|
CONTACT: Media Interviews (415) 625-2270 (415) 625-2282 Internet address: http://www.bls.gov/ro9/news.htm |
BLS 10-06 |
Consumer units[1] (households) in the San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, California metropolitan area spent an average of $68,966 per year in 2007-2008, according to results from the Consumer Expenditure Survey (CE) released by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Regional Commissioner Richard J. Holden noted that this figure was roughly 38 percent higher than the $50,063 average expenditure level for a typical household in the United States. Average annual expenditures for households in the San Francisco area differed significantly from the U.S average in six of the eight major categories. Expenditures for housing and personal insurance and pensions were significantly larger than the nationwide average, while expenditures for transportation, healthcare, entertainment, and cash contributions were measurably lower than the national average. (See chart 1.)

Housing in the San Francisco metropolitan area averaged $26,111 annually and was the largest expenditure category, accounting for 37.9 percent of a typical San Francisco area household’s total budget. This share was significantly above the 33.9-percent national average. (See tables 1 and 2.) Overall, 11 of the 18 published metropolitan areas had expenditure shares for housing measurably above the U.S. average; only Houston had a lower-than-average share. (See chart 2.) Among the 18 areas, housing shares ranged from 44.1 percent in San Diego to 32.4 percent in Houston. (See table 3.)
The majority of housing expenditures in San Francisco went towards shelter, 72.0 percent, which includes mortgage interest, property taxes, repairs, and rent, among other items; nationwide, 59.4 percent of the housing budget was allocated for shelter. (See table A.) Utilities, fuels, and public services expenses accounted for 12.3 percent of the housing budget locally, well below the national average of 20.9 percent. The rate of homeownership in San Francisco, at 57 percent, was less than the U.S. average of 67 percent.
| Category | United States | San Francisco |
|---|---|---|
Total Housing |
100.0 | 100.0 |
Shelter |
59.4 | 72.0 |
Utilities, fuels, and public services |
20.9 | 12.3 |
Household operation |
5.8 | 6.0 |
Housekeeping supplies |
3.8 | 2.3 |
Household furnishings and equipment |
10.1 | 7.4 |
|
Note: Columns may not add to 100 due to rounding. |
||
At 15.4 percent of the total budget, transportation was the second-largest expenditure category in the San Francisco area; this was significantly below the national average of 17.3 percent. Among the 18 metropolitan areas nationwide, only Phoenix, Houston, and Detroit had transportation shares that were significantly above the national average. (See chart 3.) Among the remaining areas, 10 had significantly lower shares than the U.S. average, the lowest being San Diego at 12.8 percent, followed by New York at 13.9 percent.
Of the $10,591 in annual expenditures for transportation in San Francisco, 86.0 percent was spent buying and maintaining private vehicles; this compared to the national average of 94.0 percent. The remaining 14.0 percent of a typical San Francisco household’s transportation budget was spent on public transit, which includes fares for taxis, buses, trains, and planes; this allocation was above the 6.0-percent average for the nation. (See table B.) The average number of vehicles per household in San Francisco (1.8) was similar to the national average (1.9). In addition to San Francisco, three other metropolitan areas had public transportation expenditures that accounted for more than 10 percent—New York (14.2 percent), Seattle (11.5 percent), and Washington (10.6 percent).
| Category | United States | San Francisco |
|---|---|---|
Transportation |
100.0 | 100.0 |
Vehicle Purchases (net outlay) |
34.6 | 28.1 |
Gasoline and motor oil |
29.4 | 24.4 |
Other vehicle expenses |
30.0 | 33.5 |
Public Transportation |
6.0 | 14.0 |
|
Note: Columns may not add to 100 due to rounding. |
||
The portion of the typical San Francisco consumer unit’s budget spent on food, 12.2 percent, was not significantly different than the 12.6-percent U.S. average. However, among the 18 metropolitan areas, 6 had food expenditure shares that were below the national average. Detroit (14.3 percent) was the only area with a food expenditure share significantly above that for the nation.
