Altoona to Logan Township
Pennsylvania Act 32 local earned income tax · BLAIR to BLAIR County · tax year 2026
Home rate
1.7%
Altoona, residents
Work rate
1%
Logan Township, non-residents
You pay
1.7%
the higher of the two
Cost of the commute
$0
a year, above the home rate
What this commute costs you
no extra local taxAltoona already charges its residents more than Logan Township charges commuters, so the home rate governs and the job adds nothing at all. You pay the solid bar only — Pennsylvania charges the higher of the two rates, never their sum. Local earned income tax only; state, federal and payroll tax apply on top.
What this commute actually costs
- Nothing changes for this commute. A resident of Altoona pays about 1.7% either way. It makes no difference whether they work at home or travel to Logan Township. The home rate is the higher of the two, and the higher one wins. That is $1,020 a year.
- Few other routes into Logan Township appear in this data, so there is little to compare at that end. The other direction has plenty. Altoona sends workers to 3 places, and this is number 1 by size.
- The Altoona to Logan Township commute is tax-neutral. Altoona's resident rate of about 1.7% is not exceeded by Logan Township's non-resident rate, so under the state's rule the resident rate applies and the effective figure is about 1.7% — $1,020 annually at the reference salary. Withholding is remitted to the residence in full and the work location receives no share.
- Logan Township draws few recorded inflows, so cross-origin comparison is thin at the destination end. The origin is better covered: Altoona appears as the home municipality for 3 tracked destinations, of which this ranks 1 by worker count.
Where the money goes
A $75,000 salary
- Federal income tax$7,670
- Social Security and Medicare$5,738
- State income tax$2,303
- Yours$59,290
| Federal income tax10.23% | $7,670 |
|---|---|
| Social Security and Medicare7.65% | $5,738 |
| State income tax3.07% | $2,303 |
| Yours79.05% | $59,290 |
The arithmetic, side by side
| If you worked in Altoona | $1,020 |
|---|---|
| Working in Logan Township | $1,020 |
| Difference | $0 |
On a reference salary of $60,000 a year. The local tax is flat, so every figure scales with your own pay.
What this page does not cover
- One thing worth being clear about, because it catches people out. You are not charged by both places. Altoona and Logan Township do not add their rates together. Pennsylvania picks the higher of the two, and that is what you pay. Adding them would roughly double the bill.
- Everything here is the local earned income tax and nothing else. State income tax applies on top, as do federal tax and Social Security. None of those change when you cross a municipal line between Altoona and Logan Township. This page is about the layer that does.
- Sixty thousand a year is a benchmark. It is not a guess at what people in Altoona earn. No published wage figure exists for single municipalities. The rate is the durable part of this page. The dollars scale straight up and down with whatever you earn in Logan Township.
- Check two things. A Altoona postal address may not match your taxing municipality. That catches out plenty of people near a boundary, and the state has an official lookup for it. Philadelphia is the other one to watch. It runs its wage tax separately, outside the pattern used for Logan Township.
- Pennsylvania's local rule is a greater-of rule, not an additive one: the liability for a Altoona resident working in Logan Township is the higher of the two applicable rates, not their sum. The distinction is worth stating plainly because the additive reading is intuitive and would overstate the charge by roughly a factor of two. What is divided between the municipalities is the remittance, not the worker's liability.
- Figures cover the local earned income tax exclusively. Pennsylvania's flat state income tax, federal income tax and FICA apply in addition and are invariant to the Altoona–Logan Township municipal boundary, which is precisely why they are excluded: isolating the layer that responds to the commute is the point of the comparison.
- The reference salary is a stated benchmark, not an estimate of Altoona earnings, for which no municipal-level published source exists. The local earned income tax is proportional, so all dollar figures for the Logan Township commute scale linearly with income and the rate comparison holds at every salary.
- Verify two things before relying on these figures. Municipal taxing boundaries do not track postal geography, so the applicable jurisdiction for a Altoona address should be confirmed through the state's official lookup. Separately, Philadelphia's wage tax operates outside this framework and is not governed by the greater-of rule applied here, which affects any pairing involving the city rather than Logan Township generally.
Questions people ask
Do I pay local tax twice — once where I work and once where I live?
Only once, at the higher rate. Between Altoona's about 1.7% and Logan Township's about 1%, the larger governs — the two are never added together.
Does working in a different town cost me anything?
Not a cent on this one. The crossing changes where the money is sent, not how much of it leaves, so your total matches a stay-at-home commute.
Which town's rate am I actually paying?
Altoona sets it. Your residence rate is the larger, so it governs regardless of where the job is.
Is this a common enough commute to be worth modeling?
It is. 1,371 workers travel this pair, per the federal origin-destination survey; smaller routes fall below the publication floor and get no page.
How does Pennsylvania's local earned income tax law allocate liability between two districts?
Pennsylvania's local earned income tax law assigns the higher of the residence rate (about 1.7%) and the non-resident work rate (about 1%); liabilities are never summed. The employer withholds at the governing rate and remits through the work district's collector, which then distributes to the residence district.
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.
Which district's rate governs on this route?
The residence rate equals or exceeds the work district's non-resident rate and therefore governs. Working outside the residence district does not increase employee liability on this route; it affects only inter-district distribution.
What is the basis for including this route?
Route volume is 1,371 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.