Brooklyn to Cleveland
Ohio municipal income tax, Chapter 718 framework · credit set by Brooklyn ordinance · tax year 2026
Work city takes
2.5%
Cleveland, on income earned there
Home city charges
2.5%
Brooklyn, residents
Credit back
$1,500
a share of the work tax
Cost of the commute
$0
a year, above working at home
What it costs you
no extra local taxBrooklyn credits only part of what Cleveland takes, so the remainder is taxed twice. Solid is what you pay; the faded part of the Brooklyn bar is the credit it hands back. Municipal income tax only — state, federal and payroll tax apply on top, and an Ohio school district income tax may too.
What this commute actually costs
- Some Ohio commutes cost you real money. This one does not. Brooklyn gives full credit for the tax Cleveland takes out of your pay, so the two settle down to the same bill you would owe at home. On sixty thousand that is $1,500 for the year. The commute shifts money between city halls and leaves your total alone.
- The numbers meet exactly here. Cleveland takes the most that Brooklyn will hand back, down to the cent. You pay no more than you would living and working at home, but there is no cushion left in it at all.
- The run from Brooklyn is one of 66 recorded commutes into Cleveland, and it comes 31 by the number of workers on it, about 2,005. Every one of those routes meets the same rate in Cleveland. What separates them is what each home city gives back.
- This is a well-traveled road. About 2,005 people go from Brooklyn to work in Cleveland. That is a lot of households meeting the same rule at the same time.
- This pairing is neutral to the worker. Cleveland withholds about 2.5% on income earned there, and Brooklyn, which levies about 2.5% on residents, credits that payment in full without reaching its own ceiling. Liability at the reference salary is therefore $1,500 — precisely what the same earnings would attract with no commute at all. What the arrangement alters is the division of revenue between Cleveland and Brooklyn, not the sum leaving the worker's pay.
- This pairing sits exactly on its limit. Cleveland's rate and the ceiling Brooklyn places on its credit coincide to the cent, so the credit absorbs the work-city tax precisely and not a dollar further. The commute is costless today and has no margin whatsoever: any increase by Cleveland, or any reduction in the ceiling by Brooklyn, falls directly on the worker from the first dollar.
- Cleveland is a major regional workplace, drawing recorded flows from 66 separate origins in this dataset. The route from Brooklyn ranks 31 among them by worker count, at roughly 2,005. Rank is not a proxy for tax outcome: every origin faces the same Cleveland rate, and what differs between them is the home municipality's credit, so a smaller route can carry a considerably worse result than a larger one.
- Census origin-destination statistics record approximately 2,005 workers commuting from Brooklyn to Cleveland, placing this among the larger intra-state flows in Ohio. The outcome set out above therefore has aggregate fiscal consequence for both municipalities, not merely individual consequence for the worker: the credit Brooklyn does or does not extend is applied to every one of them at once.
Where the money goes
A $75,000 salary
- Federal income tax$7,670
- Social Security and Medicare$5,738
- State income tax$1,346
- Yours$60,246
| Federal income tax10.23% | $7,670 |
|---|---|
| Social Security and Medicare7.65% | $5,738 |
| State income tax1.79% | $1,346 |
| Yours80.33% | $60,246 |
The arithmetic, step by step
| Cleveland takes, on income earned there | $1,500 |
|---|---|
| Brooklyn charges residents | $1,500 |
| Less the credit Brooklyn gives back | $1,500 |
| Total local tax | $1,500 |
| If you also lived in Cleveland | $1,500 |
| Difference | $0 |
On a reference salary of $60,000 a year. Both rates and the credit ceiling are shares of income, so every figure scales with your own pay.
What this page does not cover
- Here is the shape of it, because the arithmetic is easy to get wrong. You are taxed by both cities. What happens next is up to Brooklyn: it may credit all of what Cleveland took, some of it, or none at all. That choice belongs to the city rather than to the state, which is why identical salaries in neighboring towns land so differently.
- The credit rule on this page belongs to Brooklyn, not to the state. Its council sets it and its council can change it. Nothing needs to happen in Cleveland or at the state level for these numbers to move. Check the current rule before you rely on it.
