Natural Sciences Managers in New Hampshire
May 2025 wages · tax year 2026
You keep
$102,862
after federal, FICA and New Hampshire tax
Tax takes
$31,148
23.2% of the whole
Worth, in national money
$97,643
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
$134,010
Kept after tax
$102,862
Worth in national money
$97,643
State rank
20
of 48 states
What this pays, and what it is worth
- New Hampshire sits in the middle of the pack for natural sciences managers. The median is $134,010, ranking 20 of 48 states with figures. Close enough to the national middle that where you live matters more than the headline suggests.
- Within New Hampshire this is well-paid work. Of 488 occupations with published figures in the state, natural sciences managers ranks 26 — in the top quarter of everything people do there.
- Costs eat into it here. Of $134,010, tax leaves $102,862 — and because New Hampshire is dearer than average, that stretches only as far as $97,643 would nationally. Averages run higher here, $150,330, since top earners drag the number up.
- New Hampshire occupies the middle band for natural sciences managers: a median of $134,010, ranking 20 of 48. Where nominal pay is close to the national figure, the tax and price adjustments below carry proportionally more weight in determining the real outcome.
- Ranked against every occupation New Hampshire publishes a median for, natural sciences managers sits 26 of 488 — the upper quartile of the state's wage distribution. National standing and within-state standing are separate questions, and a job can occupy very different positions on each.
- After tax, $102,862 remains from the New Hampshire median of $134,010 for this occupation. Applying the state's above-average price parity yields $97,643 in national-average terms — the quantity relevant to a relocation decision, and the one absent from essentially every published wage comparison. Mean pay of $150,330 exceeds the median, so the upper tail is doing the work.
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: Natural Sciences Managers
The state median for this job
| Lowest tenth earn under | $92,600 |
|---|---|
| Half earn under | $134,010 |
| Top tenth earn over | $220,150 |
| This salary | $134,010 |
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 | $102,862 |
|---|---|
| Take-home in Texas | $102,862 |
| Once local prices are leveledBEA price parity | +$8,209 |
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 | $134,010 |
|---|---|
| You could take a cut of | −$11,671 |
| 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 natural sciences managers in New Hampshire earn under $134,010 and half over. The published range runs $92,600 at the tenth percentile to $220,150 at the ninetieth. Experience and employer move an individual a long way inside that.
- That $102,862 take-home in New Hampshire comes from $134,010. It is the no-frills case: single filer, standard deduction, nothing set aside before tax. Real circumstances almost always reduce the tax. City and school-district taxes are not counted at all. Locally the work ranks 26 of 488.
- The wage data and the price data come from different years. That is how each is published. The price adjustment behind $97,643 uses one figure for the whole of New Hampshire. A city and a rural county there can differ by more than two states do. Out of 488 occupations the state publishes, this one sits at 26.
- Figures are distribution medians for natural sciences managers in New Hampshire, not entry or offer rates. The published band runs $92,600 to $220,150; 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.
- Retained pay of $102,862, from $134,010, assumes a single New Hampshire filer with the standard deduction and no elective deferrals. Pre-tax retirement or HSA contributions, dependants and itemized deductions all reduce it further; local income taxes, excluded here, would increase it in the states that levy them. This occupation ranks 26 of 488 locally, and the state ranks 20 of 48 for it.
- Wage and price series carry different reference periods, each published on its own schedule. The real-terms figure of $97,643, worked from $134,010, deflates by a statewide parity that conceals substantial intra-state variation, concentrated in housing — so it supports comparison between states rather than the pricing of a move to a particular New Hampshire address, on work sitting at 26 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 $150,330, dragged up by high earners; the middle figure describes a typical worker better.
Why is the pay range for this job so wide?
Because one job title covers very different work. The bottom tenth here earn $92,600 and the top tenth $220,150 — experience, employer and specialism separate them, and a single figure hides all three.
Does a bigger number here mean I am better off?
A larger wage in a dearer place is not automatically more. Adjusted for local prices, this pay behaves like $97,643 of national purchasing power.
Is most of this wage taxed away?
Most of it arrives. $102,862 lands after tax, since there is no state income tax on wages here — though the federal floor is identical in every state.
Why is this job missing from some states?
Because the survey suppresses a figure when too few employers report it. This occupation has published pay in 48 states — the rest are withheld to protect confidentiality, which is not the same as nobody doing the work there.
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 $150,330. 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 drives the percentile dispersion in this occupation?
Dispersion between the tenth percentile ($92,600) and the ninetieth ($220,150) exceeds the family median dispersion. SOC codes aggregate roles differing in seniority, industry and specialisation, and BLS does not disaggregate below the detailed occupation level, so within-title variance is not separable from the published series.
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 $97,643 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 $102,862 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.
Why does this occupation lack published estimates in every state?
BLS suppresses estimates failing disclosure or reliability criteria. This occupation has published state-level estimates in 48 of the fifty-one jurisdictions. Suppression reflects sample size and confidentiality rules, and cannot be read as an absence of employment.