Households in San Francisco spent $4,323, or 51.5 percent, of their food dollars on food prepared at home and the remaining 48.5 percent on food prepared away from home, such as restaurant meals, carry-out, board at school, and catered affairs. In comparison, the typical U.S. household spent 57.3 percent of its food budget on food prepared at home and 42.7 percent on food prepared away from home.
As noted, San Francisco is 1 of 18 metropolitan areas nationwide for which Consumer Expenditure (CE) data are available. We encourage users interested in learning more about the CE Survey to contact the West Information Office at (415) 625-2270. Metropolitan area CE data and that for the four geographic regions and the United States are available on our Web site at http://www.bls.gov/cex/tables.htm.
Additional Information
Data contained in this report are from the Consumer Expenditure Survey (CE), which is collected on an ongoing basis by the U.S. Census Bureau for the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The CE data were averaged over a two-year period, 2007 and 2008. CE data are available for the nation, the 4 geographic regions of the country, and 18 metropolitan areas. The metropolitan area discussed in this release is San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, Calif., which is comprised of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties.
The survey consists of two components, a diary or recordkeeping survey, and an interview survey. The integrated data from the BLS Diary and Interview Surveys provide a complete accounting of consumer expenditures and income, which neither survey component alone is designed to do. Due to changes in the survey sample frame, metropolitan area data in this release are not directly comparable to those prior to 1996.
A consumer unit is defined as members of a household related by blood, marriage, adoption, or other legal arrangement; a single person living alone or sharing a household with others but who is financially independent; or two or more persons living together who share responsibility for at least 2 out of 3 major types of expenses – food, housing, and other expenses. The terms household or consumer unit are used interchangeably for convenience.
The expenditure data in this release should be interpreted with care. The expenditures are averages for consumer units with the specified characteristics, regardless of whether or not a specific unit incurred an expense for that specific item during the recording period. The average expenditure may be considerably lower than the expenditure by those consumer units that purchased the item. This study is not intended as a comparative cost of living survey, as neither the quantity nor the quality of goods and services has been held constant among areas. Differences may result from variations in characteristics such as consumer unit size, age, preferences, income levels, etc. However, expenditure shares, or the percentage of a consumer unit’s budget spent on a particular category, can be used to compare spending patterns across areas. Users should also keep in mind that prices for many goods and services have changed since the survey was conducted.
The CE significance tests in this release compare expenditure shares for selected expenditure categories in the United States to expenditure shares in selected metropolitan areas. Expenditure shares for housing and transportation that are above or below that for the nation after testing for significance at the 95-percent confidence interval are also identified in charts 2 and 3 for the 18 published metropolitan areas. It should be remembered that sample sizes for the metropolitan areas are much smaller than for the nation, so the U.S. estimates and year-to-year changes are more reliable than those for the metropolitan areas.
NOTE: A value that is statistically different from another does not necessarily mean that the difference has economic or practical significance. Statistical significance is concerned with the ability to make confident statements about a universe based on a sample. It is entirely possible that a large difference between two values is not significantly different statistically, while a small difference is, since both the size and heterogeneity of the sample affect the relative error of the data being tested.