- This page covers city income tax only. Your school district may charge its own on top, and many in Ohio do. That one follows your address in Brooklyn rather than your workplace in Cleveland, and it is not credited against anything.
- One tax is on this page and it is the city one. State tax, federal tax and Social Security all still come out of your pay. None of them change when you cross the line between Brooklyn and Cleveland. That is exactly why they are left out.
- Every dollar amount here uses a salary of sixty thousand a year. It is a benchmark, not a guess at what people in Brooklyn earn, because nobody publishes average pay for single municipalities. Scale the figures to your own salary. The rates and the credit work the same way at any income, so the Cleveland conclusion holds.
- Two misreadings bracket the correct answer and both are common. Ohio does not simply add the two rates together, which would overstate the charge; nor does it apply only the higher of them, which is Pennsylvania's rule and would understate it wherever the credit is partial. Cleveland taxes what is earned within its boundaries, Brooklyn taxes its residents on everything, and Brooklyn then credits some, all or none of what Cleveland collected. The credit is the entire mechanism, and it is set by Brooklyn rather than by the state.
- The credit rule modeled here is Brooklyn's own, adopted by ordinance and amendable by Brooklyn alone. Ohio's uniform framework governs definitions, filing and withholding; it does not compel any municipality to credit tax paid to another. A council vote in Brooklyn can therefore change every figure on this page without anything altering in Cleveland or in state law, which is a materially different exposure from a rate set by statute.
- Ohio school district income tax is a separate levy from municipal income tax and is excluded from these figures. It is imposed by school district of residence rather than by municipality, it is unaffected by employment in Cleveland, and no municipal credit applies to it. A resident of Brooklyn whose school district levies one owes it in addition to everything shown here, which is why the totals on this page are a municipal position rather than a complete local one.
- Only municipal income tax is modeled. Ohio's state income tax, federal income tax and payroll taxes all apply in addition and are invariant to the boundary between Brooklyn and Cleveland, which is precisely why they are excluded: isolating the layer that responds to the commute is the point of the comparison. A complete tax position requires adding them; a comparison of the two locations does not.
- Dollar figures are computed against a stated reference salary of sixty thousand rather than a municipal wage average, which no published source provides for Ohio municipalities. Both rates and the credit ceiling are proportional to income, so every figure scales linearly: the Brooklyn to Cleveland differential doubles at twice the salary and halves at half of it, and the rate relationship holds at every level. The one caveat is that whether the ceiling binds at all is itself scale-invariant here, because it too is expressed as a share of income rather than as a fixed dollar cap.
Questions people ask
Do I pay local tax twice — once where I work and once where I live?
Two claims, one partly canceled. Cleveland takes about 2.5% because you work there, Brooklyn charges about 2.5% because you live there, and the home city credits some of the first against the second.
Does working in a different town cost me anything?
On this route, nothing. You owe exactly what you would have owed working at home — the boundary is real on a map and invisible on your pay stub, which is not true of every pair of towns here.
Is this a common enough commute to be worth modeling?
2,005 workers make it. The pairing comes from federal commuting data rather than from guesswork, and thin routes are excluded rather than estimated.
Both towns charge the same — does the boundary matter at all then?
Not for what you pay. Both sides charge about 2.5%; the line only determines who banks it.
How does a resident credit allocate liability between two municipalities?
Both jurisdictions assert a claim: Cleveland on the basis of work location at about 2.5%, Brooklyn on residence at about 2.5%. The residence municipality grants a credit for tax paid to the work municipality, commonly capped as a share of income. Net liability is the residence tax less that credit, floored at zero, plus the work tax.
Why is the marginal cost of this crossing zero?
Marginal liability from working outside the residence jurisdiction is zero on this route. The crossing alters the distribution of revenue between jurisdictions but not the employee's total. ⚠️ This is route-specific and does not generalise to other pairs in the same dataset.
What is the basis for including this route?
Route volume is 2,005 workers, sourced from Census LODES origin-destination data. Pairs below the publication threshold are excluded rather than imputed, so page existence reflects measured commuting volume.
What is the effect of identical rates either side of the boundary?
Both jurisdictions levy about 2.5%, so the governing rate is identical regardless of which rule allocates it. The boundary affects revenue attribution between authorities, not employee liability.