Skincare Specialists in New Hampshire
May 2025 wages · tax year 2026
You keep
$39,856
after federal, FICA and New Hampshire tax
Tax takes
$7,034
15.0% of the whole
Worth, in national money
$37,834
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
$46,890
Kept after tax
$39,856
Worth in national money
$37,834
State rank
16
of 49 states
What this pays, and what it is worth
- Pay for skincare specialists is strong here. New Hampshire's middle earner gets $46,890, putting the state 16 of 49 — about 3.44% ahead of the national figure.
- Within New Hampshire this is lower-paid work. Of 488 occupations the state publishes figures for, skincare specialists ranks 387. That is the bottom quarter locally, whatever the national comparison says.
- The wage here flatters the reality. From $46,890 the take-home is $39,856. But New Hampshire costs more than the national average, so that money behaves more like $37,834 would elsewhere. Worth knowing before comparing offers across states. The average is higher, $49,930, because the best-paid pull it up.
- For skincare specialists, New Hampshire sits in the upper band nationally: a median of $46,890, ranking 16 of 49 and running about 3.44% above the national midpoint. Nominal advantage of this size is usually, though not always, large enough to survive the state's own tax and price levels.
- Against every occupation New Hampshire reports, skincare specialists ranks 387 of 488, in the lowest quartile of the state's distribution. That position is set by the local labor market and is independent of how the state compares nationally for this work.
- Retained pay after federal, FICA and New Hampshire income tax is $39,856 for skincare specialists, from $46,890. The state's price level exceeds the national average, so the price-adjusted equivalent is $37,834. ⚠️ 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 $49,930 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: Skincare Specialists
The state median for this job
| Lowest tenth earn under | $27,560 |
|---|---|
| Half earn under | $46,890 |
| Top tenth earn over | $83,200 |
| This salary | $46,890 |
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 | $39,856 |
|---|---|
| Take-home in Texas | $39,856 |
| Once local prices are leveledBEA price parity | +$3,181 |
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 | $46,890 |
|---|---|
| You could take a cut of | −$3,847 |
| Prices in Texas | 97 vs 105 |
State taxes and state price levels only. No city tax, and no housing market.
Sources and assumptions
- Half the people doing this work in New Hampshire earn less than $46,890. The published range is $27,560 up to $83,200, so an individual figure can sit a long way from the middle in either direction.
- That $39,856 take-home in New Hampshire comes from $46,890. 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 387 of 488.
- Two cautions on $37,834, the adjusted value of that $46,890 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 387 of 488 locally.
- Reported values are medians; for skincare specialists in New Hampshire the tenth-to-ninetieth percentile band is $27,560 to $83,200. Neither the median nor the band is an offer rate, and neither accounts for hours, shift differentials or overtime.
- Retained pay of $39,856, from $46,890, 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 387 of 488 locally, and the state ranks 16 of 49 for it.
- This $37,834 adjusted figure, worked from $46,890, 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 387 of 488 in the state. The occupation ranks 387 of 488 locally.
Questions people ask
Is this the average pay for the job?
Half earn more than this and half earn less. The average sits at $49,930 because a long tail of high pay lifts it, so the two answer different questions.
Why is the pay range for this job so wide?
One title, many jobs. The lowest tenth take $27,560, the highest tenth $83,200, and what separates them is experience, employer and what exactly the role does.
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 $37,834 — the wage did not change, only what it covers.
Is most of this wage taxed away?
Most of it arrives. $39,856 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?
The survey withholds small samples rather than publish an unreliable number. Pay appears for 49 states here, and a missing state means too few reports, not no jobs.
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 $49,930. 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 ($27,560) and the ninetieth ($83,200) 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 $37,834 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 $39,856 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 49 of the fifty-one jurisdictions. Suppression reflects sample size and confidentiality rules, and cannot be read as an absence of employment.