Streetsboro to Aurora
Ohio municipal income tax, Chapter 718 framework · credit set by Streetsboro ordinance · tax year 2026
Work city takes
2%
Aurora, on income earned there
Home city charges
2%
Streetsboro, 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 taxStreetsboro credits only part of what Aurora takes, so the remainder is taxed twice. Solid is what you pay; the faded part of the Streetsboro 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 Aurora costs you nothing extra in local tax. Streetsboro charges residents about 2%, and it credits back every dollar Aurora 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.
- The numbers meet exactly here. Aurora takes the most that Streetsboro 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.
- This is the only route into Aurora large enough to show up in the data. About 530 people travel it from Streetsboro. Other people commute there too. Their numbers are simply too small to be counted separately.
- This pairing is neutral to the worker. Aurora withholds about 2% on income earned there, and Streetsboro, 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 Aurora and Streetsboro, not the sum leaving the worker's pay.
- This pairing sits exactly on its limit. Aurora's rate and the ceiling Streetsboro 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 Aurora, or any reduction in the ceiling by Streetsboro, falls directly on the worker from the first dollar.
- Within this dataset Aurora draws a single recorded commuting flow of qualifying size — the one from Streetsboro, carrying roughly 530 workers. That reflects the reporting floor rather than the labor market: smaller flows certainly exist and fall below the threshold at which Census origin-destination statistics are published. No ranking against sibling routes is therefore available for this workplace.
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
| Aurora takes, on income earned there | $1,200 |
|---|---|
| Streetsboro charges residents | $1,200 |
| Less the credit Streetsboro gives back | $1,200 |
| Total local tax | $1,200 |
| If you also lived in Aurora | $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
- Two guesses about this are wrong, and they miss in opposite directions. The rates are not added together. Nor do you simply pay whichever is higher, which is how it works across the border in Pennsylvania. Aurora taxes what you earn there, Streetsboro taxes everything you earn, and then Streetsboro decides how much of the first bill to give back.
- These figures rest on a local rule, not a state one. Streetsboro decides how much credit to give for tax already paid to Aurora. It is worth confirming the current position with the city or its collection agency, because this is the part most likely to have changed.
- Watch for one more local tax. School district income tax is separate from what Streetsboro and Aurora 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 Streetsboro and Aurora. 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 Streetsboro 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 Aurora 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. Aurora taxes what is earned within its boundaries, Streetsboro taxes its residents on everything, and Streetsboro then credits some, all or none of what Aurora collected. The credit is the entire mechanism, and it is set by Streetsboro rather than by the state.
- The credit rule modeled here is Streetsboro's own, adopted by ordinance and amendable by Streetsboro 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 Streetsboro can therefore change every figure on this page without anything altering in Aurora 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 Aurora, and no municipal credit applies to it. A resident of Streetsboro 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 Streetsboro and Aurora, 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 Streetsboro to Aurora 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?
Both places charge you, but the city you live in gives back some of what the other one took. Aurora taxes you for working there at about 2%; Streetsboro then charges its own about 2% and credits part of the first against it. Whether anything is left over depends on how generous that credit is.
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 Streetsboro would.
Is this commute common enough for the numbers to mean anything?
530 people travel it. Volume decides whether a route gets published at all, never what the tax on it is.
Both towns charge the same — does the boundary matter at all then?
Not for what you pay. Both sides charge about 2%; the line only determines who banks it.
How does a resident credit allocate liability between two municipalities?
Both jurisdictions assert a claim: Aurora on the basis of work location at about 2%, Streetsboro 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 measurement basis for a route of this size?
Route volume is 530 workers per Census LODES, above the publication floor but below the dataset's upper quartile. Liability is determined by jurisdictional rates and residence rules alone; commuter volume has no bearing on it and is reported only as context.
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.