How Many Sole Proprietorships Are in the U.S.?

Growth of Sole Proprietorships in the U.S. over the last 25 years

By Syndicated Maps Editorial | Updated October 2025

---

The Quiet Majority of U.S. Businesses

Small business has always been the backbone of the American economy. But behind the storefronts and corporations we recognize, there’s a massive segment of entrepreneurs working quietly on their own. These are sole proprietors — individuals who operate businesses without forming a corporation or partnership. They make up the largest share of business owners in the country by far, and their growth over the last 25 years reveals a major shift in how Americans earn a living.

While corporations often dominate headlines and political discussions, the reality is that the modern U.S. economy runs on self-employed people. From freelance designers and real estate agents to independent truckers and gig-app drivers, sole proprietorships now outnumber all corporations combined.

---

What Is a Sole Proprietorship?

A sole proprietorship is an unincorporated business owned and run by one person. It’s the simplest and most common structure for small businesses in the United States. The owner and the business are legally the same entity — meaning the owner keeps all profits but is also personally responsible for all debts and liabilities.

Unlike corporations or limited liability companies (LLCs), sole proprietorships don’t require registration with the state beyond local permits or business licenses. The owner simply reports business income and expenses on Schedule C of their personal Form 1040 tax return. This simplicity makes it the easiest entry point into entrepreneurship.

The downside is that sole proprietors have unlimited personal liability. If the business is sued or can’t pay its debts, the owner’s personal assets could be at risk. Despite that, millions of Americans continue to choose this structure for its flexibility and low cost.

---

How Many Sole Proprietorships Exist?

According to the most recent data from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), there were about 31 million active sole proprietorships in the United States as of tax year 2022. That’s up from roughly 17 million in 1997 — an increase of more than 80 percent in a single generation.

IRS “Schedule C” filings show steady growth over time:

• 1997 — 16.9 million

• 2003 — 19.7 million

• 2019 — 27.9 million

• 2020 — 28.3 million

• 2021 — 29.3 million

• 2022 — 30.98 million

Each of those figures represents a person reporting self-employment income, usually without any employees. The U.S. Small Business Administration estimates that about 86 percent of all non-employer firms — those without payroll — are sole proprietorships. That means roughly 25 million people are working entirely for themselves, often from home or through digital platforms.

---

Comparing Sole Proprietors, S-Corps, and C-Corps

To see how dominant sole proprietors have become, it helps to compare them with incorporated businesses. Based on IRS data:

• S Corporations (Form 1120-S) grew from about 2.5 million in 1997 to 5.3 million in 2022.

• C Corporations and other corporate forms (Form 1120) remained flat around 1.5 to 2 million during the same period.

• Sole Proprietorships surged from 17 million to nearly 31 million.

The result is clear: self-employed individuals now make up the overwhelming majority of all U.S. business filings. S-corps overtook traditional C-corps in the early 2000s as pass-through taxation became more popular, but both corporate types combined still account for only about one-fifth the number of sole proprietors.

This trend shows a fundamental reshaping of the business landscape. Americans increasingly prefer independence, flexibility, and low overhead over traditional corporate structures.

---

Why the Surge in Sole Proprietorships?

Several long-term trends explain the steady rise in self-employment:

1. Technology and the Gig Economy
   The rise of apps and online platforms has made it easy to start earning as an independent contractor. Rideshare drivers, delivery workers, and freelance professionals can all operate as sole proprietors with just a smartphone and a 1099 form.

2. Remote Work and Side Hustles
   The pandemic accelerated the shift toward home-based work. Millions began side businesses — from consulting and tutoring to selling crafts online — to supplement their income or replace full-time jobs.

3. Ease of Formation
   Forming an LLC or corporation requires state filings, separate tax returns, and annual fees. A sole proprietorship can begin operating immediately, with no separate paperwork beyond a Schedule C at tax time.

4. Digital Marketplaces
   Platforms like Etsy, Amazon, and Shopify have turned hobbyists into business owners overnight. These online ecosystems allow individuals to operate globally without ever forming a corporation.

5. Demographic and Lifestyle Changes
   Many retirees or mid-career professionals choose self-employment for flexibility. Others launch micro-businesses to gain autonomy after leaving traditional jobs.

