McKeesport to Pittsburgh
Pennsylvania Act 32 local earned income tax · ALLEGHENY to ALLEGHENY County · tax year 2026
Home rate
1.7%
McKeesport, residents
Work rate
1%
Pittsburgh, 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 taxMcKeesport already charges its residents more than Pittsburgh 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
- Good news for this commute. Working in Pittsburgh costs you nothing extra. McKeesport charges residents about 1.7%, at least as much as Pittsburgh asks of people who work there but live elsewhere. The higher rate wins, so your home rate is simply the rate. That is $1,020 a year, wherever you work.
- Roughly 1,667 people commute from McKeesport to Pittsburgh, which makes this route number 30 out of 85 tracked into that workplace. A normal-sized flow rather than a dominant one.
- For the McKeesport to Pittsburgh commute the residence governs. McKeesport's resident rate of about 1.7% equals or exceeds Pittsburgh's non-resident rate, so Pennsylvania's greater-of test resolves to the resident rate and the effective burden is about 1.7%, or $1,020 at the reference salary. The workplace adds nothing; the entire amount is remitted to the residence. This is the majority outcome and the one most commuters need confirmed.
- This flow carries 1,667 workers, ranking 30 among 85 recorded routes into Pittsburgh and 1 of 1 destinations recorded for McKeesport. The rate outcome above therefore applies to a meaningful but not dominant share of that workplace's inbound commuters.
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 McKeesport | $1,020 |
|---|---|
| Working in Pittsburgh | $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. McKeesport and Pittsburgh 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.
- Only one tax is on this page. It is the local earned income tax that McKeesport and Pittsburgh levy. State tax, federal tax and Social Security all still apply. All three are the same wherever in Pennsylvania you work.
- All the dollar amounts rest on one assumed salary. It is stated rather than measured, because nobody publishes average pay for McKeesport. The local tax is a flat percentage. Scale every figure to your own salary and the Pittsburgh conclusion holds.
- A postal address in McKeesport does not prove which municipality taxes you. Boundaries and postcodes disagree often enough here that the state publishes a lookup. Philadelphia is a special case too. Its wage tax sits outside the rules that govern Pittsburgh.
- Pennsylvania's local rule is a greater-of rule, not an additive one: the liability for a McKeesport resident working in Pittsburgh 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.
- The scope here is the municipal earned income tax alone. State, federal and payroll taxes are unaffected by the choice between McKeesport and Pittsburgh and are therefore outside the model. A total tax position requires adding them; a comparison of the two locations does not.
- Monetary figures derive from a single stated salary assumption; no published wage series covers Pennsylvania municipalities such as McKeesport. The flat structure of the local tax means the Pittsburgh comparison is scale-invariant, so the rate difference rather than the dollar difference is the transferable result.
- Municipal taxing jurisdiction is determined by boundary rather than by postal address, and the two diverge frequently enough in Pennsylvania that the DCED lookup should be treated as authoritative for McKeesport. Philadelphia is additionally outside this regime, administering its own wage tax on residents and non-residents under separate authority, so it does not follow the treatment described for Pittsburgh.
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 McKeesport's about 1.7% and Pittsburgh'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?
McKeesport 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. 1,667 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 1,667 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.