Interpreters and Translators in Washington
May 2025 wages · tax year 2026
You keep
$51,796
after federal, FICA and Washington tax
Tax takes
$9,954
16.1% of the whole
Worth, in national money
$47,711
Washington costs more than average
On that salary you would be around the 25th percentile for this work in Washington — roughly, since only five points along the band are published.
One filer, standard deduction, no dependants and nothing paid in before tax — the same household the rest of this page uses, so the comparison holds. City and school-district income taxes are not included.
Median here
$61,750
Kept after tax
$51,796
Worth in national money
$47,711
State rank
18
of 47 states
What this pays, and what it is worth
- Washington sits in the middle of the pack for interpreters and translators. The median is $61,750, ranking 18 of 47 states with figures. Close enough to the national middle that where you live matters more than the headline suggests.
- Middle of the local pack. Of 493 occupations Washington reports figures for, this is number 298.
- Costs eat into it here. Of $61,750, tax leaves $51,796 — and because Washington is dearer than average, that stretches only as far as $47,711 would nationally. Averages run higher here, $70,140, since top earners drag the number up.
- Washington occupies the middle band for interpreters and translators: a median of $61,750, ranking 18 of 47. Where nominal pay is close to the national figure, the tax and price adjustments below carry proportionally more weight in determining the real outcome.
- In Washington's occupational distribution, interpreters and translators sits at 298 of 493 — neither quartile. This local position is what a resident compares against, and it is determined by the state's own labor market rather than by national patterns for this occupation.
- After tax, $51,796 remains from the Washington median of $61,750 for this occupation. Applying the state's above-average price parity yields $47,711 in national-average terms — the quantity relevant to a relocation decision, and the one absent from essentially every published wage comparison. Mean pay of $70,140 exceeds the median, so the upper tail is doing the work.
Compare this career across states
Choose your filing status and local taxes, compare pay, and keep a shortlist.Compare wage and personal-pay outcomes by state, with selected resident local taxes and saved career choices.
Pay band: Interpreters and Translators
The state median for this job
| Lowest tenth earn under | $44,640 |
|---|---|
| Half earn under | $61,750 |
| Top tenth earn over | $105,710 |
| This salary | $61,750 |
Positions between the published tenth, quarter, half, three-quarter and ninetieth points are estimated by straight line.
The same pay, somewhere else
The state median for this job
| Take-home in Washington | $51,796 |
|---|---|
| Take-home in Texas | $51,796 |
| Once local prices are leveledBEA price parity | +$5,591 |
The raise and the real gain point in opposite directions here.
State income tax and state price levels only. No city income tax, and no housing market.
What you would need there
The state median for this job
| To match take-home only | $61,750 |
|---|---|
| You could take a cut of | −$6,762 |
| Prices in Texas | 97 vs 109 |
State taxes and state price levels only. No city tax, and no housing market.
Sources and assumptions
- A median is the middle, not an offer. Half of interpreters and translators in Washington earn under $61,750 and half over. The published range runs $44,640 at the tenth percentile to $105,710 at the ninetieth. Experience and employer move an individual a long way inside that.
- In Washington the take-home figure of $51,796, from $61,750, assumes one filer, no dependants, and nothing paid into a pension before tax. Each of those lowers the bill, so treat it as the plain case. City and school-district income taxes are not included either, and in a few states those are real money. It ranks 298 of 493 occupations here.
- One number stands for prices across all of Washington, which is a simplification — big cities cost far more than small towns. Read $47,711, the adjusted value of that $61,750 median, as a way to compare states fairly, not as a quote for any particular place. The two datasets are also from different years. This job sits at 298 of 493 in the state.
- Figures are distribution medians for interpreters and translators in Washington, not entry or offer rates. The published band runs $44,640 to $105,710; within-state dispersion of that width routinely exceeds the dispersion between states, so tenure, employer and metropolitan area predict an individual's pay better than geography does.
- Take-home for Washington is computed for a single filer taking the standard deduction with no dependants and no pre-tax contributions, giving $51,796 from $61,750. Each omitted item reduces taxable income, so the figure is a lower bound on retained pay for this household shape. Municipal and school-district income taxes are excluded, which understates the burden materially in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Maryland. The occupation ranks 298 of 493 locally.
- Price deflation uses one statewide parity for Washington, so $47,711 — the adjusted value of that $61,750 median — establishes comparability between states rather than accuracy within one. The wage and parity series are dated independently, each following its own publication cycle, and neither is projected forward. This occupation sits at 298 of 493 locally.
Questions people ask
Is this the average pay for the job?
It is the midpoint, not the average. The average here is $70,140, dragged up by high earners; the middle figure describes a typical worker better.
Why is the pay range for this job so wide?
The label is broader than the work. From $44,640 at the bottom tenth to $105,710 at the top, the same title covers roles that share little beyond a name.
Does a bigger number here mean I am better off?
A larger wage in a dearer place is not automatically more. Adjusted for local prices, this pay behaves like $47,711 of national purchasing power.
Is most of this wage taxed away?
Less than people assume. $51,796 of this wage reaches your account, because Washington takes no income tax from wages — but federal tax, Social Security and Medicare still apply exactly as they do everywhere else.
Why is this job missing from some states?
The survey withholds small samples rather than publish an unreliable number. Pay appears for 47 states here, and a missing state means too few reports, not no jobs.
How does the published median differ from the mean for this occupation?
The median is the midpoint of the distribution; the mean for this occupation in Washington is $70,140. Wage distributions are right-skewed, so the mean exceeds the median wherever a minority earn substantially more. BLS publishes both because substituting one for the other misstates a typical worker's pay.
What drives the percentile dispersion in this occupation?
Dispersion between the tenth percentile ($44,640) and the ninetieth ($105,710) exceeds the family median dispersion. SOC codes aggregate roles differing in seniority, industry and specialisation, and BLS does not disaggregate below the detailed occupation level, so within-title variance is not separable from the published series.
How does the state price level affect real compensation?
Washington's regional price parity sits above the national average, so nominal wages overstate purchasing power. Deflating take-home by the state price level gives $47,711 in national-average terms. ⚠️ RPPs are an all-items index; housing parities vary far more widely than the headline figure.
Why is the take-home ratio comparatively high in this state?
Washington levies no personal income tax on wages, so take-home of $51,796 reflects the federal layer and FICA alone. Federal income tax and FICA are unchanged; states without a wage income tax generally recover revenue through consumption and property bases instead.
Why does this occupation lack published estimates in every state?
BLS suppresses estimates failing disclosure or reliability criteria. This occupation has published state-level estimates in 47 of the fifty-one jurisdictions. Suppression reflects sample size and confidentiality rules, and cannot be read as an absence of employment.