Combined, these forces have made the sole proprietor model the natural fit for a digital, decentralized economy.

---

Growth Over the Last 25 Years

To visualize the shift, imagine a simple chart showing three lines from 1997 to 2022:

• Sole proprietorships rise sharply from 17 million to 31 million.

• S-corps climb moderately from 2.5 million to 5.3 million.

• C-corps and other corporations remain almost flat around 1.5 million.

This tells a powerful story about American entrepreneurship. In 1997, there were roughly eight sole proprietors for every C-corp. Today, there are more than twenty. The number of people working for themselves has grown even as large corporations consolidate or automate.

It’s not just tax filings that have grown. The types of businesses have diversified: independent tech developers, social-media creators, real-estate flippers, e-commerce resellers, and niche consultants all fall under the same legal structure. In the 1990s, sole proprietorships were dominated by small retail and service shops; today, they span nearly every professional category imaginable.

---

The Pros and Cons

Advantages:

• Extremely easy and inexpensive to start

• Complete control and decision-making power

• Simple tax reporting (income passes directly to the owner)

• No need for separate corporate filings

Disadvantages:

• Unlimited personal liability for debts or lawsuits

• Limited ability to raise capital or take on investors

• May appear less formal to clients or lenders

• Can face higher self-employment taxes

Despite the risks, the simplicity often wins out — especially for freelancers and solo operators who value independence more than liability protection.

---

The Bigger Picture

The growing share of sole proprietorships reflects a larger social and economic transformation. America’s workforce is shifting from long-term employment toward self-directed work. Many young people see entrepreneurship not as a risky leap but as a normal career path. Digital platforms, online education, and new payment tools have made it easier than ever to run a one-person enterprise.

At the same time, the traditional corporation isn’t disappearing — it’s just becoming more specialized. S-corps remain attractive for small firms with a few employees, and large public companies still dominate stock markets. But in raw numbers, the future of small business clearly belongs to independent owners.

---

The Bottom Line

If you want to understand the modern U.S. economy, look beyond Wall Street and Fortune 500 companies. The real growth engine is the tens of millions of Americans who work for themselves. Over the past 25 years, the number of sole proprietorships has nearly doubled, while corporate filings have barely changed.

Sole proprietors now represent more than three-quarters of all active business tax returns in the country. Their rise marks a cultural shift toward autonomy, flexibility, and personal entrepreneurship — the defining traits of the twenty-first-century economy.

How AI Cameras & Sensors Are Transforming Safety in Daily Life

Artificial intelligence is no longer a futuristic concept—it is actively reshaping safety in our daily lives. From reducing car accidents to improving air quality and strengthening school security, AI-powered cameras and sensors are transforming how communities address risk. Unlike traditional surveillance, these systems use machine learning and advanced analytics to recognize behaviors, detect hazards, and trigger alerts in real time. Supporters argue that AI safety technologies save lives and reduce costs, while critics worry about privacy, accuracy, and over-reliance on automation. This article explores how AI cameras and sensors are being used across roads, environmental monitoring, and schools, while weighing the opportunities and challenges ahead.

AI on the Roads: Smarter Enforcement and Safer Driving 

Subscription Websites vs Ad-Heavy Sites: Which Ranks Better?

Do Subscription-Based Websites with Higher Engagement Get Better Search Engine Results vs Advertising-Based Websites with Tons of Ads?

Search engine optimization (SEO) is a constantly evolving field, but one principle has remained consistent: user experience drives rankings. In today’s digital ecosystem, website owners often face a strategic decision—should they monetize with subscriptions or advertising? Subscription-based websites typically emphasize quality content, deeper engagement, and minimal distractions, while advertising-driven websites often maximize impressions at the cost of user experience. The question is: which model performs better in search engine results pages (SERPs)?

The Core Difference Between Subscription and Ad-Supported Sites

Subscription-based websites rely on paid memberships or premium content access. This model incentivizes publishers to focus on providing high-value, niche content that builds loyalty. Ad-based sites, on the other hand, prioritize maximizing traffic volume to generate revenue through impressions and clicks. This can lead to cluttered pages, intrusive pop-ups, and slower loading times.

Search engines like Google measure site quality through signals such as page speed, bounce rate, dwell time, and overall engagement. Therefore, the monetization model indirectly influences SEO outcomes by shaping user behavior.

