Household movement

How migration changes rental demand—and why mover income matters

What can tax-return migration reveal about the depth and spending power of incoming demand?

Migration is often reduced to a net headcount, but rental demand depends on who moved, the resources they brought and the housing they seek. A positive flow can deepen the tenant pool, change its income mix or bypass a property segment entirely.

RentMarker joins IRS county-to-county migration with metro rent, population and labor evidence. Tax returns provide a consistent view of filers, exemptions and adjusted gross income moving between places. They do not count every person and they arrive on a different cadence from monthly rents, so the result is a demand screen rather than a live population counter.

Movers create housing demand only after geography, income, timing and property segment are connected.
Current evidence

Mover income beside rent pressure

The chart preserves both the direction of migration resources and the rent relationship instead of turning movement into a popularity score.

Positive net tax-return migration only

Inbound scale and the asking-rent share of mover AGI

Emerald marks arrivals with higher average AGI than leavers; amber marks a negative mover-income gap.

Net IRS migration per one thousand residents and annualized asking rent as a share of inbound AGIScatter plot of metros gaining tax-return households. The horizontal axis shows net households per one thousand residents; the vertical axis shows annualized Zillow asking rent divided by average AGI per inbound tax return.0.05.711.317.022.710%21%31%41%51%30% descriptive lineJefferson, GA: 21.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 32.2% annual rent/inbound AGIThe Villages, FL: 21.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 19.8% annual rent/inbound AGIMyrtle Beach, SC: 15.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.7% annual rent/inbound AGIOcala, FL: 14.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.1% annual rent/inbound AGIHomosassa Springs, FL: 14.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.0% annual rent/inbound AGIWilmington, NC: 12.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 21.7% annual rent/inbound AGILakeland, FL: 11.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 39.1% annual rent/inbound AGIPort St. Lucie, FL: 10.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.6% annual rent/inbound AGIPanama City, FL: 10.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.7% annual rent/inbound AGIPunta Gorda, FL: 9.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.4% annual rent/inbound AGIAthens, TN: 8.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.4% annual rent/inbound AGIDeltona, FL: 8.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.4% annual rent/inbound AGIWilliston, ND: 8.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.8% annual rent/inbound AGISpartanburg, SC: 8.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.0% annual rent/inbound AGIAlbemarle, NC: 8.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 32.9% annual rent/inbound AGIGreeley, CO: 8.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.7% annual rent/inbound AGIDaphne, AL: 8.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.1% annual rent/inbound AGILake Havasu City, AZ: 8.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.3% annual rent/inbound AGIPalm Bay, FL: 7.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.3% annual rent/inbound AGICharleston, SC: 7.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.7% annual rent/inbound AGISt. George, UT: 7.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.1% annual rent/inbound AGIMorristown, TN: 7.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.6% annual rent/inbound AGIBrenham, TX: 7.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 16.9% annual rent/inbound AGINorth Port, FL: 7.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 18.5% annual rent/inbound AGISherman, TX: 7.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 20.4% annual rent/inbound AGIAthens, TX: 7.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 19.9% annual rent/inbound AGIHuntsville, AL: 7.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.8% annual rent/inbound AGIGreeneville, TN: 7.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 21.0% annual rent/inbound AGISebring, FL: 6.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 31.7% annual rent/inbound AGIPahrump, NV: 6.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.6% annual rent/inbound AGISandpoint, ID: 6.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.5% annual rent/inbound AGIFayetteville, AR: 6.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.5% annual rent/inbound AGIMontrose, CO: 6.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 35.7% annual rent/inbound AGISeneca, SC: 6.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 19.3% annual rent/inbound AGIKalispell, MT: 6.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.4% annual rent/inbound AGIHilton Head Island, SC: 6.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 16.5% annual rent/inbound AGIBend, OR: 5.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.2% annual rent/inbound AGIJohnson City, TN: 5.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.3% annual rent/inbound AGIRichmond, KY: 5.