Value

(dollars)

90-percent

confidence

interval1 (±)

(dollars)

Value

(dollars)

90-percent

confidence

interval1 (±)

(dollars)

Population

count

(thousands)

Median

income

(dollars)

HOUSEHOLDS

All households ............. 106,289 42,105 219 106,418 42,151 324 –129 –46 –0.1

Type of Household

Family households ............. 72,465 51,804 298 72,380 51,751 390 85 53 0.1

Married-couple families ....... 55,511 59,494 444 55,603 59,343 620 –92 151 0.3

Female householder, no

husband present............ 12,754 28,237 507 12,525 28,126 650 229 111 0.4

Male householder, no wife

present .................... 4,200 42,166 847 4,252 42,143 1,360 –52 23 0.1

Nonfamily households .......... 33,823 25,466 273 34,039 25,439 378 –216 27 0.1

Female householder ......... 18,698 20,638 317 18,821 20,929 424 –123 *–291 *–1.4

Male householder............ 15,126 31,553 352 15,218 31,269 526 –92 284 0.9

Race and Hispanic Origin of

Householder

All races2 ................... 106,289 42,105 217 106,418 42,151 324 –129 –46 –0.1

White ........................ 88,604 44,166 321 88,543 44,232 452 61 –66 –0.1

Non-Hispanic White .......... 79,419 45,833 303 79,375 45,910 433 44 –77 –0.2

Black......................... 13,247 29,715 637 13,355 30,436 757 –108 *–721 *–2.4

Asian and Pacific Islander ...... 3,518 55,999 1,615 3,527 55,525 2,440 –9 474 0.9

Hispanic origin3

................ 9,669 33,118 809 9,663 33,455 1,114 6 –337 –1.0

Age of Householder

Under 65 years................ 84,573 48,669 331 84,591 48,770 475 –18 –101 –0.2

15 to 24 years............... 6,422 27,814 632 6,393 27,711 831 29 103 0.4

25 to 34 years............... 18,604 44,533 704 18,554 44,477 1,020 50 56 0.1

35 to 44 years............... 23,928 53,865 605 23,904 53,243 905 24 *622 *1.2

45 to 54 years............... 21,681 57,667 735 21,797 58,217 1,278 –116 –550 –0.9

55 to 64 years............... 13,939 44,776 732 13,944 44,993 1,002 –5 –217 –0.5

65 years and over ........... 21,716 23,118 291 21,827 23,047 423 –111 71 0.3

Region

Northeast ..................... 20,237 43,940 714 20,212 45,118 923 25 *–1,178 *–2.6

Midwest ...................... 24,539 44,396 553 24,496 44,647 814 43 –251 –0.6

South ........................ 38,293 38,503 464 38,526 38,402 614 –233 101 0.3

West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,220 45,103 630 23,185 44,759 834 35 344 0.8

Residence

Inside metropolitan areas ....... 85,786 44,848 331 85,737 44,986 447 49 –138 –0.3

Outside metropolitan areas...... 20,503 33,046 679 20,681 32,844 796 –178 202 0.6

EARNINGS OF FULL-TIME,

YEAR-ROUND WORKERS

Male ......................... 58,588 37,355 166 58,734 37,339 225 –146 16 0.0

Female ....................... 41,198 27,479 179 41,571 27,352 178 –373 *127 *0.5

PER CAPITA INCOME

All races2 ................... 276,567 22,269 209 276,540 22,199 209 27 70 0.3

White ........................ 226,360 23,515 242 226,401 23,415 242 –41 100 0.4

Non-Hispanic White .......... 194,120 25,340 271 194,196 25,273 271 –76 67 0.3

Black......................... 35,924 14,862 355 35,919 15,198 418 5 *–336 *–2.2

Asian and Pacific Islander ...... 11,535 22,948 1,216 11,332 22,457 1,230 203 491 2.2

Hispanic origin3

................ 33,875 12,614 441 33,862 12,307 441 13 *307 *2.5

*Statistically significant change at the 90-percent confidence level.

