What was California's net domestic migration between 2020 and 2024?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
California experienced substantial net domestic outmigration during the 2020–2024 period, with multiple official and journalistic sources estimating aggregate losses on the order of hundreds of thousands per year and roughly 1.4–1.5 million across the full four-year span; year-to-year figures differ by data source and methodology — for example, the California Department of Finance reported a slowdown from a peak outflow near 249,308 in 2023 to about 197,016 in 2024 [1], while national Vintage 2024 Census figures list a 2023–24 domestic migration loss of about 239,575 for California [2] and independent analysis summarized a cumulative 2020–2024 domestic loss of roughly 1.46 million [3].
1. What the headline numbers say: annual losses and a four‑year tally
Official and secondary sources converge on a story of large annual domestic losses for California across 2020–2024, but they disagree on exact totals: the California Department of Finance (DOF) reported that net domestic outmigration eased from about a 249,308 loss in 2023 to roughly 197,016 in 2024 [1], while U.S. Census Vintage 2024 data show California with one of the largest single-year domestic losses in 2023–24 at −239,575 [2]; aggregating journalistic and policy summaries, Governing’s reporting cites a cumulative net domestic migration loss of approximately 1.46 million residents over the 2020–24 interval [3].
2. Why the different numbers exist: methodology, revisions, and international counts
The divergence between DOF and Census-based tallies is partly methodological: California’s DOF issues state estimates that incorporate administrative records and later revisions (including a December 2024 DOF revision noted in the E‑2 county report), while Census Vintage releases use federal estimation protocols and different windows (July‑to‑July) and components of change; DOF revisions also added administrative components for asylum‑seekers and temporary protected status arrivals in later releases, which altered the balance between domestic and international migration estimates and shifted year totals [4] [5].
3. The role of international migration and natural increase in the population story
Although California lost residents to other states on net during 2020–2024, substantial international immigration and residual natural increase mitigated population decline: the DOF and national Census both report sizeable international inflows — for example, net international migration to California reached about 134,400 in the year ending July 2024 as a positive counterweight [4], and the Census noted that international migration and natural increase helped the West grow despite a net domestic migration loss nationally [2].
4. Geography and demography: who left, who arrived, and why it matters
Analysts emphasize that the outflow was not uniform: reporting indicates that many emigrants were working‑age adults, often those with college credentials, while incoming migrants and international arrivals skewed different socioeconomically, a dynamic with implications for tax bases and local economies; Governing highlighted a loss of more affluent, educated cohorts and estimated that the state added roughly 934,000 international migrants during the same timeframe while losing 1.46 million domestically [3], a juxtaposition cited by fiscal commentators when debating budget and labor impacts [1].
5. What can’t be resolved from the available reporting
Precise, single definitive tallies for "net domestic migration between 2020 and 2024" depend on the chosen data series and whether one uses DOF‑revised state counts, Census Vintage estimates, or third‑party aggregations; the available sources document large annual losses and provide a plausible cumulative estimate (about −1.4 to −1.5 million across 2020–24 per Governing’s synthesis), but the DOF’s December 2024 and subsequent methodological changes mean that readers should treat any single numeric answer as contingent on source and revision history [3] [4] [5].