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.2% annual rent/inbound AGIDurant, OK: 5.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 36.5% annual rent/inbound AGISebastian, FL: 5.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 19.5% annual rent/inbound AGISanford, NC: 5.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.1% annual rent/inbound AGIAustin, TX: 5.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 19.7% annual rent/inbound AGIBurlington, NC: 5.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.0% annual rent/inbound AGIBoise City, ID: 5.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.5% annual rent/inbound AGIGreenville, SC: 5.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.9% annual rent/inbound AGIJacksonville, FL: 5.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.0% annual rent/inbound AGIHagerstown, MD: 5.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 32.2% annual rent/inbound AGIGrand Junction, CO: 5.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.2% annual rent/inbound AGICullman, AL: 5.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.6% annual rent/inbound AGICorsicana, TX: 5.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.2% annual rent/inbound AGITullahoma, TN: 5.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 32.2% annual rent/inbound AGIKnoxville, TN: 4.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.5% annual rent/inbound AGIShelton, WA: 4.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.3% annual rent/inbound AGISioux Falls, SD: 4.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 22.6% annual rent/inbound AGINew Bern, NC: 4.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.3% annual rent/inbound AGIJacksonville, NC: 4.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 35.0% annual rent/inbound AGIMorehead City, NC: 4.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.8% annual rent/inbound AGIRaleigh, NC: 4.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.3% annual rent/inbound AGICookeville, TN: 4.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.3% annual rent/inbound AGIPinehurst, NC: 4.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.9% annual rent/inbound AGIWinchester, VA: 4.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 31.2% annual rent/inbound AGIHuntsville, TX: 4.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.5% annual rent/inbound AGIPort Angeles, WA: 4.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.9% annual rent/inbound AGINashville, TN: 4.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.8% annual rent/inbound AGIMidland, TX: 4.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.7% annual rent/inbound AGIAlbany, OR: 4.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 36.1% annual rent/inbound AGICharlotte, NC: 4.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.7% annual rent/inbound AGIChattanooga, TN: 4.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.5% annual rent/inbound AGICleveland, TN: 4.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.3% annual rent/inbound AGIClarksville, TN: 4.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 31.3% annual rent/inbound AGICoeur d'Alene, ID: 4.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.6% annual rent/inbound AGIPensacola, FL: 4.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.8% annual rent/inbound AGICalhoun, GA: 4.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 36.2% annual rent/inbound AGIAsheville, NC: 4.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.0% annual rent/inbound AGICentralia, WA: 4.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.5% annual rent/inbound AGIDover, DE: 4.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 36.4% annual rent/inbound AGIPayson, AZ: 4.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.2% annual rent/inbound AGIStaunton, VA: 4.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.2% annual rent/inbound AGIMissoula, MT: 4.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.1% annual rent/inbound AGILake City, FL: 4.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 34.2% annual rent/inbound AGIHinesville, GA: 3.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 48.4% annual rent/inbound AGIGaffney, SC: 3.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.5% annual rent/inbound AGIHelena, MT: 3.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.1% annual rent/inbound AGIShelby, NC: 3.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.6% annual rent/inbound AGIHickory, NC: 3.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.2% annual rent/inbound AGIProvo, UT: 3.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 32.0% annual rent/inbound AGIOlympia, WA: 3.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 36.5% annual rent/inbound AGITampa, FL: 3.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.7% annual rent/inbound AGIGardnerville Ranchos, NV: 3.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 21.8% annual rent/inbound AGIRapid City, SD: 3.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 22.8% annual rent/inbound AGIEllensburg, WA: 3.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 21.4% annual rent/inbound AGIBrunswick, GA: 3.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.4% annual rent/inbound AGINewport, OR: 3.