1

For an explanation of confidence intervals, see ‘‘Standard errors and their use’’ at www.census.gov/hhes/income/income01/sa.pdf. 2

Data for American Indians and Alaska Natives are not shown separately in this table because of the small sample of those households.

3

People of Hispanic origin may be of any race.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2001 Annual Demographic Survey.
26 Money Income in the United States: 2001 U.S. Census Bureau

Table B-2.

Comparison of 2000 Median Income by State Using the Expanded Sample

and the Original Sample

(Households as of March 2001)

States

Expanded sample Original sample

Difference (expanded

sample minus

original sample)

Percent

change in

median

income

Number

of households (thousands)

Median income

Number

of households (thousands)

Median income

Number

of households (thousands)Median

income

(dollars)

Value

(dollars)

90-percent

confidence

interval1 (±)

(dollars)

Value

(dollars)

90-percent

confidence

interval1 (±)

(dollars)

United States. . . 106,289 42,105 219 106,418 42,151 324 –129 –46 –0.1

Alabama ........... 1,739 35,531 1,742 1,757 33,111 3,221 –18 *2,420 7.3

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 53,152 1,926 224 50,767 2,685 1 *2,385 *4.7

Arizona ............ 1,832 39,825 2,038 1,848 41,454 2,208 –16 *–1,629 *–3.9

Arkansas ........... 1,053 29,780 1,285 1,049 30,292 1,545 4 –512 –1.7

California........... 12,367 46,962 1,112 12,281 46,808 1,495 86 154 0.3

Colorado ........... 1,639 48,403 2,114 1,660 48,548 2,820 –21 –145 –0.3

Connecticut......... 1,296 50,464 2,209 1,304 50,374 3,389 –8 90 0.2

Delaware. . . . . . . . . . . 296 50,538 2,270 294 50,172 4,465 2 366 0.7

District of Columbia . . 235 41,258 1,852 239 38,716 2,953 –4 *2,542 *6.6

Florida ............ 6,266 38,939 1,257 6,262 38,004 1,355 4 *935 *2.5

Georgia ........... 3,025 41,904 1,375 3,120 42,883 1,581 –95 *–979 *–2.3

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402 51,296 1,956 408 48,096 3,399 –6 *3,200 *6.7

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496 37,725 1,969 496 37,462 2,729 - 263 0.7

Illinois ............. 4,568 46,136 1,612 4,521 46,435 1,953 47 –299 –0.6

Indiana ............ 2,347 40,952 1,655 2,360 39,636 2,773 –13 1,316 3.3

Iowa............... 1,132 41,168 1,346 1,126 42,949 2,311 6 *–1,781 *–4.1

Kansas ............ 1,048 41,220 1,911 1,061 37,858 3,364 –13 *3,362 *8.9

Kentucky ........... 1,594 36,336 1,395 1,598 37,176 2,769 –4 –840 –2.3

Louisiana........... 1,685 30,763 1,367 1,696 30,230 2,139 –11 533 1.8

Maine. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 529 37,504 1,405 509 41,659 1,984 20 *–4,155 *–10.0

Maryland ........... 2,093 54,717 2,213 2,065 51,601 3,320 28 *3,116 *6.0

Massachusetts ...... 2,463 47,103 2,295 2,431 46,982 2,823 32 121 0.3

Michigan ........... 3,779 45,649 1,823 3,787 46,190 2,362 –8 –541 –1.2

Minnesota .......... 1,864 54,646 2,828 1,867 50,873 2,800 –3 *3,773 *7.4

Mississippi.......... 1,091 34,270 2,240 1,101 31,517 1,569 –10 *2,753 *8.7

Missouri............ 2,151 45,165 1,944 2,144 47,471 3,019 7 *–2,306 *–4.9

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . 357 32,958 1,670 363 32,046 2,055 –6 912 2.8

