SalaryCPA Research · State comparison
California vs Washington: CPA salary compared
Which state pays CPAs more — California or Washington? We put the verified BLS medians for accountants side by side, then adjust each for local prices to show where a paycheck actually stretches further.
California · real pay
$87,670
BEA-adjusted · nominal $97.1K
Washington · real pay
$90,230
BEA-adjusted · nominal $96.6K
Higher on paper
California
+$500 nominal median
Higher buying power
Washington
flips after cost of living
Nominal: verified BLS OEWS May 2025 (Accountants & Auditors, SOC 13-2011) · Real pay = nominal ÷ (RPP ÷ 100), BEA Regional Price Parities 2024 · Real pay is BEA-adjusted, not take-home.
Does California or Washington pay CPAs more?
Nominal medians are verified BLS OEWS May 2025 wages for accountants and auditors. Real pay is BEA-adjusted (RPP 2024), not take-home.
Cost of living flips the answer
California pays more on paper — $97,050 vs $96,550, a $500 edge. But once local prices are accounted for, Washington stretches further: $90,230 in buying-power-adjusted pay vs $87,670 — a $2.6K real-pay swing the headline number hides.
This is a case where the headline salary and the real answer disagree. A bigger number on the offer letter does not always mean more money in practice.
Head to head
California vs Washington, side by side
Each state's verified nominal median next to its buying-power-adjusted (real) pay. The gray bar is the headline wage; the accent bar is what it's worth once local prices are applied.
Nominal
$97.1K
Price level
110.7/100
Real pay
$87.7K
Local prices run 11% above the national average, so some of that pay is absorbed by higher local costs — California slips 9 places once adjusted for buying power.
Nominal
$96.6K
Price level
107/100
Real pay
$90.2K
Local prices run 7% above the national average, so some of that pay is absorbed by higher local costs — Washington slips 3 places once adjusted for buying power.
The numbers
Full comparison
Every figure below is passed straight from the data layer — nominal wages are the verified BLS measurement; real pay is nominal ÷ (RPP/100).
| Metric | California | Washington |
|---|---|---|
| Nominal medianverified BLS | $97,050 | $96,550 |
| Typical range25th–75th pct | $75.8K – $125.9K | $79.2K – $122.5K |
| Price levelBEA RPP · US avg = 100 | 110.7 | 107 |
| Real pay (median)BEA-adjusted | $87,670 | $90,230 |
| Nominal rankof 51 | #6 | #8 |
| Real-pay rankof 51 | #15 | #11 |
| Rank shiftnominal → real | -9 places | -3 places |
How to read this
California or Washington: which should a CPA choose?
Pay is one input, not the decision. Here is what these numbers do — and do not — tell you.
What the numbers show
California has the higher headline median ($97.1K vs $96.6K). Washington wins on buying power once local prices are applied.
What they do not show
Real pay is not take-home. It excludes federal and state income taxes, housing choices, commuting, childcare, and benefits — all of which can move the real answer for your situation.
Buying power is one lens
A state can win on real pay and still be the worse move for you — job density, industry mix, firm presence, taxes, family, and climate all matter. We do not name a "best" state.
BLS measures accountants, not CPAs
These are wages for the broad "Accountants and Auditors" occupation. Licensed CPAs are a subset who typically earn above these medians; the license premium is a separate modeled estimate, not applied here.
Go deeper
Full state guides
Each comparison is a summary. Open a state's full guide for percentiles, top metros, pay by role and experience, and the calculator.
Keep comparing
California vs Washington — FAQ
- Does California or Washington pay CPAs more?
- California has the higher headline (nominal) median for accountants and auditors — about $97,050 vs $96,550 in Washington, a gap of roughly $500 (+0.5%). These are BLS-measured wages for the broad "Accountants and Auditors" occupation; BLS does not publish a CPA-specific figure, so the CPA license premium is a separate estimate.
- Is California or Washington better after cost of living?
- Washington. This is the pair's twist: California pays more on paper, but once local prices are applied, Washington's pay stretches further — about $90,230 in buying-power-adjusted (real) pay vs $87,670. Real pay = nominal ÷ (RPP ÷ 100), using the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis's Regional Price Parities (2024).
- Is this take-home pay?
- No. Both the nominal and the real (BEA-adjusted) figures are gross wages. Real pay restates the wage in national-average price terms to compare buying power across markets — it does not model federal or state income taxes, housing, commuting, or benefits. No-income-tax states, for example, can stretch a paycheck further than this adjustment alone shows.
- Where do these numbers come from?
- The nominal medians are the verified BLS OEWS May 2025 wages for Accountants and Auditors (SOC 13-2011) in each state. The price adjustment uses the BEA Regional Price Parities (2024) from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (2024). Real pay is a derived combination of the two, not a survey measurement.
Last updated June 2026 · Nominal medians are verified BLS OEWS May 2025(Accountants & Auditors, SOC 13-2011) · Real pay is BEA-adjusted (derived), not a BLS measurement and not take-home pay · Prices: BEA RPP 2024.
Model your own number in California or Washington
Set your role, experience, license, and employer to get a tailored estimate, then read it against the cost-of-living picture above.