Minnesota Workers' Comp Settlement Calculator
Estimate a workers' comp settlement under Minnesota law. The calculator applies this jurisdiction's own benefit rate and weekly maximum, and every figure below is the one our verified data holds, with the statute behind it and the date we checked it.
What Minnesota pays, and when you must act
Workers' compensation pays a share of your wage while you cannot work, whoever was at fault, up to a weekly maximum the state sets. Two deadlines run from the injury: one for reporting it and one for filing the claim. Here is what we hold for this state.
We do not hold a verified current maximum weekly benefit for Minnesota. The maximum is 108% of the statewide average weekly wage under Minn. Stat. § 176.011 and is reset each October 1 by the Department of Labor and Industry, whose figure for the current rate year could not be recovered from the agency or from the Internet Archive. The rate year that has now ended may not be carried forward. The 66.67% rate is applied to gross wages. If you were hurt during a rate year we still hold, enter your date of injury: the maximum that governs your claim is the one in force on that date, and it stays with the claim.
Minn. Stat. § 176.141·Last reviewed 2026-08-09
“An agreement between an employee or an employee's dependent and the employer or insurer to settle any claim for compensation under this chapter is valid where it has been executed in writing and signed by the parties and intervenors in the matter, and, where one or more of the parties is not represented by an attorney, the commissioner or a compensation judge has approved the settlement and made an award thereon.”
Minn. Stat. § 176.521, subd. 1(a)·Last reviewed 2026-10-07
What Minnesota pays at different wages
The weekly benefit the calculator above pays at six average weekly wages, and what that comes to over 12 weeks out of work. The numbers are the engine's output, not an editorial claim about what these claims are worth.
Temporary total disability only, run through the calculator above at each wage: no medical costs, no permanent impairment, no waiting period or limit on the number of weeks, and one rate for every week, so a different rate the state sets for part of a claim (see the note under the maximum) is not applied. We hold no verified maximum weekly benefit for Minnesota, so these rows apply 66.67% with no ceiling. Minnesota does cap the weekly benefit, so at the higher wages the real benefit can be lower than shown. These wages illustrate the rule; they are not an estimate of your claim.
Every Minnesota deadline we hold
A claim can be more than one kind of case, and the clock is different for each. These are the Minnesota periods in our verified data, with the statute behind each one. A deadline is the outside limit, never a target, and other rules can shorten it.
Minnesota's 6 years comes from Minn. Stat. § 541.05, subd. 1, which opens “Except where the Uniform Commercial Code otherwise prescribes, the following actions shall be commenced within six years:” and lists, at clause (5), “(5) for criminal conversation, or for any other injury to the person or rights of another, not arising on contract, and not hereinafter enumerated;” A shorter section sits beside it. Minn. Stat. § 541.07 opens “Except where the Uniform Commercial Code, this section, section 541.05, 541.073, 541.076, or 604.205 otherwise prescribes, the following actions shall be commenced within two years:” and its clause (1) reads “(1) for libel, slander, assault, battery, false imprisonment, or other tort resulting in personal injury,” The Minnesota Supreme Court has written about both sections. D.M.S. v. Barber, No. C8-00-2227, decided June 13, 2002, was about when the delayed-discovery period for a sexual-abuse claim begins to run. The part of the opinion that begins “We first consider whether D.M.S.’s negligence claims are barred by the statute of limitations.” goes on: “Generally, personal injury actions grounded on negligence must be commenced within the six-year period of limitation provided in Minn. Stat. § 541.05(5) (2000).” Sipe v. STS Manufacturing, Inc., No. A11-2082, decided July 31, 2013, was about a wrongful-discharge claim created by a Minnesota statute. The court wrote that “section 541.07(1) is limited to common law causes of action not created by statute.” and referred to “our interpretation of the phrase “other tort resulting in personal injury” as being limited to common law intentional torts.” Neither case was about an ordinary negligence or product claim, and neither says which period governs yours. Ask a licensed Minnesota attorney which period applies to your claim.