How Search Engines Measure Engagement

Engagement is a broad metric, but in SEO terms, it boils down to:

• Click-through rate (CTR): Do users click your page when it appears in search results?

• Bounce rate: Do users leave immediately after landing on your site?

• Dwell time: How long do they stay on the page?

• Pages per session: Do they explore other areas of your site?

• Return visits: Do users come back over time?

Subscription sites often perform well across these metrics because paying users are more motivated to engage with content. Ad-heavy sites may struggle because slow load times and clutter discourage longer visits.

Why Subscription Sites Often Rank Higher

1. Cleaner User Experience: Without layers of display ads, subscription sites load faster, are easier to navigate, and provide a smoother experience. Page speed is a ranking factor, and Google’s Core Web Vitals directly reward websites that deliver better usability.

2. Higher Content Quality: Subscription publishers must deliver value to justify recurring payments. This leads to more in-depth research, expert-driven analysis, and unique perspectives. Search engines prioritize authoritative content, especially after algorithm updates like Google’s Helpful Content System.

3. Stronger Audience Loyalty: Subscribers are not one-time visitors. They engage repeatedly, signal trust through brand searches, and amplify SEO through direct traffic—an important ranking factor that indicates authority.

4. Reduced Bounce Rate: Visitors on subscription sites are less likely to bounce, even if content is gated. They already trust the brand and are willing to log in or sign up, while casual ad-driven visitors often leave if bombarded by ads.

The Struggles of Advertising-Heavy Sites

Advertising isn’t inherently bad, but when overused, it creates challenges:

• Slow Load Times: Ad scripts, trackers, and pop-ups increase page weight and slow rendering, which hurts both rankings and user satisfaction.

• Disruptive Layouts: Interstitials and autoplay videos can cause accidental clicks and frustrate users, leading to higher bounce rates.

• Lower Trust Signals: Users often associate ad-heavy sites with low credibility, reducing brand searches and direct visits—both valuable for SEO.

• Shorter Engagement: When users only skim content before leaving due to clutter, the site loses out on dwell time signals that improve search rankings.

Google’s Stance on Ads vs User Experience

Google explicitly penalizes pages that prioritize ads over content. Its Page Layout Algorithm Update reduced rankings for “ad-heavy” sites where users had to scroll past multiple ads to find useful content. Similarly, Core Web Vitals assess visual stability, meaning ad shifts that disrupt reading flow can damage rankings.

Subscription sites naturally avoid these pitfalls by design. With fewer or no ads, they align more closely with Google’s vision of prioritizing helpful content.

Case Study Comparisons

• News Outlets: Premium news sites like The New York Times or The Washington Post blend subscription models with limited advertising. Their SEO strength comes from deep reporting and brand authority. By contrast, clickbait-driven sites filled with ads often lose visibility after Google updates targeting low-value content.

• Streaming vs Free Entertainment: Netflix (subscription) provides ad-free, premium streaming, while many free streaming sites are ad-saturated and often penalized for spammy experiences. Netflix dominates SEO rankings for brand and content searches, while ad-heavy platforms constantly struggle to stay indexed.

• Educational Platforms: Subscription-based e-learning providers like Coursera and MasterClass rank high for competitive keywords due to strong engagement and authority. Free but ad-filled tutorial blogs may gain traffic quickly but often lack retention and long-term SEO dominance.

SEO Benefits of Subscription Engagement

Subscription-based sites also benefit from community engagement features such as:

• Member forums and discussions: Generate fresh content and long-tail keyword coverage.

• Personalized recommendations: Keep users browsing multiple pages, improving session duration.

• Email-driven return visits: Subscribers often re-engage via newsletters, reinforcing brand authority.

Each of these creates signals that search engines interpret as a trustworthy and valuable site.

Hybrid Models: The Best of Both Worlds?

Not all ad-supported sites perform poorly. Some combine advertising with strong editorial quality. For example, Forbes and Wired monetize with both display ads and premium memberships. The key is balance: when ads don’t overwhelm content, sites can maintain SEO competitiveness while diversifying revenue.

Hybrid models often rely on:

• Limited, relevant ads: Contextual or native ads blend with content without disrupting experience.

