California vs Michigan on USAspending: $39.5B against $8.4B

416,538 Michigan awards on $8.4B

Michigan’s award tape is the distinctive fact next to the per-capita inversion. 416,538 actions on $8.4B is a high-frequency file. California’s 639,340 actions on $39.5B is a high-dollar file. Michigan’s row count is about 65 percent of California’s on about 21 percent of the dollars. The auto-manufacturing peak is consistent with many vehicle and parts actions mixed into a busy statewide tape.

Population is 10,140,459 versus 39,431,263. Michigan is about 26 percent of California’s Census count and about 21 percent of California’s $39.5B. That is close enough for Michigan’s $175.18 per capita to exceed California’s $135.64.

Automobile manufacturing versus commercial construction

Michigan’s lead NAICS is automobile manufacturing. California’s lead NAICS is commercial and institutional building construction. An auto peak on $8.4B is a different federal buying pattern than a facilities peak on $39.5B. The packet names those peaks; it does not give dollar shares or plant lists.

Use the California and Michigan state hubs for agencies and recipients. Cite USAspending.gov. The 416,538 and 639,340 rows include many codes beyond those labels. Do not treat the auto peak as an outlay category.

FY2026: $1.8B versus $5.3B

Fiscal year 2026 obligations are $5.3B in California and $1.8B in Michigan. Michigan’s latest-year amount is a sizable slice of $8.4B. California’s $5.3B is a smaller share of $39.5B. Recency narrows the dollar gap relative to the stacked stock, without reversing California’s lead.

Treat FY2026 as a recency slice of obligations, not Treasury cash. Do not divide $5.3B or $1.8B by 639,340 or 416,538 all-years awards. Spending per capita of $135.64 and $175.18 already uses Census denominators of 39,431,263 and 10,140,459.

Scale for California, intensity and rows for Michigan

California still books $39.5B against $8.4B. That ranking does not move. Michigan’s $175.18 reading and 416,538-row tape are the reasons to open this page rather than stop at the stacked totals. Keep every figure labeled as a USAspending.gov obligation.

Place-of-performance for automobile manufacturing can sit at assembly plants while suppliers sit in other states. The packet does not reallocate. Outlays are a different series.

Auto actions on an $8.4B Midwest tape

Michigan’s automobile-manufacturing peak on $8.4B with 416,538 awards is both an intensity story ($175.18 versus California’s $135.64) and a frequency story (416,538 versus 639,340 on about one-fifth the dollars). California still books $39.5B against $8.4B. Michigan’s 10,140,459 residents sit on a heavier load per resident than California’s 39,431,263. The auto peak is consistent with many vehicle and parts actions mixed into a busy statewide tape.

FY2026 of $1.8B versus $5.3B narrows the dollar gap relative to the stacked stock without reversing California’s lead. Cite USAspending.gov. Outlays are not listed. Do not divide $1.8B by 416,538 all-years awards. Spending per capita of $175.18 and $135.64 already uses the Census denominators.

Place-of-performance for automobile manufacturing can sit at assembly plants while suppliers sit in other states. The packet does not reallocate. Use the California and Michigan hubs for agencies and recipients. The comparison hub holds the $39.5B versus $8.4B tables. Keep commercial construction versus automobile manufacturing as mix tags, not as inventories of every award.

Michigan’s 416,538 awards on 10,140,459 residents under $175.18 per capita describe an auto-manufacturing tape that is busy and heavier per resident than California’s $135.64 on 39,431,263. California still books $39.5B against $8.4B and 639,340 awards. FY2026 of $1.8B versus $5.3B narrows the dollar gap on recency without reversing it. Cite USAspending.gov. Outlays are not listed.

How to read California versus Michigan

Read California first on stacked dollars ($39.5B vs $8.4B). Read Michigan first on spending per capita ($175.18 vs $135.64) and on award volume relative to dollars (416,538 vs 639,340). FY2026 is $5.3B versus $1.8B. Note automobile manufacturing versus commercial construction.

The comparison hub holds the tables. The California and Michigan hubs hold agencies and recipients. Outlays are not listed.

Michigan’s 10,140,459 residents and California’s 39,431,263 residents set the $175.18 versus $135.64 denominators on $8.4B versus $39.5B. Award counts of 416,538 versus 639,340 and FY2026 of $1.8B versus $5.3B complete the comparison. Automobile manufacturing versus commercial construction remains the mix contrast. Cite USAspending.gov. Obligations, not outlays.

Questions

Does California or Michigan have more federal spending?

California leads stacked USAspending.gov obligations $39.5B to Michigan’s $8.4B. Michigan leads spending per capita, $175.18 versus $135.64, on 10,140,459 residents against California’s 39,431,263. Award counts are 639,340 in California and 416,538 in Michigan. FY2026 obligations are $5.3B in California and $1.8B in Michigan.

Why does Michigan have so many awards on $8.4B?

The packet reports 416,538 awards in Michigan on $8.4B versus 639,340 in California on $39.5B. Michigan’s lead industry is automobile manufacturing, a mix that can generate many vehicle and parts actions. Spending per capita is $175.18 versus $135.64. These figures are USAspending.gov obligations, not outlays.

What industries lead in California and Michigan?

California’s top industry is commercial and institutional building construction. Michigan’s is automobile manufacturing. Those labels are the largest NAICS slices on $39.5B and $8.4B. Award counts are 639,340 in California and 416,538 in Michigan. Those peaks are mix labels on the stacked stocks, not inventories of every award.

Are California vs Michigan figures Treasury outlays?

No. The $39.5B and $8.4B totals, and FY2026 amounts of $5.3B and $1.8B, are USAspending.gov obligations. Outlays are cash payments and can lag. Spending per capita ($135.64 vs $175.18) uses Census population where present. Award counts in the packet are all-years totals, not a single fiscal year’s actions.