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.8% annual rent/inbound AGIBrevard, NC: 3.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.0% annual rent/inbound AGIKingsport, TN: 3.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.2% annual rent/inbound AGICedar City, UT: 3.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.8% annual rent/inbound AGIGainesville, GA: 3.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.8% annual rent/inbound AGISan Antonio, TX: 3.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.1% annual rent/inbound AGIShawnee, OK: 3.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.6% annual rent/inbound AGIStatesboro, GA: 3.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 40.7% annual rent/inbound AGIWinston, NC: 3.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.9% annual rent/inbound AGICrestview, FL: 3.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 22.2% annual rent/inbound AGIIdaho Falls, ID: 3.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.9% annual rent/inbound AGIBowling Green, KY: 3.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.6% annual rent/inbound AGIButte, MT: 3.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.1% annual rent/inbound AGICheyenne, WY: 3.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.1% annual rent/inbound AGIAberdeen, WA: 3.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.6% annual rent/inbound AGILas Vegas, NV: 3.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.0% annual rent/inbound AGIBellingham, WA: 3.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 31.5% annual rent/inbound AGIElizabeth City, NC: 3.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 34.6% annual rent/inbound AGIParagould, AR: 3.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.6% annual rent/inbound AGIArdmore, OK: 3.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.3% annual rent/inbound AGILaconia, NH: 2.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 18.5% annual rent/inbound AGIFrankfort, KY: 2.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.0% annual rent/inbound AGIKerrville, TX: 2.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.2% annual rent/inbound AGIBozeman, MT: 2.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 33.4% annual rent/inbound AGITalladega, AL: 2.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.0% annual rent/inbound AGIRichmond, VA: 2.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.8% annual rent/inbound AGIWarner Robins, GA: 2.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 37.0% annual rent/inbound AGICape Coral, FL: 2.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 18.2% annual rent/inbound AGIReno, NV: 2.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.7% annual rent/inbound AGILewiston, ME: 2.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 33.2% annual rent/inbound AGIPortland, ME: 2.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 31.9% annual rent/inbound AGISavannah, GA: 2.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 31.4% annual rent/inbound AGIDallas, TX: 2.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.2% annual rent/inbound AGIGettysburg, PA: 2.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 21.6% annual rent/inbound AGITyler, TX: 2.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.3% annual rent/inbound AGIMuskegon, MI: 2.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.3% annual rent/inbound AGIGreenwood, SC: 2.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.3% annual rent/inbound AGITwin Falls, ID: 2.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 33.1% annual rent/inbound AGIHammond, LA: 2.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 36.3% annual rent/inbound AGIShow Low, AZ: 2.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 34.2% annual rent/inbound AGIGainesville, TX: 2.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.4% annual rent/inbound AGIPhoenix, AZ: 2.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.3% annual rent/inbound AGIJoplin, MO: 2.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 33.2% annual rent/inbound AGIConcord, NH: 2.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.5% annual rent/inbound AGIRoseburg, OR: 2.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 31.6% annual rent/inbound AGIGrants Pass, OR: 2.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 34.9% annual rent/inbound AGIPottsville, PA: 2.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 31.9% annual rent/inbound AGIDes Moines, IA: 2.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.2% annual rent/inbound AGITraverse City, MI: 2.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.9% annual rent/inbound AGIKeene, NH: 2.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.1% annual rent/inbound AGIColumbia, SC: 2.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 31.0% annual rent/inbound AGIDenver, CO: 2.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.0% annual rent/inbound AGIBremerton, WA: 2.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.4% annual rent/inbound AGIDublin, GA: 2.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.4% annual rent/inbound AGIAugusta, GA: 2.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.1% annual rent/inbound AGISanta Fe, NM: 2.