• Tiered memberships: Free content with ads, premium ad-free subscriptions.

• Content upgrades: Offering in-depth guides or reports behind a paywall.

This approach allows publishers to capture broader audiences while still reaping the SEO benefits of engaged subscribers.

Future SEO Trends Favor Subscription Sites

Several trends suggest that subscription-based sites may increasingly outperform ad-heavy ones:

1. AI Search Evolution: Search engines are using AI to evaluate “helpfulness.” Subscription sites that deliver depth will fare better than shallow, ad-driven clickbait.

2. Privacy Shifts: With third-party cookies fading, advertising becomes less effective. Subscription sites, with first-party user data, will gain an advantage.

3. Voice and Conversational Search: As users ask longer, more specific questions, in-depth subscription content will match intent better than ad-cluttered pages.

4. Brand Authority Weighting: Google increasingly favors recognizable, trustworthy brands. Subscription models build authority through loyalty, while ad-heavy clickbait sites struggle to establish trust.

Conclusion

So, do subscription-based websites with higher engagement get better search engine results compared to advertising-heavy websites with tons of ads? The evidence strongly suggests yes. Subscription sites encourage longer dwell times, cleaner user experiences, and higher trust—all factors that align with search engine ranking systems. Ad-supported sites can still succeed if they manage balance and provide genuine value, but over-reliance on intrusive ads typically damages SEO performance.

For website owners, the takeaway is clear: prioritize engagement over impressions. Whether through subscriptions, premium memberships, or hybrid approaches, investing in user experience and content quality will always yield stronger SEO results than flooding pages with ads.

FCC Rules on Slander for Broadcasters vs Social Media Free Speech

The way speech is regulated in the United States depends greatly on the medium. Broadcasters such as television and radio stations fall under the oversight of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which enforces rules against slander, obscenity, and indecency on public airwaves. In contrast, social media platforms like Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), YouTube, and TikTok operate in a far less regulated environment, primarily governed by platform policies and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. This article explores the FCC requirements for broadcasters when it comes to slander, explains the difference between slander and libel, and highlights why social media content is treated differently.

What the FCC Requires From Broadcasters

Broadcasters operate on the public airwaves, which are considered a limited public resource. Because of this, they must meet licensing requirements and adhere to content regulations. While the FCC does not directly regulate slander cases, it does set standards for fairness and truth in programming. Broadcasters can face consequences if they knowingly air false statements that damage a person’s reputation. The FCC requires licensees to operate in the “public interest, convenience, and necessity.” This includes preventing defamatory speech on programs, particularly during live broadcasts. If slander occurs, a broadcaster may be exposed to civil liability and, in extreme cases, face FCC scrutiny if such actions suggest a lack of control over programming. Unlike private conversation, broadcasting slander is magnified by its reach, which is why the FCC emphasizes responsibility.

Slander vs. Libel in Broadcasting

Slander refers to false spoken statements that harm a person’s reputation, while libel refers to false written or published statements. In broadcasting, the spoken word over radio or television is often considered slander, though in some legal contexts it may be treated as libel since it is recorded and disseminated. Broadcasters must be particularly careful in live settings such as call-in shows, interviews, and unscripted segments. For example, if a guest makes a knowingly false statement about an individual, the station could face a lawsuit if it fails to issue corrections or exercise editorial oversight. This is why many broadcasters use time-delay mechanisms to filter out inappropriate or defamatory content.

The Fairness Doctrine and Its Legacy

Historically, the FCC also enforced the Fairness Doctrine, which required broadcasters to present controversial issues in a balanced way. Although the Fairness Doctrine was abolished in 1987, its legacy still influences broadcasting ethics. The underlying idea was that because broadcasters use public airwaves, they owe viewers truthful and balanced coverage. While slander laws are enforced through courts rather than the FCC, the expectation remains that broadcast licensees must avoid reckless disregard for the truth.

Social Media and Section 230

Unlike broadcasters, social media platforms are not licensed by the FCC. Instead, they operate under a legal framework established by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. Section 230 grants platforms immunity from liability for content posted by users. This means if a user publishes defamatory statements on X, Facebook, or YouTube, the platform itself cannot generally be sued for slander or libel. The user who created the content may face legal consequences, but the platform is shielded. This legal distinction creates a massive difference in accountability. Broadcasters are responsible for nearly everything they air, while social media companies are treated as “neutral hosts,” even though in practice they use algorithms to amplify certain content.

