You think you get to spend 6 digit salary you are getting? It depends.

A $100,000 Salary Doesn’t Go as Far as You Think

—Especially in California.

For decades, earning $100,000 a year has been seen as a financial milestone—a symbol of professional success and economic security. But in many major U.S. cities, particularly in California, that six-figure income no longer delivers the comfortable lifestyle it once promised.

A recent analysis by consumer information site ConsumerAffairs examined tax burdens and cost of living across the 100 largest U.S. cities. The findings reveal a stark reality: after accounting for taxes and local expenses, a $100,000 salary can feel closer to $60,000 in effective purchasing power in some high-cost metro areas.

Researchers concluded that “$100,000 no longer guarantees a comfortable life,” noting that high housing costs and state tax structures are significantly eroding take-home income in certain regions.

California Cities Rank Among the Worst for Purchasing Power.

Eight of the 10 cities where $100,000 stretches the least are located in the Golden State. The city where purchasing power is lowest is San Francisco, followed by Oakland. New York City ranks third.

Several Southern California cities—including Irvine, Anaheim, Santa Ana, Long Beach, and Los Angeles—tie for fourth place among the least favorable locations.

In Los Angeles, for example, a $100,000 annual salary is reduced significantly once taxes and cost of living are factored in. After paying roughly $31,000 in combined taxes, the take-home income falls to about $73,700. When adjusted for the city’s elevated housing and consumer costs, the effective purchasing power drops further to approximately $63,800.

That means a six-figure earner in Los Angeles may experience a standard of living comparable to someone making around $60,000 in a more affordable metro area.

The report highlights housing expenses as the single largest factor diminishing real income. California’s major metro areas consistently rank among the most expensive housing markets in the country, with both home prices and rental rates well above the national average.

Even high earners find a substantial portion of their income absorbed by mortgage payments or rent, leaving less room for savings, discretionary spending, or long-term wealth building.

While California cities often offer strong job markets and high nominal salaries, those benefits are offset by elevated everyday costs.

In contrast, Texas cities dominate the top of the purchasing-power rankings. Laredo leads the list, where $100,000 translates into nearly $89,900 in effective spending power after adjusting for taxes and cost of living.

Other high-ranking cities include El Paso, Lubbock, and Corpus Christi. These cities benefit from lower housing costs and the absence of a state income tax, allowing residents to retain and stretch more of their earnings.

The difference between top-ranked and bottom-ranked cities exceeds $20,000 in effective purchasing power—despite identical gross salaries.

The findings underscore a broader economic truth: income alone does not determine financial comfort. Geography plays a crucial role.

A $100,000 salary in a high-cost coastal city may offer less financial flexibility than a $70,000 salary in a lower-cost region. Meanwhile, professionals earning mid-range incomes in affordable areas may enjoy stronger savings potential and a higher overall quality of life.

As housing prices and living costs remain elevated in California’s major cities, the symbolic power of a six-figure salary continues to erode. For many households, what once represented prosperity now simply covers the basics.

In today’s economy, where you live may matter just as much as how much you earn.