Finding top talent is a challenge for many employers – and the cost of hiring being one of those challenges, however, hiring remotely can be more cost-effective because employers have access to a wider pool of talent from more affordable states. Hiring costs are always top of mind for employers, especially when taking into account mandatory contributions to programs like unemployment and health care. However, the boom in remote work has allowed employers to expand their hiring possibilities beyond the boundaries of their home bases. "Finding top talent can be a challenge for many business owners with the cost to hire an employee being one of them. When hiring remotely, not only do employers have access to a wider pool of talent, they can also look to be more cost-effective when hiring individuals from different states," says Anastasia Pshegodskaya, director of talent acquisition at employment solutions specialist Remote. "With this in mind, it's worth employers investigating talent in specific states if cost is a challenge in the hiring process." A new study from Remote reveals the states where hiring will hurt a company's purse the most—and the least. Using an average salary of $54,132, Remote calculated hiring costs based on the required social contributions per state of residence. According to the study, South Carolina is the least expensive state in the U.S. for hiring, with the lowest basic mandatory employer costs of $4,648. Montana and Nebraska tie for second place with basic costs of $4,684. Mississippi and Louisiana around out the top five at $4,711 and $4,725 respectively. |

Least expensive states to hire employees

Where will hiring cost you more? See our slideshow above.

Related:

• Spreading the word about insurance career opportunities
• The insurance industry talent and technology tug-of-war
• Insurance industry hiring trends for 2023