Most States’ Population Growth Slowed in 2025 as International Migration Declined

In 2025, population growth rates fell in 48 states as international migration declined nationwide. The number of states with populations that grew more slowly than their long-term trends tripled to 30 from 10 in 2024. With populations aging and birth rates near record lows, states are increasingly dependent on migration—domestic and international—for growth.

Although nearly every state’s population is still expanding, slower long-term growth poses fiscal risks to many states. Total population across the 50 states grew about half as fast from July 2024 to July 2025 as it did during the preceding 12 months, extending the volatility of recent years brought on by rapidly shifting migration trends.

Since 2020, net migration from other states and abroad has been the leading driver, nationally and in most states, of population change—the difference between all new residents, including newcomers and babies, and those who die or move away. In 2021 and 2022, domestic migration played an outsize role, in part because of an uptick in interstate moves amid the COVID-19 pandemic. And as those domestic flows eased in 2023 and 2024, a sharp rise in international migration boosted growth in most states. That momentum then reversed in 2025 as international migration declined steeply, slowing population growth in almost every state.

The states with the largest declines in international migration—Colorado, New Jersey, and New York—also saw the most pronounced decreases in overall population growth. Despite these declines, international migration and overall population growth in most states returned in 2025 to levels more in line with long-term trends.

Before the pandemic, population growth had been trending downward for decades. Looking ahead, it is unclear whether the volatility of recent years will persist or give way to steadier change. But in either case, slower long-term growth trajectories are increasing the fiscal pressures on states associated with aging and threaten to erode tax bases and strain labor markets.

At a regional level, migration trends played out unevenly.

The Northeast felt the effects of slowing international migration most acutely, especially in Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York, which have ranked among the top in population gains from immigration in recent years. The region also has some of the nation's oldest populations and lowest birth rates, leaving states with low, and often negative, natural change (i.e., the difference between births and deaths) to offset shifts in migration. And at the same time, the Northeast continued to have the nation’s highest median rate of domestic out-migration, which in prior years had been partially counterbalanced by international migration. But, with reduced immigration in 2025, the net effect on regional population growth was more apparent. Together, these factors returned the Northeast to a slower growth rate closer to its historical trend after unusually strong growth in 2024.

The Midwest was a very different story. Even as international migration slowed, shifting patterns led to positive net domestic migration into the region for the first time in at least 15 years, helping to drive population growth in every Midwestern state in 2025. In all other regions, at least one state had a net loss of residents. And all but one state in the Midwest attracted more domestic migrants than in 2024, reducing net outflows in some states and bolstering net gains in others. Whether these shifts represent a lasting change in migration patterns or a single-year fluctuation remains to be seen.

By contrast, the West’s status as a destination may be weakening. The region has now lost residents to other parts of the country for five straight years, driven by outflows from California. This trend dragged down overall growth in the West, pushing the region’s median growth rate below that of the Midwest for the first time since at least 2000. Still, the West remained home to some of the nation’s fastest-growing states—with Arizona, Idaho, Nevada, Utah, and Washington ranking in the top 10 for overall growth. At the same time, California, Hawaii, and New Mexico were among the five states that shrank in 2025, reflecting the divergent growth patterns within the region.

The South maintained its position as the fastest-growing region in 2025. Although slowing growth in Florida and Texas tied to the broader declines in international migration tempered the region’s overall pace, both states still grew significantly faster than the nation overall. Overall, more than half of Southern states outpaced their 15-year growth rates, with North and South Carolina posting the strongest relative increases.

State highlights

Population changes from July 2024 to July 2025 show:

• Population growth slowed in 44 states, with California, Hawaii, and New Mexico flipping from positive to negative and losses accelerating in Vermont.
• Population growth trended downward in all but two states, Montana and West Virginia, where new arrivals from other states outpaced the slowdown in international migration.
• Population grew fastest in South Carolina (1.46%), followed by Idaho (1.44%), North Carolina (1.32%), Texas (1.25%), and Utah (1.03%).
• Five states had a net loss of residents: Vermont (-0.29%), Hawaii (-0.15%), West Virginia (-0.07%), New Mexico (-0.06%), and California (-0.02%).
• Population grew the slowest in New York (0.01%), Louisiana (0.07%), Alaska (0.10%), Pennsylvania (0.10%), and Illinois (0.13%).
• Three states recorded their slowest annual growth rates since 2000: Vermont (-0.29%), Colorado (0.40%), and Utah (1.03%).

Long-term trends

Whereas short-term volatility often obscures fundamental underlying population dynamics, long-term trends can help illuminate states’ demographic trajectories. For example, the drop in growth in 2025 may reflect short-term volatility—a sharp decrease in international migration from a historic high—within a sustained slowdown. Long-term trends are better understood through 15-year compound annual growth rates, which measure the constant pace that population would have had to change each year starting in 2010 to reach its 2025 total.

Over the past 15 years, the 50-state median population growth rate was 0.50% a year, and three states lost residents over that time. West Virginia’s population declined by slightly more than 88,000 from mid-2010 through mid-2025, equal to 0.32% annually. Illinois’ population shrank by about 126,000, or 0.07% a year, and Mississippi lost about 16,000 people, or 0.04% a year.