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.8% annual rent/inbound AGIAugusta, ME: 2.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.8% annual rent/inbound AGILongview, WA: 2.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.4% annual rent/inbound AGIFargo, ND: 2.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.3% annual rent/inbound AGISpringfield, MO: 2.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.5% annual rent/inbound AGISearcy, AR: 2.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.0% annual rent/inbound AGIAstoria, OR: 2.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 20.7% annual rent/inbound AGIOdessa, TX: 2.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 36.3% annual rent/inbound AGIKilleen, TX: 2.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.7% annual rent/inbound AGIYork, PA: 2.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.4% annual rent/inbound AGIDothan, AL: 2.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.7% annual rent/inbound AGIHilo, HI: 2.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 39.8% annual rent/inbound AGIAlamogordo, NM: 2.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 38.4% annual rent/inbound AGIOklahoma City, OK: 2.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.6% annual rent/inbound AGISierra Vista, AZ: 2.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.4% annual rent/inbound AGIRocky Mount, NC: 1.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.3% annual rent/inbound AGIFort Collins, CO: 1.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.5% annual rent/inbound AGIMount Vernon, WA: 1.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.9% annual rent/inbound AGIBangor, ME: 1.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 34.8% annual rent/inbound AGICrawfordsville, IN: 1.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 21.9% annual rent/inbound AGIChambersburg, PA: 1.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.0% annual rent/inbound AGINaples, FL: 1.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 11.3% annual rent/inbound AGIWilson, NC: 1.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 35.9% annual rent/inbound AGILynchburg, VA: 1.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.5% annual rent/inbound AGIOak Harbor, WA: 1.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.5% annual rent/inbound AGIDecatur, AL: 1.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.1% annual rent/inbound AGIMadison, WI: 1.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 31.2% annual rent/inbound AGIBillings, MT: 1.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.8% annual rent/inbound AGIEnterprise, AL: 1.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.6% annual rent/inbound AGIEau Claire, WI: 1.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.7% annual rent/inbound AGITulsa, OK: 1.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.8% annual rent/inbound AGIOrlando, FL: 1.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 33.0% annual rent/inbound AGICoos Bay, OR: 1.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 31.0% annual rent/inbound AGIFort Smith, AR: 1.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.4% annual rent/inbound AGITahlequah, OK: 1.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 33.0% annual rent/inbound AGIMarquette, MI: 1.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.4% annual rent/inbound AGIFlorence, AL: 1.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.4% annual rent/inbound AGIGadsden, AL: 1.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.4% annual rent/inbound AGICumberland, MD: 1.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.8% annual rent/inbound AGIHouston, TX: 1.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.1% annual rent/inbound AGIBrainerd, MN: 1.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 16.6% annual rent/inbound AGITucson, AZ: 1.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.3% annual rent/inbound AGIAlbertville, AL: 1.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.7% annual rent/inbound AGILittle Rock, AR: 1.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.0% annual rent/inbound AGIOzark, AL: 1.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 32.1% annual rent/inbound AGIAda, OK: 1.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.3% annual rent/inbound AGIChico, CA: 1.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 35.8% annual rent/inbound AGIOgden, UT: 1.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.8% annual rent/inbound AGIMuskogee, OK: 1.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.0% annual rent/inbound AGIRome, GA: 1.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.1% annual rent/inbound AGIKennewick, WA: 1.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.8% annual rent/inbound AGIGreenville, NC: 1.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 33.2% annual rent/inbound AGIBloomsburg, PA: 1.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.2% annual rent/inbound AGIRoanoke, VA: 1.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.5% annual rent/inbound AGIHolland, MI: 1.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.8% annual rent/inbound AGIValdosta, GA: 1.