Stow to Cuyahoga Falls
Ohio municipal income tax, Chapter 718 framework · credit set by Stow ordinance · tax year 2026
Work city takes
2%
Cuyahoga Falls, on income earned there
Home city charges
2%
Stow, residents
Credit back
$1,200
a share of the work tax
Cost of the commute
$0
a year, above working at home
What it costs you
no extra local taxStow credits only part of what Cuyahoga Falls takes, so the remainder is taxed twice. Solid is what you pay; the faded part of the Stow 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
- Here is the good news. Working in Cuyahoga Falls costs you nothing extra in local tax. Stow charges residents about 2%, and it credits back every dollar Cuyahoga Falls collects from you. Either way your bill is $1,200 a year. What changes is which city keeps the money, not how much of it you hand over.
- Nothing to pay, and nothing to spare. Stow's credit stops precisely where Cuyahoga Falls's tax stops. The two cancel exactly, which is a comfortable place to be and a fragile one.
- This route from Stow is 2 of 3 recorded commutes into Cuyahoga Falls, with around 1,115 people on it. Treat the ranking loosely. Only flows above a certain size are published at all.
- This pairing is neutral to the worker. Cuyahoga Falls withholds about 2% on income earned there, and Stow, which levies about 2% on residents, credits that payment in full without reaching its own ceiling. Liability at the reference salary is therefore $1,200 — precisely what the same earnings would attract with no commute at all. What the arrangement alters is the division of revenue between Cuyahoga Falls and Stow, not the sum leaving the worker's pay.
- This pairing sits exactly on its limit. Cuyahoga Falls's rate and the ceiling Stow 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 Cuyahoga Falls, or any reduction in the ceiling by Stow, falls directly on the worker from the first dollar.
- Cuyahoga Falls records 3 qualifying commuting origins in this dataset, of which Stow ranks 2 by worker count at approximately 1,115. A workplace of this size draws from a small enough set of origins that the comparison is indicative rather than statistical, and the published floor excludes an unknown tail of smaller flows.
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
| Cuyahoga Falls takes, on income earned there | $1,200 |
|---|---|
| Stow charges residents | $1,200 |
| Less the credit Stow gives back | $1,200 |
| Total local tax | $1,200 |
| If you also lived in Cuyahoga Falls | $1,200 |
| 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
- Do not add the two rates up, and do not assume the bigger one simply wins. Neither is how Ohio works. Both Cuyahoga Falls and Stow charge you. Stow may then hand back what Cuyahoga Falls took, or part of it, or none of it. Everything on this page turns on which of those it does.
- One thing to keep in mind. Ohio does not require Stow to give any credit at all. That choice sits with the city, and cities revisit it. A vote in Stow could change what this commute to Cuyahoga Falls costs you, with no change in the law itself.
- Watch for one more local tax. School district income tax is separate from what Stow and Cuyahoga Falls charge, and plenty of Ohio districts levy it. Working elsewhere makes no difference to it, and no credit offsets it.
- 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 Stow and Cuyahoga Falls. That is exactly why they are left out.
- The dollar figures rest on one assumed salary, sixty thousand. Double your pay and they double. Halve it and they halve. What stays put is the relationship between what Cuyahoga Falls charges and what Stow gives back, which is the part worth carrying away.
- 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. Cuyahoga Falls taxes what is earned within its boundaries, Stow taxes its residents on everything, and Stow then credits some, all or none of what Cuyahoga Falls collected. The credit is the entire mechanism, and it is set by Stow rather than by the state.
- The credit rule modeled here is Stow's own, adopted by ordinance and amendable by Stow 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 Stow can therefore change every figure on this page without anything altering in Cuyahoga Falls 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 Cuyahoga Falls, and no municipal credit applies to it. A resident of Stow 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 Stow and Cuyahoga Falls, 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 Stow to Cuyahoga Falls 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?
You are taxed by both, then given credit for one. Working in Cuyahoga Falls costs about 2%; living in Stow costs about 2%, reduced by whatever share of the work tax the home city recognizes.
Does working in a different town cost me anything?
Nothing extra. The tax is redirected rather than increased, so this particular crossing costs you no more than working in Stow would.
Is this a common enough commute to be worth modeling?
Yes — 1,115 people make this exact journey, according to the federal employment survey that tracks where workers live against where they work. Routes below a volume floor are not published, so a page existing here means the commute is real and measured.
Both towns charge the same — does the boundary matter at all then?
The rates match at about 2%, so the crossing moves money between authorities rather than out of your pocket.
How does a resident credit allocate liability between two municipalities?
Both jurisdictions assert a claim: Cuyahoga Falls on the basis of work location at about 2%, Stow on residence at about 2%. 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 1,115 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%, so the governing rate is identical regardless of which rule allocates it. The boundary affects revenue attribution between authorities, not employee liability.