It provides a benchmark for whether wages actually cover the cost of living, framing debates over whether the current minimum wage is sufficient.
It's the amount you'd need to earn per hour to actually pay for the basics where you live, which is often higher than the legal minimum wage.
Because housing and other costs differ widely, a living wage in rural Mississippi differs sharply from one in San Francisco, complicating any single national figure.
Advocates, researchers and some local governments use living-wage estimates to set or argue for higher minimum wages, contract requirements or anti-poverty programs.
Researchers add up typical costs for housing, food, child care, transportation, health care, taxes and other essentials in a given area to estimate required income.
Estimates differ for single adults, couples and families with children, since costs like child care and housing scale with household size.
Unlike the minimum wage, living-wage figures carry no legal force unless adopted into a specific law, ordinance or contracting rule by a government body.
A look at how the federal wage floor works, what raising it to $15 could do, and why economists still disagree.
Read the guide →Lawmakers and economists continue to debate whether more than doubling the $7.25 federal floor would lift workers out of poverty or cost jobs.
Read the brief →