Austin, TX vs Los Angeles, CA
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Los Angeles, CA outspends Austin, TX by a wide margin per resident — $85,432 versus $21,772, a 292% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
Austin, TX holds the stronger Fiscal Health Score, 75/100 (grade B) against 47/100 (grade D) for Los Angeles, CA — a 28-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
Los Angeles, CA reports no outstanding debt per resident in its Census filing, while Austin, TX carries $1,229 per resident. Their budgets diverge on where the largest per-resident dollars go: Austin, TX leads with parks and recreation at $1,801 per resident, while Los Angeles, CA leads with police at $4,111.
They also fund themselves differently: intergovernmental transfers is the largest single revenue source in Austin, TX at 18% of total revenue, whereas Los Angeles, CA relies most on other revenue at 51%.
Summary
Los Angeles spends 74.5% more per capita than Austin ($63,660/person difference). Austin, TX has the stronger Fiscal Health Score (B, 75/100).
Fiscal Health Score
Key Metrics
Per Capita Spending by Department
Revenue Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Property Tax | $0 | $64 |
| Sales Tax | $526 | $77 |
| Income Tax | $1,465 | $307 |
| Intergovernmental | $14,031 | $134 |
| Charges & Fees | $3,247 | $459 |
| Other | $5,645 | $9,048 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Police | $0 | $4,111 |
| Fire Protection | $634 | $1,057 |
| Highways & Roads | $0 | $503 |
| Education | $51 | $829 |
| Public Welfare | $1,837 | $1,286 |
| Health | $517 | $409 |
| Hospitals | $664 | $2,135 |
| Parks & Recreation | $1,801 | $1,347 |
| Housing | $3,741 | $6,325 |
| Sewerage | $865 | $34 |
| Utilities | $3,264 | $21,992 |
| Interest on Debt | $0 | $630 |
| General Admin | $0 | $11,586 |
| Other | $8,399 | $33,189 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.