Minn. Stat. 541.05, subd. 1(5)·Last reviewed 2026-07-28
Open the personal injury calculatorMinn. Stat. § 541.076·Source retrieved 2026-07-27
Open the medical malpractice calculatorMinn. Stat. § 573.02, subd. 1·Source retrieved 2026-07-27
Open the wrongful death calculatorMinn. Stat. § 176.151·Source retrieved 2026-07-27
Open the workers compensation calculatorMinnesota's 6 years comes from Minn. Stat. § 541.05, subd. 1, which opens “Except where the Uniform Commercial Code otherwise prescribes, the following actions shall be commenced within six years:” and lists, at clause (5), “(5) for criminal conversation, or for any other injury to the person or rights of another, not arising on contract, and not hereinafter enumerated;” A shorter section sits beside it. Minn. Stat. § 541.07 opens “Except where the Uniform Commercial Code, this section, section 541.05, 541.073, 541.076, or 604.205 otherwise prescribes, the following actions shall be commenced within two years:” and its clause (1) reads “(1) for libel, slander, assault, battery, false imprisonment, or other tort resulting in personal injury,” The Minnesota Supreme Court has written about both sections. D.M.S. v. Barber, No. C8-00-2227, decided June 13, 2002, was about when the delayed-discovery period for a sexual-abuse claim begins to run. The part of the opinion that begins “We first consider whether D.M.S.’s negligence claims are barred by the statute of limitations.” goes on: “Generally, personal injury actions grounded on negligence must be commenced within the six-year period of limitation provided in Minn. Stat. § 541.05(5) (2000).” Sipe v. STS Manufacturing, Inc., No. A11-2082, decided July 31, 2013, was about a wrongful-discharge claim created by a Minnesota statute. The court wrote that “section 541.07(1) is limited to common law causes of action not created by statute.” and referred to “our interpretation of the phrase “other tort resulting in personal injury” as being limited to common law intentional torts.” Neither case was about an ordinary negligence or product claim, and neither says which period governs yours. Ask a licensed Minnesota attorney which period applies to your claim.
Minn. Stat. 541.05·Last reviewed 2026-07-28
Open the slip and fall calculatorMinnesota's 6 years comes from Minn. Stat. § 541.05, subd. 1, which opens “Except where the Uniform Commercial Code otherwise prescribes, the following actions shall be commenced within six years:” and lists, at clause (5), “(5) for criminal conversation, or for any other injury to the person or rights of another, not arising on contract, and not hereinafter enumerated;” A shorter section sits beside it. Minn. Stat. § 541.07 opens “Except where the Uniform Commercial Code, this section, section 541.05, 541.073, 541.076, or 604.205 otherwise prescribes, the following actions shall be commenced within two years:” and its clause (1) reads “(1) for libel, slander, assault, battery, false imprisonment, or other tort resulting in personal injury,” The Minnesota Supreme Court has written about both sections. D.M.S. v. Barber, No. C8-00-2227, decided June 13, 2002, was about when the delayed-discovery period for a sexual-abuse claim begins to run. The part of the opinion that begins “We first consider whether D.M.S.’s negligence claims are barred by the statute of limitations.” goes on: “Generally, personal injury actions grounded on negligence must be commenced within the six-year period of limitation provided in Minn. Stat. § 541.05(5) (2000).” Sipe v. STS Manufacturing, Inc., No. A11-2082, decided July 31, 2013, was about a wrongful-discharge claim created by a Minnesota statute. The court wrote that “section 541.07(1) is limited to common law causes of action not created by statute.” and referred to “our interpretation of the phrase “other tort resulting in personal injury” as being limited to common law intentional torts.” Neither case was about an ordinary negligence or product claim, and neither says which period governs yours. Ask a licensed Minnesota attorney which period applies to your claim.
Minn. Stat. §§ 541.05, 347.22·Source retrieved 2026-07-27
Open the dog bite calculatorMinnesota against the rest of the country
Every count below is read from our state-law data across all 51 jurisdictions, so it moves when the data does. What you will not find here is an average settlement figure: the only one we could compute is a model, and a model presented as a measurement is not a fact.
- 39 of the 51 jurisdictions we track pay 66.67% of the wage, the most common rate, and Minnesota is one of them. It applies the rate to gross wages, as 47 of the 51 do; the rest use after-tax earnings.
- 34 of the 51 jurisdictions have a verified maximum weekly benefit in our data, and they run from $800 in Georgia to $2,431 in Iowa. Minnesota is one of the 17 we hold no verified current figure for, so this page does not rank it.
- Minnesota's 3 years to file is longer than the 2 years that 24 jurisdictions use. Across the 51 jurisdictions the deadline for this case type runs from 1 year to 4 years.
- In 44 of the 51 jurisdictions, the statute we read provides for settling or commuting a claim to a lump sum on the terms it states; in 4 it allows one only in the cases it names; and for 3 we could not read an official copy. Minnesota is in the first group.
Comparisons are drawn from the rules that set a benefit, not from closed-claim data, which we do not hold. See the full methodology
Minnesota calculators
Minnesota Workers' Comp questions
Every document behind our workers' compensation figures, each linked with the date we last read it, is listed on our Workers' Compensation research sources page.