| Category | United States | San Francisco |
|---|---|---|
Average annual expenditures |
$50,063 | $68,966 |
Percent distribution |
100.0 | 100.0 |
Food |
12.6 | 12.2 |
Alcoholic beverages |
.9 | 1.1 |
Housing |
34.0 | 37.9* |
Apparel and services |
3.7 | 3.6 |
Transportation |
17.3 | 15.4* |
Healthcare |
5.8 | 4.8* |
Entertainment |
5.5 | 4.9* |
Personal care products and services |
1.2 | 1.4 |
Reading |
.2 | .3 |
Education |
2.0 | 2.1 |
Tobacco products and smoking supplies |
.6 | .3 |
Miscellaneous |
1.6 | 1.6 |
Cash contributions |
3.6 | 2.6* |
Personal insurance and pensions |
10.9 | 12.0* |
|
*Statistically significant difference from the U.S. average at the 95-percent confidence level. |
||
| Category | United States | San Francisco |
|---|---|---|
| Consumer unit characteristics: | ||
Income before taxes |
$63,328 | $89,770 |
Age of reference person |
49.0 | 48.3 |
| Average number in consumer unit: | ||
Persons |
2.5 | 2.4 |
Children under 18 |
.6 | .5 |
Persons 65 and over |
.3 | .3 |
Earners |
1.3 | 1.4 |
Vehicles |
1.9 | 1.8 |
Percent homeowner |
67 | 57 |
Average annual expenditures |
$50,063 | $68,966 |
Food |
6,288 | 8,393 |
Food at home |
3,605 | 4,323 |
Cereals and bakery products |
483 | 562 |
Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs |
812 | 919 |
Dairy products |
409 | 478 |
Fruits and vegetables |
628 | 916 |
Other food at home |
1,273 | 1,448 |
Food away from home |
2,683 | 4,070 |
Alcoholic beverages |
450 | 774 |
Housing |
17,015 | 26,111 |
Shelter |
10,103 | 18,800 |
Owned dwellings |
6,745 | 11,238 |
Rented dwellings |
2,663 | 6,208 |
Other lodging |
694 | 1,355 |
Utilities, fuels, and public services |
3,563 | 3,204 |
Household operations |
991 | 1,567 |
Housekeeping supplies |
647 | 600 |
Household furnishings and equipment |
1,711 | 1,939 |
Apparel and services |
1,841 | 2,456 |
Transportation |
8,680 | 10,591 |
Vehicle purchases (net outlay) |
2,999 | 2,973 |
Gasoline and motor oil |
2,550 | 2,589 |
Other vehicle expenses |
2,607 | 3,550 |
Public transportation |
525 | 1,479 |
Healthcare |
2,914 | 3,321 |
Entertainment |
2,767 | 3,409 |
Personal care products and services |
602 | 932 |
Reading |
117 | 174 |
Education |
996 | 1,450 |
Tobacco products and smoking supplies |
320 | 176 |
Miscellaneous |
824 | 1,101 |
Cash contributions |
1,779 | 1,822 |
Personal insurance and pensions |
5,471 | 8,256 |
Life and other personal insurance |
313 | 270 |
Pensions and Social Security |
5,158 | 7,986 |
| Area | Housing | Food | Transportation |
|---|---|---|---|
United States |
34.0 | 12.6 | 17.3 |
Atlanta |
37.0* | 12.9 | 15.7 |
Baltimore |
38.5* | 11.4* | 14.8* |
Boston |
37.0* | 13.3 | 14.4* |
Chicago |
36.0* | 12.4 | 15.4* |
Cleveland |
34.9 | 11.7 | 17.2 |
Dallas |
33.5 | 11.7 | 19.1 |
Detroit |
33.0 | 14.3* | 19.1* |
Houston |
32.4* | 12.3 | 19.5* |
Los Angeles |
38.3* | 12.9 | 15.6* |
Miami |
39.2* | 12.0 | 18.1 |
Minneapolis |
34.1 | 12.2 | 16.6 |
New York |
39.6* | 12.2 | 13.9* |
Philadelphia |
37.5* | 11.0* | 15.5* |
Phoenix |
34.3 | 11.3* | 20.5* |
San Diego |
44.1* | 10.9* | 12.8* |
San Francisco |
37.9* | 12.2 | 15.4* |
Seattle |
33.8 | 11.5* | 15.2* |
Washington |
37.0* | 11.5* | 14.8* |
|
*Statistically significant difference from the U.S. average at the 95-percent confidence level. |
|||

*Note: Statistical significance testing at the 95-percent confidence interval.

*Note: Statistical significance testing at the 95-percent confidence interval.
[1]See the Additional Information for the definition of a consumer unit. The terms consumer unit and household are used interchangeably throughout the text for convenience.
Last Modified Date: January 21, 2010