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 37.3% annual rent/inbound AGIJonesboro, AR: 1.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 35.5% annual rent/inbound AGIThomasville, GA: 1.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 37.8% annual rent/inbound AGIMacon, GA: 1.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.0% annual rent/inbound AGIDalton, GA: 1.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 34.7% annual rent/inbound AGIPaducah, KY: 1.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.7% annual rent/inbound AGIFairmont, WV: 1.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.5% annual rent/inbound AGILongview, TX: 1.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.6% annual rent/inbound AGIKokomo, IN: 1.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.0% annual rent/inbound AGISumter, SC: 1.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 36.0% annual rent/inbound AGIZanesville, OH: 1.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.3% annual rent/inbound AGIGulfport, MS: 1.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.6% annual rent/inbound AGISpokane, WA: 1.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.1% annual rent/inbound AGIAbilene, TX: 1.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 41.2% annual rent/inbound AGILumberton, NC: 1.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 38.6% annual rent/inbound AGINorwich, CT: 1.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 35.3% annual rent/inbound AGIClarksburg, WV: 1.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.4% annual rent/inbound AGIPueblo, CO: 1.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 32.1% annual rent/inbound AGICañon City, CO: 1.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.6% annual rent/inbound AGICasper, WY: 1.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.6% annual rent/inbound AGIKearney, NE: 1.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 33.7% annual rent/inbound AGIOshkosh, WI: 1.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.8% annual rent/inbound AGIKansas City, MO: 1.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.2% annual rent/inbound AGIWaco, TX: 1.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.6% annual rent/inbound AGIColorado Springs, CO: 1.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 32.2% annual rent/inbound AGIDurham, NC: 1.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.4% annual rent/inbound AGIJefferson City, MO: 1.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.4% annual rent/inbound AGIIndianapolis, IN: 1.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.5% annual rent/inbound AGITorrington, CT: 1.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 21.4% annual rent/inbound AGIKingston, NY: 0.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 21.8% annual rent/inbound AGIMoses Lake, WA: 0.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.9% annual rent/inbound AGIGreensboro, NC: 0.9 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.6% annual rent/inbound AGIOxford, MS: 0.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 38.9% annual rent/inbound AGILubbock, TX: 0.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.6% annual rent/inbound AGITupelo, MS: 0.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 32.0% annual rent/inbound AGIMarion, IN: 0.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.3% annual rent/inbound AGIWarrensburg, MO: 0.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.7% annual rent/inbound AGIGoldsboro, NC: 0.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 36.3% annual rent/inbound AGIAppleton, WI: 0.8 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.8% annual rent/inbound AGIStevens Point, WI: 0.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.2% annual rent/inbound AGIJamestown, ND: 0.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.2% annual rent/inbound AGIDyersburg, TN: 0.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 20.0% annual rent/inbound AGIAtlanta, GA: 0.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.7% annual rent/inbound AGILebanon, PA: 0.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.6% annual rent/inbound AGIGlens Falls, NY: 0.7 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.8% annual rent/inbound AGIBay City, MI: 0.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.8% annual rent/inbound AGIMurray, KY: 0.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.3% annual rent/inbound AGISeattle, WA: 0.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.9% annual rent/inbound AGIGainesville, FL: 0.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 32.4% annual rent/inbound AGIWisconsin Rapids, WI: 0.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.2% annual rent/inbound AGIWilliamsport, PA: 0.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.5% annual rent/inbound AGILa Crosse, WI: 0.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.9% annual rent/inbound AGIBattle Creek, MI: 0.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.7% annual rent/inbound AGIHutchinson, KS: 0.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 20.8% annual rent/inbound AGIAlbuquerque, NM: 0.6 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.6% annual rent/inbound AGIDurango, CO: 0.