Which red states receive the most federal funding per capita?

1. Why the headline numbers point to Alaska, New Mexico and Wyoming — and what that actually means

Analyses that rank states by federal funding per capita repeatedly list Alaska first and New Mexico and Wyoming near the top, with USAFacts reporting Alaska at about $8,628 per person in 2021 (inflation‑adjusted to 2023 dollars), New Mexico about $6,748, and Wyoming about $6,718; those numbers reflect large federal program flows relative to small populations and are driven by Medicaid enrollment, direct federal spending and federal agency presence ^{[1] [2]}. These per‑person figures do not mean those states “depend” on federal money in the same way across all programs: different studies count different slices of federal spending. For example, FFIS’s federal grants per capita metric excludes certain direct‑to‑individual programs like SNAP and Pell, and MoneyGeek and other sources use IRS/Treasury flows to compute a return‑on‑taxes metric, so apparent rankings change when program scope or year shifts ^{[3] [4]}.

2. Alternative lists show other red states clustering near the top when methods change

When researchers change the methodology to include tax‑based flows or a broader suite of federal programs, states such as West Virginia, Mississippi, Alabama, Kentucky, Arizona, Montana and Louisiana appear among the highest per‑capita recipients; MoneyGeek’s return‑on‑taxes analysis places West Virginia at the top with a $2.91 return per tax dollar and lists several red states with high dependency scores, illustrating that the choice of numerator (which federal dollars included) and denominator (population, tax payments, or GDP) reshuffles the ranking ^[4]. FFIS data for fiscal 2023 provides a different baseline — a national federal grants per capita average of $2,779 and state values that range widely — and explicit per‑state comparisons require working from the detailed spreadsheet rather than headline summaries ^[3].

3. The common drivers behind high per‑capita federal receipts in red states

Three structural factors recur across studies as causes of elevated per‑capita federal receipts: high Medicaid enrollment and disproportionate health‑program spending, significant federal disaster relief or infrastructure grants, and the presence of large federal employers or resource‑related payouts. USAFacts highlights New Mexico’s high Medicaid enrollment (about 38.3% in the cited analysis) as a major driver of its per‑capita federal receipts, while Alaska’s small population plus federal operations and resource‑sharing arrangements amplify per‑person numbers ^{[2] [1]}. The Rockefeller Institute confirms the broader fact that most states receive more federal dollars than they send, so the headline “red states receive federal funds” is not exceptional but part of a general federal‑state fiscal pattern ^[5].

4. Why “red state dependence” arguments can be misleading without nuance

Political narratives often treat per‑capita receipts as proof of disproportionate dependence, but analysts warn this is incomplete because different programs respond to need and policy choices rather than partisanship. FFIS cautions that its grants‑per‑capita series omits direct‑to‑individual programs like SNAP and Pell, which can materially change a state’s ranking; MoneyGeek’s tax‑return framing measures “return on taxes” differently and can privilege states with lower tax payments rather than higher spending per se ^{[3] [4]}. The Rockefeller Institute’s finding that only 13 states are net contributors underscores that most states, irrespective of partisan label, are net recipients—context, program mix and year determine how “dependent” a state appears ^[5].

5. Bottom line for readers asking “which red states receive the most federal funding per capita?”

If you use common per‑capita grant measures and USAFacts/FFIS conventions, Alaska, New Mexico and Wyoming stand out among red states; if you widen the accounting to tax return flows or total federal return‑on‑taxes, West Virginia, Mississippi, Alabama and several Mountain and Southern red states rank highly. The differences are methodological: decide first which federal flows matter for your question (grants only, grants plus individual benefits, or all federal receipts relative to tax payments) and then consult the cited datasets to reproduce the ranking for a specific year ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]}.