Student analysis finds a $12 minimum wage would lift pay for about 14,000 New Hampshire workers while raising small-business concerns

A team of student researchers presented a nonpartisan analysis to the House Labor, Industrial and Rehabilitative Services Committee on the likely effects of raising New Hampshire's minimum wage, focusing on the first step of House Bill 1484: a move to $12 an hour.

The presenters told the committee that New Hampshire's current minimum wage is $7.25 — the federal floor — and that its real purchasing power has fallen considerably. "New Hampshire's minimum wage is currently at $7.25 an hour," one presenter said, noting that when adjusted for inflation that wage has substantially less purchasing power than in prior decades.

Why it matters: the students said a $12 floor would directly affect roughly 14,000 workers in the state, concentrated in child care, retail and food service. The team emphasized distributional details: about 55% of affected workers are 24 or younger and roughly 31% live in households below the poverty line, meaning the policy would reach many early-career workers as well as adults supporting vulnerable households.

The research team summarized evidence from academic and government studies showing mixed effects. Some literature and federal-level modeling suggest higher wages increase earnings and can reduce public-program enrollment; other studies and a 2021 New Hampshire Employment Security estimate project modest job losses under larger increases (the students highlighted that the magnitude of employment effects varies by study and context). "We saw mixed outcomes in the literature: higher earnings for affected workers but potential small employment declines in some settings," a presenter said.

On business effects, presenters said impacts vary by firm size and industry. Small businesses and fixed-reimbursement providers (for example, some residential care homes operating under Medicaid rates) expressed concerns, while some research suggests higher wages can reduce turnover and raise productivity. Committee members repeatedly pressed presenters about an Oxford study cited in the brief that estimated about a 1.5% increase in small-business closures after a wage rise in the U.K.; the presenters stressed that the U.K. context differs from New Hampshire and included the finding for robustness rather than direct transfer.

The team compared neighboring states' approaches: Vermont and Maine index wages to inflation and include exemptions or municipal options; Pennsylvania's pending bill takes a tiered geographic approach. The presenters recommended indexing to inflation and outlined three legislative pathways for New Hampshire: a statewide floor with targeted exemptions, geographic tiers, or municipal flexibility allowing cities or towns to adopt higher minima.

Committee members asked detailed questions about program interactions (SNAP and TANF), benefit cliffs, and household composition. Presenters said a $12 threshold would generally not price most individuals out of SNAP but could affect TANF eligibility depending on family size and exact thresholds; they pointed to the brief for precise numbers. The presenters acknowledged limits in their brief, including that they did not analyze correlations between firm size and wage levels in detail and recommended that as future work.

The session ended with the committee thanking the student team and discussing follow-up and how the legislative process works; no formal action or vote on House Bill 1484 occurred at the meeting.

The committee footnoted the team's use of 2019 stakeholder testimony for historical business perspectives and emphasized that the presentation was intended to inform deliberation rather than propose final legislative language.