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.3% annual rent/inbound AGIHarrisburg, PA: 0.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.2% annual rent/inbound AGIHarrisonburg, VA: 0.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 39.7% annual rent/inbound AGIJanesville, WI: 0.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.5% annual rent/inbound AGIYuma, AZ: 0.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 32.4% annual rent/inbound AGIAuburn, AL: 0.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.2% annual rent/inbound AGIMorgantown, WV: 0.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 31.5% annual rent/inbound AGIFlorence, SC: 0.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.2% annual rent/inbound AGIVernal, UT: 0.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 32.1% annual rent/inbound AGILas Cruces, NM: 0.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 32.4% annual rent/inbound AGIJackson, TN: 0.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 32.7% annual rent/inbound AGIFort Wayne, IN: 0.5 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.5% annual rent/inbound AGIWatertown, WI: 0.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.7% annual rent/inbound AGIRichmond, IN: 0.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 22.3% annual rent/inbound AGIMilledgeville, GA: 0.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.6% annual rent/inbound AGINew Castle, IN: 0.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 20.9% annual rent/inbound AGIOmaha, NE: 0.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.1% annual rent/inbound AGIMidland, MI: 0.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.4% annual rent/inbound AGIGreen Bay, WI: 0.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 19.2% annual rent/inbound AGICarson City, NV: 0.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.2% annual rent/inbound AGIDuluth, MN: 0.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.4% annual rent/inbound AGILexington, KY: 0.4 net tax-return households per 1,000; 31.4% annual rent/inbound AGIAmarillo, TX: 0.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.6% annual rent/inbound AGIBirmingham, AL: 0.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.9% annual rent/inbound AGIRacine, WI: 0.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.1% annual rent/inbound AGIBartlesville, OK: 0.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 22.8% annual rent/inbound AGIAllentown, PA: 0.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 31.8% annual rent/inbound AGIGrand Rapids, MI: 0.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.4% annual rent/inbound AGIHot Springs, AR: 0.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.8% annual rent/inbound AGIBismarck, ND: 0.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.9% annual rent/inbound AGIKlamath Falls, OR: 0.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.6% annual rent/inbound AGIAshland, OH: 0.3 net tax-return households per 1,000; 22.7% annual rent/inbound AGICharlottesville, VA: 0.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 26.2% annual rent/inbound AGIColumbus, OH: 0.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.3% annual rent/inbound AGISedalia, MO: 0.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.8% annual rent/inbound AGIWichita, KS: 0.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.6% annual rent/inbound AGIMuncie, IN: 0.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 27.1% annual rent/inbound AGIMedford, OR: 0.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 34.1% annual rent/inbound AGIWenatchee, WA: 0.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.4% annual rent/inbound AGIManchester, NH: 0.2 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.5% annual rent/inbound AGITerre Haute, IN: 0.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.3% annual rent/inbound AGICanton, OH: 0.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.0% annual rent/inbound AGIMansfield, OH: 0.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 23.2% annual rent/inbound AGIFremont, NE: 0.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.5% annual rent/inbound AGIColumbia, MO: 0.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.4% annual rent/inbound AGILafayette, LA: 0.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 29.7% annual rent/inbound AGIFlint, MI: 0.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 24.1% annual rent/inbound AGIDickinson, ND: 0.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 25.4% annual rent/inbound AGICarlsbad, NM: 0.1 net tax-return households per 1,000; 30.3% annual rent/inbound AGIDanville, VA: 0.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 28.1% annual rent/inbound AGIProvidence, RI: 0.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 32.6% annual rent/inbound AGIBlackfoot, ID: 0.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 21.0% annual rent/inbound AGIEugene, OR: 0.0 net tax-return households per 1,000; 36.0% annual rent/inbound AGIJeffersonThe VillagesMyrtle BeachOcalaHomosassa SpringsNet tax-return households per 1,000 residents →Annual rent / inbound AGI →
AGI is adjusted gross income per inbound tax return—not renter income, gross household income or disposable income. Source periods remain separate.
What the current contract says