The Problem of Scale and Enforcement

Broadcasting is finite: only a set number of radio and TV frequencies exist, and each licensee is monitored by the FCC. By contrast, social media operates at an infinite scale. Millions of users publish content simultaneously across platforms, making real-time oversight impossible. The FCC has no jurisdiction over social media platforms, which means content moderation is left to company policies, community guidelines, and in some cases, international law. For example, platforms often remove slanderous posts only when flagged by users, whereas broadcasters are expected to prevent defamatory content before it reaches the airwaves.

Case Examples in Broadcasting

There have been several high-profile cases where broadcasters faced lawsuits for slander or defamation. For instance, if a local news anchor falsely accuses a business owner of fraud without evidence, the station could be sued for damages. The FCC might also review whether the station demonstrated irresponsibility in meeting its license obligations. In political broadcasting, candidates have additional protections. Broadcasters cannot censor legally qualified candidate ads, but they also cannot slander opponents directly without exposing themselves to liability. This creates a narrow but important balance between free speech and reputation rights.

Case Examples in Social Media

On social media, slander cases rarely involve the platform itself. Instead, lawsuits are directed at individuals who posted defamatory statements. However, enforcing judgments can be difficult, especially when anonymous accounts are involved. Social media companies may cooperate with law enforcement in cases of criminal threats, but they rarely intervene in civil slander disputes. This has led to criticism that platforms spread misinformation and defamation with few consequences. Unlike broadcasters, they cannot lose an FCC license, because no such regulatory oversight exists.

Calls for Reform

As misinformation spreads online, some lawmakers and regulators have called for reforms to Section 230. Proposals include narrowing immunity so platforms can be held accountable if they algorithmically promote slanderous or harmful content. Critics argue that the current system creates a double standard: broadcasters face strict responsibility for slander, while platforms that reach billions of users face little risk. Proponents of Section 230 argue that removing immunity would crush free speech online and burden platforms with endless lawsuits.

Key Differences Between Broadcasters and Social Media

To summarize:

• Broadcasters are licensed by the FCC and must operate in the public interest. They are legally responsible for defamatory statements aired on their stations and can lose licenses if they repeatedly fail in oversight.

• Social media platforms are shielded by Section 230. They are not legally responsible for user-generated slander, though they may remove content under their policies. Liability generally falls on the user.

• Enforcement is proactive for broadcasters but reactive for social media, where slanderous content often spreads before being removed.

Conclusion

The FCC’s role in regulating broadcasters ensures that slanderous or defamatory speech is minimized on public airwaves. Broadcasters must exercise editorial judgment and maintain control over their programming or face serious consequences. Social media platforms, however, operate under an entirely different framework that largely absolves them of responsibility for slanderous user content. This difference reflects both the historical nature of broadcasting as a scarce public resource and the modern challenge of regulating billions of online voices. Whether Congress revisits Section 230 or strengthens slander protections in the digital era remains a subject of ongoing debate.

Seasonal News Viewership and the Challenge for News After Elections

Every year, news viewership in the U.S. rises and falls in a predictable rhythm. Audiences tune out in the summer, return in the fall, and surge during election season. This cycle has existed for decades, but it creates a significant challenge for news organizations: how do you cover important issues consistently when the audience only seems to care at certain times? In this article, we’ll explore the seasonal patterns of news consumption, the spikes during elections, and how these cycles pressure newsrooms to decide what matters, when to cover it, and how to keep people engaged outside of political “peak season.”

1. The Seasonal Cycle of News Viewership

Winter (Jan–Mar): Audiences engage moderately, often drawn to political speeches, new legislation, and the opening of the year’s news agenda.
Spring (Apr–Jun): Viewership is steady but not dramatic, with bumps during primaries or international crises.
Summer (Jul–Aug): The lowest point of the year. Congress often recesses, major political stories slow down, and Americans spend more time outdoors.
Fall (Sep–Nov): Engagement explodes. Debates, conventions, and Election Day create the largest viewership spikes of the year.
December: A mix of political transitions and holiday distractions keeps interest moderate.
This cycle illustrates the problem: newsrooms can produce important investigative work in April or July, but the audience might not be paying attention.