Nebraska. . . . . . . . . . . 649 41,915 1,727 655 38,545 3,144 –6 *3,370 *8.7

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . 704 45,888 1,762 713 44,737 2,362 –9 1,151 2.6

New Hampshire . . . . . 484 51,133 2,058 492 48,904 3,909 –8 2,229 4.6

New Jersey......... 3,064 50,538 1,592 3,068 51,033 1,485 –4 –495 –1.0

New Mexico . . . . . . . . 660 35,136 2,066 670 35,252 3,200 –10 –116 –0.3

New York. . . . . . . . . . . 7,089 40,838 975 7,070 41,597 1,426 19 *–759 *–1.8

North Carolina ...... 3,012 38,472 1,352 2,993 38,815 2,224 19 –343 –0.9

North Dakota . . . . . . . 251 36,358 1,793 253 35,396 2,711 –2 962 2.7

Ohio............... 4,435 43,079 1,240 4,413 43,897 1,790 22 –818 –1.9

Oklahoma .......... 1,343 32,610 1,260 1,348 32,465 1,724 –5 145 0.4

Oregon ............ 1,353 42,631 1,576 1,363 42,463 2,719 –10 168 0.4

Pennsylvania ....... 4,671 42,348 1,234 4,685 43,743 2,134 –14 *–1,395 *–3.2

Rhode Island . . . . . . . 393 42,544 1,831 399 43,165 4,152 –6 –621 –1.4

South Carolina ...... 1,577 37,594 1,540 1,590 37,065 2,140 –13 529 1.4

South Dakota . . . . . . . 290 36,682 1,165 293 36,162 2,114 –3 520 1.4

Tennessee.......... 2,220 34,130 1,555 2,274 33,909 2,515 –54 221 0.7

Texas .............. 7,578 38,791 1,286 7,611 39,837 1,379 –33 *–1,046 *–2.6

Utah. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 705 47,649 1,749 718 45,261 2,074 –13 *2,388 *5.3

Vermont. . . . . . . . . . . . 247 39,685 1,508 255 38,175 3,101 –8 1,510 4.0

Virginia ............ 2,740 47,189 1,757 2,774 50,032 3,693 –34 *–2,843 *–5.7

Washington......... 2,289 42,809 2,122 2,249 42,062 2,747 40 747 1.8

West Virginia. . . . . . . . 746 29,526 1,084 755 29,041 1,235 –9 485 1.7

Wisconsin .......... 2,024 45,349 1,630 2,015 45,383 2,834 9 –34 –0.1

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . 190 39,721 1,759 191 39,027 3,017 –1 694 1.8

- Represents zero or rounds to zero. * Statistically significant at the 90-percent confidence level.

1

For an explanation of confidence intervals, see ‘‘Standard errors and their use’’ at www.census.gov/hhes/income/income01/sa.pdf.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2001 Annual Demographic Supplement.
U.S. Census Bureau Money Income in the United States: 2001 27

Table B-3.

Comparison of 2000 Median Income Using Census 2000-Based Population Controls and

1990 Census-Based Population Controls by Selected Characteristics

(Households and people as of March 2001)

Characteristic

2000

Census 2000-based controls

2000

1990 census-based controls

Difference (Census

2000-based

controls minus

1990 census-based

controls)

Percent

change in

median

income

Number

(thousands)Value

(dollars)

90-percent

confidence

interval1 (±)

(dollars)

Number

(thousands)Value

(dollars)

90-percent

confidence

interval1 (±)

(dollars)

Number

(thousands)

Median

income

(dollars)

HOUSEHOLDS

All households ..................... 108,209 41,990 217 106,289 42,105 217 1,920 –115 *–0.3

Type of Household

Family households .................... 73,767 51,712 296 72,465 51,804 298 1,302 –92 *–0.2

Married-couple families .............. 56,592 59,272 441 55,511 59,494 444 1,081 –222 *–0.4

