Animal Caretakers in New Hampshire
May 2025 wages · tax year 2026
You keep
$30,134
after federal, FICA and New Hampshire tax
Tax takes
$4,656
13.4% of the whole
Worth, in national money
$28,605
New Hampshire costs more than average
On that salary you would be around the 25th percentile for this work in New Hampshire — roughly, since only five points along the band are published.
One filer, standard deduction, no dependants and nothing paid in before tax — the same household the rest of this page uses, so the comparison holds. City and school-district income taxes are not included.
Median here
$34,790
Kept after tax
$30,134
Worth in national money
$28,605
State rank
19
of 51 states
What this pays, and what it is worth
- Middling, nationally. New Hampshire pays animal caretakers around $34,790 at the midpoint, 19 of 51 states. The interesting numbers on this page are the two below it.
- Against 488 occupations New Hampshire publishes, animal caretakers lands at 470. That is the lower quarter. That is the comparison people actually feel, more than any national table.
- The wage here flatters the reality. From $34,790 the take-home is $30,134. But New Hampshire costs more than the national average, so that money behaves more like $28,605 would elsewhere. Worth knowing before comparing offers across states. The average is higher, $37,160, because the best-paid pull it up.
- For animal caretakers the New Hampshire median is $34,790, ranking 19 of 51 states reporting. Mid-band nominal positions are the ones most frequently reordered by the adjustments, because no large wage premium exists to absorb a state's tax or price level.
- Within New Hampshire, this work ranks 470 of 488 occupations by median pay, in the bottom quartile. The within-state position is the more salient one for anyone weighing this job against alternatives available to them locally.
- Retained pay after federal, FICA and New Hampshire income tax is $30,134 for animal caretakers, from $34,790. The state's price level exceeds the national average, so the price-adjusted equivalent is $28,605. ⚠️ This is purchasing power and not a wage; cross-state offer comparisons that stop at the nominal figure systematically overvalue high-cost states. The mean of $37,160 sits above the median, the right skew typical of wage data.
Compare this career across states
Choose your filing status and local taxes, compare pay, and keep a shortlist.Compare wage and personal-pay outcomes by state, with selected resident local taxes and saved career choices.
Pay band: Animal Caretakers
The state median for this job
| Lowest tenth earn under | $27,830 |
|---|---|
| Half earn under | $34,790 |
| Top tenth earn over | $51,040 |
| This salary | $34,790 |
Positions between the published tenth, quarter, half, three-quarter and ninetieth points are estimated by straight line.
The same pay, somewhere else
The state median for this job
| Take-home in New Hampshire | $30,134 |
|---|---|
| Take-home in Texas | $30,134 |
| Once local prices are leveledBEA price parity | +$2,405 |
The raise and the real gain point in opposite directions here.
State income tax and state price levels only. No city income tax, and no housing market.
What you would need there
The state median for this job
| To match take-home only | $34,790 |
|---|---|
| You could take a cut of | −$2,909 |
| Prices in Texas | 97 vs 105 |
State taxes and state price levels only. No city tax, and no housing market.
Sources and assumptions
- A median is the middle, not an offer. Half of animal caretakers in New Hampshire earn under $34,790 and half over. The published range runs $27,830 at the tenth percentile to $51,040 at the ninetieth. Experience and employer move an individual a long way inside that.
- One filer, no dependants, no pension contributions — that is the household behind New Hampshire's $30,134, worked from $34,790. That is on purpose. It lets states be compared with each other, not with each other's family circumstances. Local city taxes are left out. Locally this work ranks 470 of 488.
- Two cautions on $28,605, the adjusted value of that $34,790 median. It levels out prices with a single number for all of New Hampshire. No actual address matches that. The wage figures and price figures are also from different years. Each is published on its own timetable. This work sits at 470 of 488 locally.
- Figures are distribution medians for animal caretakers in New Hampshire, not entry or offer rates. The published band runs $27,830 to $51,040; within-state dispersion of that width routinely exceeds the dispersion between states, so tenure, employer and metropolitan area predict an individual's pay better than geography does.
- The New Hampshire take-home of $30,134, on $34,790 for work ranking 470 of 488 locally, models the simplest household deliberately: holding it constant is what makes the interstate comparison meaningful. It also means the absolute figure overstates liability for most real filers, and municipal income taxes are outside the model entirely. The occupation ranks 470 of 488 in the state.
- This $28,605 adjusted figure, worked from $34,790, rests on a state-level price parity averaging over within-state dispersion larger than much of the between-state dispersion. Wage and price vintages differ by publication schedule. The result is directionally sound and not address-specific, for work at 470 of 488 in the state. The occupation ranks 470 of 488 locally.
Questions people ask
Is this the average pay for the job?
It is the midpoint, not the average. The average here is $37,160, dragged up by high earners; the middle figure describes a typical worker better.
How much does pay for this job actually vary?
Less than you might expect. The bottom tenth earn $27,830 and the top tenth $51,040, so most people doing this work in New Hampshire sit within a fairly tight band.
Does a bigger number here mean I am better off?
Not on its own. Prices in New Hampshire run above the national level, so the same dollars buy less here. Adjusted for that, this pay is worth $28,605 — the wage did not change, only what it covers.
Is most of this wage taxed away?
Most of it arrives. $30,134 lands after tax, since there is no state income tax on wages here — though the federal floor is identical in every state.
Can I compare this job across every state?
Yes for this one. Pay is published in all 51 jurisdictions, so a state-to-state comparison here rests on the same survey everywhere rather than on a patchwork.
How does the published median differ from the mean for this occupation?
The median is the midpoint of the distribution; the mean for this occupation in New Hampshire is $37,160. Wage distributions are right-skewed, so the mean exceeds the median wherever a minority earn substantially more. BLS publishes both because substituting one for the other misstates a typical worker's pay.
What is the dispersion of this occupation's wage distribution?
The tenth-to-ninetieth percentile span ($27,830 to $51,040) sits at or below the family's median dispersion, indicating relatively standardized compensation. Percentiles are published per state, so this dispersion is specific to New Hampshire rather than a national figure.
How does the state price level affect real compensation?
New Hampshire's regional price parity sits above the national average, so nominal wages overstate purchasing power. Deflating take-home by the state price level gives $28,605 in national-average terms. ⚠️ RPPs are an all-items index; housing parities vary far more widely than the headline figure.
Why is the take-home ratio comparatively high in this state?
New Hampshire levies no personal income tax on wages, so take-home of $30,134 reflects the federal layer and FICA alone. Federal income tax and FICA are unchanged; states without a wage income tax generally recover revenue through consumption and property bases instead.
Is this occupation's state coverage complete?
State-level estimates are published for all 51 jurisdictions for this occupation, so cross-state comparison is not confounded by suppression. ⚠️ Estimates remain survey-based and carry sampling error; small differences between adjacent states should not be over-read.