2. Election Spikes: A Double-Edged Sword

Elections are both a blessing and a curse for news organizations. Blessing: Election years deliver record ratings. Debates and election nights are among the few events that draw tens of millions to live broadcasts. Digital outlets and streaming platforms also see traffic spikes. Curse: Audiences often retreat after elections, leaving a steep drop in ratings and subscription growth. This creates a business challenge: should outlets chase the short-term boom of elections or invest in year-round coverage that may not draw immediate numbers?

3. Why This Challenges Newsrooms

The spiky attention span of audiences means important but less flashy topics—like local government decisions, environmental risks, or long-term policy debates—may struggle for visibility. News organizations face three dilemmas:

1. Resource Allocation – Should more reporters be hired in fall to handle debate coverage, only to see demand vanish by December?

2. Editorial Choices – Should editors prioritize horse-race coverage of polls and campaign drama over investigative pieces that matter but attract fewer clicks?

3. Audience Trust – If viewers only see political theater in the news, they may lose faith that journalism serves the public good beyond elections.

4. The Summer Slump Problem

The summer months highlight this challenge most clearly. While journalists continue covering corruption, climate change, or international conflicts, the audience is on vacation. Investigative work released in July risks being overlooked. Some outlets respond by holding stories until September, when they expect higher attention. Others adapt by focusing on evergreen or human-interest content during the lull. But both approaches reveal the difficulty: timing often dictates impact.

5. Post-Election Fatigue

After elections, viewership falls sharply. This drop is not just about numbers; it reflects emotional exhaustion. Audiences are saturated with months of political ads, debates, and analysis. For newsrooms, this presents another obstacle: how to sustain attention on governance after the votes are counted. Policies made in January may be more consequential than speeches in October, yet the audience has tuned out.

6. Digital Platforms and the Changing Landscape

Digital and social platforms complicate the seasonal challenge. TV Still Dominates Election Nights – But TV ratings drop sharply outside those events. Websites & Apps – Digital subscriptions often surge in election years, only to stagnate afterward. Social Media – Short-form clips on TikTok or YouTube spread quickly but often prioritize drama over depth. For news organizations, the seasonal cycle isn’t just about timing—it’s about platform strategy. They must ask: should we chase viral moments or double down on long-form investigative journalism?

7. Why Covering Things That Matter Is Harder

The combination of seasonal patterns and audience behavior makes it harder to highlight critical issues: Climate – A long-term story, but one that rarely produces spikes in daily engagement. Local Government – Decisions about zoning, schools, or policing affect millions but don’t command national attention. Economic Policy – The impact is profound, but unless tied to an election, these stories often feel abstract. Elections grab the spotlight, leaving many of these stories in the shadows unless newsrooms commit to prioritizing them despite lower ratings.

8. Strategies for Newsrooms

To overcome these challenges, news organizations can:

1. Build Evergreen Coverage – Create explainer pages and guides on key issues that remain useful year-round.

2. Engage Through Storytelling – Package policy reporting with human stories to make it relatable.

3. Invest in Local Reporting – National elections spike interest, but local journalism connects audiences to year-round civic issues.

4. Leverage Seasonal Cycles – Plan investigative releases around higher-attention months without neglecting quieter periods.

5. Use Data and Charts – Visual tools can keep engagement steady even when stories aren’t “breaking news.”

9. What This Means for the Future

The seasonal cycle is unlikely to disappear. Human attention naturally gravitates toward elections and defining national moments. But for journalism to fulfill its civic role, organizations must resist the temptation to treat news as seasonal entertainment. Instead, they need to balance spikes with sustained coverage that builds understanding year-round. Success will depend on creativity, platform adaptation, and a renewed commitment to covering what matters—even when fewer people are watching.

Conclusion

Seasonal viewership trends show that Americans tune in most during elections and disengage during summer or post-election months. This creates a challenge for news organizations: how to maintain focus on meaningful issues when the audience is distracted or fatigued. By developing year-round strategies, investing in local and investigative reporting, and using digital platforms wisely, newsrooms can bridge the gap between audience cycles and civic responsibility. Elections may command attention, but real democracy depends on what happens in the quieter months.