Female householder, no husband

present .......................... 12,900 28,264 502 12,754 28,237 507 146 27 *0.1

Male householder, no wife present ..... 4,275 42,155 831 4,200 42,166 847 75 –11 -

Nonfamily households ................. 34,442 25,306 271 33,823 25,466 273 619 –160 *–0.6

Female householder................. 19,097 20,480 314 18,698 20,638 317 399 –158 *–0.8

Male householder ................... 15,345 31,479 349 15,126 31,553 352 219 –74 *–0.2

Race and Hispanic Origin of

Householder

All races 2 ......................... 108,209 41,990 217 106,289 42,105 217 1,920 –115 *–0.3

White............................... 90,030 43,916 319 88,604 44,166 321 1,426 –250 *–0.6

Non-Hispanic White ................. 80,527 45,623 301 79,419 45,833 303 1,108 –210 *–0.5

Black ............................... 13,174 29,667 646 13,247 29,715 637 –73 –48 *–0.2

Asian and Pacific Islander .............. 3,963 55,757 1,564 3,518 55,999 1,615 445 –242 *–0.4

Hispanic origin 3 ...................... 10,034 33,168 786 9,669 33,118 773 365 50 *0.2

Age of Householder

Under 65 years....................... 85,740 48,633 329 84,573 48,669 331 1,167 –36 *–0.1

15 to 24 years...................... 6,409 27,847 638 6,422 27,814 632 –13 33 *0.1

25 to 34 years...................... 19,031 44,414 693 18,604 44,533 704 427 –119 *–0.3

35 to 44 years...................... 24,054 53,762 602 23,928 53,865 605 126 –103 *–0.2

45 to 54 years...................... 21,969 57,642 727 21,681 57,667 735 288 –25 -

55 to 64 years...................... 14,277 44,853 722 13,939 44,776 732 338 77 *0.2

65 years and over................... 22,469 23,083 286 21,716 23,118 291 753 –35 *–0.2

Region

Northeast ........................... 21,022 43,750 701 20,237 43,940 714 785 –190 *–0.4

Midwest............................. 25,222 44,261 544 24,539 44,396 553 683 –135 *–0.3

South .............................. 38,852 38,389 461 38,293 38,503 464 559 –114 *–0.3

West . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,113 44,915 648 23,220 45,103 630 –107 –188 *–0.4

Residence

Inside metropolitan areas............... 87,276 44,695 332 85,786 44,848 331 1,490 –153 *–0.3

Outside metropolitan areas ............. 20,933 32,913 673 20,503 33,046 679 430 –133 *–0.4

EARNINGS OF FULL-TIME,

YEAR-ROUND WORKERS

Male ............................... 59,602 37,252 166 58,588 37,355 166 1,014 –103 *–0.3

Female ............................. 41,719 27,462 168 41,198 27,479 179 521 –17 *–0.1

PER CAPITA INCOME

All races 2 ......................... 279,517 22,346 188 276,567 22,269 209 2,950 77 *0.3

White............................... 228,208 23,582 224 226,360 23,515 242 1,848 67 *0.3

Non-Hispanic White ................. 193,931 25,529 258 194,120 25,340 271 –189 189 *0.7

Black ............................... 35,597 14,796 339 35,924 14,862 355 –327 –66 *–0.4

Asian and Pacific Islander .............. 12,693 23,350 1,115 11,535 22,948 1,216 1,158 402 *1.8

Hispanic origin 3 ...................... 36,093 12,651 392 33,875 12,614 441 2,218 37 *0.3

- Represents zero or rounds to zero. *Statistically significant change at the 90-percent confidence level.

1

For an explanation of confidence intervals, see ‘‘Standard errors and their use’’ at www.census.gov/hhes/income/income01/sa.pdf. 2

Data for American Indians and Alaska Natives are not shown separately in this table because of the small sample of those households.

3

Hispanics may be of any race.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2001 Annual Demographic Supplement.