Read the distribution before the example

The current migration contract includes 311 metros. 201 receive a higher adjusted-gross-income mix than they send out, and 93 place annualized market rent above the study’s inbound-income threshold. Jefferson, GA has the strongest income gap among the ranked rows.

Markets compared311mapped IRS flows
Higher-income arrivals201aggregate AGI direction
Median net migration2.0per 1,000 residents
Median rent / inbound AGI27.6%screen, not qualification
Open Jefferson, GA
01
Count the right movement

Net migration hides the two flows that created it

A metro can receive many households and lose nearly as many, producing a modest net figure alongside high turnover. Another can post the same net result from much smaller flows. Gross inflow and outflow describe market churn and the size of the relocation channel that a net number alone cannot show.

Scaling by population improves comparison between large and small metros, but the measure still depends on source coverage. IRS data follows filed tax returns and exemptions, so some students, very low-income households and other non-filers may be underrepresented. The limitation belongs beside the conclusion.

02
Follow resources

Adjusted gross income adds depth to the mover count

The income attached to incoming and outgoing tax returns can reveal whether the resource mix changed as households moved. Higher-income arrivals may support a different rent segment, while large outflows of income can matter even when the number of movers appears balanced.

Adjusted gross income is not disposable income and not a forecast of rent. It is an aggregate tax measure for covered returns. Use it to frame the potential spending power of migration, then check local wages, household incomes and the actual tenant segment before drawing an affordability conclusion.

03
Respect timing

Migration, jobs and rent describe overlapping—not identical—periods

Tax migration is annual and released with a lag. Rent indexes and labor series update more frequently. A current page therefore joins the latest defensible release from each source rather than claiming every household move occurred during the latest rent change.

Timing disagreement can itself be informative. Earlier inflows may already be reflected in rent and construction; a later labor slowdown may challenge the old migration narrative. The correct response is to label periods and reopen the thesis, not to force stale movement into a current causal claim.

04
Find the housing channel

Households must still choose the target location and unit

Metro inflow can concentrate near particular employers, schools or amenities and may favor ownership, new apartments or single-family rentals differently. County-to-metro allocation also introduces a mapping boundary. Neighborhood leasing data is needed to learn whether the property participates in the broader movement.

Underwriting should test what happens if migration normalizes, if new supply captures arrivals or if the incoming income mix does not match the asking rent. A favorable flow earns deeper demand research. It does not justify an automatic rent premium or a permanent growth assumption.

Decision workflow

Turn movement into a demand question

  1. 1
    Open both flows

    Inspect inflow and outflow before relying on their net difference.

  2. 2
    Scale and qualify

    Use population scaling and keep tax-filer coverage visible.

  3. 3
    Compare resources

    Read incoming and outgoing adjusted gross income without calling it rent capacity.

  4. 4
    Locate the demand

    Verify which neighborhoods and property types the movers actually choose.

Questions readers ask

Keep the boundary of the evidence visible

These answers are part of the article and the structured data. They state what the current sources can support—and where property-level evidence must take over.

Does positive migration guarantee rent growth?

No. Available supply, household income, property preferences and existing vacancy determine how movement reaches rent. Migration is a demand input, not a rent forecast.

Does IRS migration include every resident?

No. It is based on matched tax returns and exemptions. Coverage and release timing should remain visible when interpreting the flows.

Why compare mover income with rent?

It helps test whether the economic mix of flows broadly aligns with the local rent environment. It still cannot replace renter income or unit-level qualification evidence.

Continue with the evidence

Inspect the markets where mover resources and rent pressure meet

Use the full migration study to compare flows, income and current counter-signals, then verify whether the target submarket receives that demand.

Explore momentum map Open full research
Source ledger

The releases behind the examples

Every market figure above is rebuilt from these current public-source releases.

acs populationCensus ACS 5-year — populationACS 2024 5-year · retrieved 2026-07-26bls cesBLS CES — payroll employmentCES SM current · retrieved 2026-07-26bls lausBLS LAUS — resident employmentLAUS current · retrieved 2026-07-26cbsa delineationOMB/BLS delineation — metro geographyOMB July 2023 delineation · retrieved 2026-07-30irs migrationIRS SOI — county migration and mover incomeSOI migration 2022-2023 · retrieved 2026-07-26zillow zoriZillow ZORI — metro market rentsMetro_zori_uc_sfrcondomfr_sm_sa_month.csv · retrieved 2026-07-26