How We Source & Verify This Data

Why this site exists

The most-cited state-by-state workers' comp comparison on the web is a 2017 blog table. While verifying our data against official sources, we found it is wrong for at least three states — Indiana (it says 5+ employees; the state requires coverage from your first), Minnesota (it says 5+; the state's own DLI page says there is no minimum), and Missouri (it misses the stricter construction rule). Stale tables get copied from site to site. We built the table the boring way: one state at a time, against the official source, with the date shown.

Our rules

• Official source first. Each state's threshold is confirmed on the state agency's own page (labor department, WC commission, or statute) — the exact URL is linked on every state page.
• Two sources minimum when the official page is ambiguous, marked as such on the page.
• Verification date on every record — you can see exactly when we last checked.
• Errors fixed fast. Send us an official source and we verify within days.
• Re-verified quarterly and whenever a state changes its law (legislation monitored year-round).

What we track that most tables don't

• Separate construction-industry thresholds (often stricter — e.g., California's SB 216 requires licensed contractors to carry coverage even with zero employees as of 2026)
• Payroll-based triggers (Kansas $20k/year, Wisconsin $500/quarter) instead of employee counts
• Monopolistic state funds (ND, OH, WA, WY) where private insurance doesn't exist
• The two elective states (TX, SD) with no general mandate

Not legal advice

This is compliance data, not legal advice. Rules have industry and corporate-structure exceptions — always confirm with the official source linked on each page.