Regionally, growth over the 15 years was especially sluggish in the Northeast and Midwest. The Northeast lost residents to other states every year from 2010 to 2025. Meanwhile, the Midwest saw modest gains from other states in 2025 after enduring losses in each of the prior 14 years, a short-term change that underscores the importance of looking to long-term trends to effectively assess a region’s outlook. The South and West, by contrast, were home to 16 of the 20 fastest-growing states over the past 15 years, led by Idaho, Utah, and Texas, which each added people at more than triple the median rate.

Long-term state highlights

A comparison of 15-year population trends, based on each state’s compound annual growth rate from July 2010 to July 2025, shows that:

• Population grew the fastest in Idaho (the equivalent of 1.72% a year), Utah (1.63%), Texas (1.53%), Florida (1.47%), and Nevada (1.31%).
• Among the 10 states with the highest long-term growth rates, North Dakota (1.13%) was the only one not in the South or West. The state owes its strong long-term growth rate to the early-2010s oil boom, which attracted out-of-state workers, but its growth slowed dramatically in 2015 after a drop in oil prices and has remained closer to national trends since.
• Population growth was slowest in Louisiana (0.11%), Michigan (0.17%), Pennsylvania (0.18%), and Vermont and New Mexico (both 0.19%).

Drivers of population change

For most of the 15 years ending in 2025, 50-state population growth was driven by natural increase, when birth rates surpass deaths. But since the baby boom of 1946 to 1964, birth rates have generally been declining and the country has aged, which together mean that migration—domestic and international—now plays a much more significant role in whether state populations shrink or grow than it did in the past.

The nation’s birth-to-death ratio remains near historic lows despite slowly improving over the past four years thanks to falling death rates as the pandemic faded. In 2025, deaths exceeded births in 17 states, most significantly in Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and West Virginia. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that the national rate of natural change will turn negative around 2030, meaning more states will probably have to rely on migration to maintain population growth.

Swings in migration during and after the pandemic introduced significant short-term volatility in state population trends. Domestic migration surged in 2021 as people relocated at high rates from large metropolitan areas to less densely populated places. These shifts helped widen the gap between the fastest- and slowest-growing states, though those differences narrowed after 2022. Domestic migration started to decline in 2023, then dropped to decade lows in 2024 and 2025.

By contrast, international migration steadily rose from 2021 to 2024, helping 42 states exceed their population growth long-term trends in 2024. And despite slowing in 2025, international migration remained positive and continued to add residents to every state.

Measuring international migration is challenging, and methods for estimating the number of immigrants have changed significantly in recent years, adding uncertainty to current and future projections. According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s estimates, international migration is trending toward net negative—which would be the first time that has happened in more than 50 years. The CBO projects that net international migration will rise in coming years, returning to pre-pandemic levels. However, these forecasts do not account for potential further changes in federal immigration policy, which adds uncertainty to the complex mix of economic, policy, and geopolitical trends that shape migration patterns.

A look ahead

Historic trends also can help states map out the future. Every 10 years, the U.S. Census Bureau provides an official count of state populations, most recently as of April 1, 2020. University of Virginia’s Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service uses these counts, supplemented by other Census data, to estimate how state demographics may change in the decades to come.

According to the center’s projections, median 50-state growth will continue slowing through 2050, with an annualized growth rate of just 0.03% during the final decade of that span. The center projects that only three states will lose population from 2020 to 2030, but that count is expected to increase sixfold over the 2030s and reach 24 by 2050. The Census Bureau also projects a steady slowdown in national population growth, which it attributes largely to the combination of declining fertility rates and rising death rates as baby boomers age.

Analyzing the age composition of state populations not only helps explain projected population growth or declines, but also illuminates the ways that demographic shifts may affect future state budgets. According to the Weldon Cooper projections, from 2020 to 2050, the population of adults age 65 and over will increase in n every state, while K-12-, college-, and working-age populations will decline in almost half of states.

Each state’s age distribution will bring a combination of risks and opportunities. For example, states with growing senior populations may face drops in income and sales tax revenue and increased health care and pension costs. These challenges may be lessened in states that also have growing populations of 25-to-64-year-olds (e.g., Utah and Texas), which typically translates to a boost in the labor force and in the number of people who, through their taxes, help cover public costs for aging residents. But an expanding working-age population may present issues of its own, including those related to housing availability and cost.

Why Pew assesses population change

Population trends are tied to states’ finances, with demographic changes affecting both revenue and spending. More people usually means more workers and consumers contributing to economic activity as they take jobs and buy goods and services, which generates more tax revenue. A growing economy, in turn, can attract even more workers and their families. But a rapidly expanding population can also strain government resources by pushing up housing costs, overburdening transit and other infrastructure, and increasing demand for public services.

On the other hand, a shrinking or slow-growing population can be both a cause and an effect of weakened economic prospects. Less economic activity can limit state revenue collections. And although a smaller population can lead to a reduction in some spending, it also means fewer residents are available to help cover the costs of long-standing commitments, such as debt and state employee retirement benefits. The size of a state’s population, and annual changes to it, also factor into how much it will receive from some federal grants.

Pew tracks population changes over the short and long terms to shed light on different ways that populations affect states’ fiscal conditions. In the near term, annual population shifts can affect revenue collections and spending while long-term demographic trends play a significant role in shaping states’ overall economic and fiscal trajectories. State officials study population trends, along with other measures, to forecast revenue streams and demand for services and inform budgeting and long-term fiscal planning.

Alexandre Fall is a principal associate and Kellen Silver is a senior associate with The Pew Charitable Trusts’ Fiscal 50 project.