High-tax Massachusetts Loses Roughly 182,000 Residents to Domestic Out-Migration, Raising Long-Term Workforce Worries
Massachusetts lost roughly 182,000 residents to domestic out-migration from April 2020 to July 2025, a sustained trend that threatens the state’s future workforce and economic competitiveness, and raises long-term fiscal concerns.
- About 182,000 people left Massachusetts for other U.S. states from April 2020–July 2025, per the Pioneer Institute.
- Young adults (ages 26–34) are the most mobile cohort, intensifying concerns about workforce renewal (Pioneer Institute).
- International arrivals masked losses temporarily (an estimated 230,000 added from 2022–2024), but federal policy shifts and slower immigration reduced that cushion (CommonWealth Beacon).
Out-migration trend and demographics
Analysis by the Pioneer Institute finds domestic out-migration from Massachusetts is a steady structural trend, not a pandemic blip. Between April 2020 and July 2025 the state lost about 182,000 residents to other states. Annual net domestic losses peaked at nearly 48,000 in 2022, improved in 2024 (‑19,195), then slipped again in 2025 (‑33,340). For 2024–2025 Massachusetts ranked 46th nationally in domestic migration performance (UMass Donahue Institute).
“Losing 26–34‑year‑olds undermines future growth.” The Pioneer analysis emphasizes that the 26–34 cohort — often in prime working and child-raising years — is leaving at higher rates, compounding long-term tax-base and productivity concerns.
International migration has masked domestic losses — for now
Massachusetts recorded a large inflow of international migrants from 2022–2024, adding roughly 230,000 residents and contributing to a labor force that grew to about 3.9 million in 2024. That surge helped produce modest population growth to roughly 7.15 million by mid‑2025, up about 15,500 year‑over‑year. But federal policy shifts and a national immigration slowdown trimmed inflows in 2025, reducing the buffer against domestic departures (Pioneer Institute; CommonWealth Beacon).
Labor force and jobs lag national peers
Despite a larger labor force driven by international arrivals, Massachusetts has not recovered private‑sector employment to pre‑pandemic levels. Private-sector jobs remain down roughly 18,000 (‑0.55%) since January 2020, while the U.S. private sector grew by over 5% in the same period. Fast‑growing states such as Florida, North Carolina and Texas posted private‑job gains above 10%, outcompeting Massachusetts in job creation and attracting domestic migrants (Pioneer Institute).
Unemployment rose to 4.8% by December, up from a low of 3.2% in April 2023, and remains higher than neighboring states including Connecticut (4.2%), Rhode Island (4.3%), Maine (3.2%), New Hampshire (3.1%) and Vermont (2.6%). That increase undercuts the view that the state’s economy is uniformly strong despite prominent universities and tech sectors.
Contributors: cost, competitiveness, housing limits
Pioneer points to affordability and competitiveness as central drivers: high housing costs, expensive child care and health care, and an overall tax burden push residents toward lower‑cost states with faster housing development. Massachusetts’ domestic migration rate sits around ‑4.7 per 1,000 residents, worse than the Northeast average of ‑3.5 per 1,000. Many departing residents relocate to Southern and Sun Belt states that offer lower taxes and easier housing development (Pioneer Institute; Mass.gov).
Regional comparisons and historical patterns
Massachusetts ranks among states with the largest domestic departures, alongside New York and California. International migration rates (recently about 5.6 per 1,000) rank near the top nationally and have historically masked domestic losses. Between 2011–2023 the state averaged roughly 43,600 international arrivals annually, but recent federal policy changes and data revisions increase uncertainty (UMass Donahue Institute; CommonWealth Beacon).
Projections and risks
Analysts warn that if current trends persist — domestic out‑migration near 27,700 per year while international inflows slow to about 40,000 annually — Massachusetts could lose roughly 28,000 residents by 2035 under a low‑growth scenario (about a 0.4% decline). That outcome would widen workforce shortfalls and strain public finances (Mass.gov).
Implications for Utah
Massachusetts’ population and workforce trends present opportunities and lessons for Utah policymakers, employers and higher education institutions:
- Talent and recruitment: The outflow of young, skilled workers creates recruitment chances for Utah. Emphasize competitive pay, housing affordability and worker‑friendly policies to attract talent.
- Economic competition: High‑tax, high‑cost states risk losing businesses and workers to pro‑growth states. Utah’s lower taxes, streamlined permitting and housing expansion are competitive advantages.
- Fiscal lessons: Rising unemployment and stagnant private‑sector job growth in Massachusetts signal risks Utah can avoid by prioritizing workforce training and affordable housing supply.
- Higher education pipelines: Utah colleges can recruit out‑of‑state students and convert them into long‑term employees via employer partnerships and targeted programs.
- Housing and infrastructure: Proactive land‑use policy and infrastructure investment are essential to absorb incoming residents without spiking costs.
- Political and cultural effects: Migration from high‑tax blue states often brings residents motivated by economic opportunity; for Utah’s conservative audience, new arrivals may align with pro‑growth values.
Sources and further reading
- Pioneer Institute, “Domestic Out‑Migration Is Hollowing Out Massachusetts Workforce and Economy”
- UMass Donahue Institute, U.S. Census Bureau Vintage 2025 State Population Estimates summary
- CommonWealth / Beacon, “Mass. population squeaks to growth but national immigration slowdown reveals cracks”
- Mass.gov, Housing needs and population projections
Reporting notes
This article draws on analysis from the Pioneer Institute and population summaries from the UMass Donahue Institute, which use U.S. Census Vintage 2025 estimates. The Pioneer Institute is a free‑market think tank focused on economic competitiveness and policy reform; the UMass Donahue Institute provides state summaries based on federal revisions. Further local reporting and federal migration policy changes will shape near‑term trends.
