placestats

Aggregate travel time to work and Local income tax as a share of income

Across 554 counties, Aggregate travel time to work and Local income tax as a share of income have a link of +0.50, on a scale from −1 (opposite) to +1 (in step). But compare places with the same population density, income and education, and a very weak link of +0.18 remains. Most of the first figure came from both measures following how urban, rich and educated a place is, not from a link with each other.

Mostly gone after adjusting

Every place, plotted

One dot for each place reporting both measures. Hover over or tap a dot to see its name and values. The thin line is the straight line that best fits the dots. The bold line, shown for counties, is the link after adjusting for density, income and education. A dot far from the lines is a place that does not follow the pattern.

Loading every place…

What each measure is

Aggregate travel time to work

The total minutes all commuters together spend getting to work in a day.

Census ACS 5-year · ACS table B08013_001

Local income tax as a share of income

Local income tax as a percentage of what residents earned. It is zero in most of the country. About 4,800 local governments in a dozen states charge one, and New York City's is the largest. When a city spans several counties, its tax is split between them by where its residents' income is.

Census local government finances · Census local government finances, item T40, every local government

Highest and lowest

Where each measure is highest and lowest among the places reporting both (2023), with the other measure beside it. This is shown for every size of place where both are published. Metro-area values are added up from their counties. A measure that cannot be added up across counties, such as a middle value (median), has no metro figure. Counts are shown per 1,000 residents, since raw totals would only list the largest places. Cities and towns and ZIP codes are shown where the Census survey or the CDC publishes them; most other sources stop at the county. They are shown for places of 5,000 residents or more, and only where the survey’s margin of error is small enough for the figure to be usable. The CDC publishes its health estimates for cities in a version adjusted for age, so places with older or younger people can be compared fairly, but not for ZIP codes.

Counties

By aggregate travel time to work

Aggregate travel time to work, per 1,000 residentsLocal income tax as a share of income
Highest
Charles County, MD18,8861.63
Queens County, NY18,0452.42
Richmond County, NY17,6802.31
Calvert County, MD17,6061.72
Pike County, PA16,5170.0591
Lowest
Norton County, KS3643.360.0113
Greeley County, KS5262.350.00718
Forest County, PA5420.780.38
Thomas County, KS5527.610.000451
Rawlins County, KS5690.880.0123

By local income tax as a share of income

Aggregate travel time to work, per 1,000 residentsLocal income tax as a share of income
Highest
District of Columbia, DC11,7274.57
Bronx County, NY15,7872.44
New York County, NY12,8712.44
Kings County, NY16,0282.42
Queens County, NY18,0452.42
Lowest
Sedgwick County, KS8742.210.00001
Franklin County, MO11,9210.000018
Jasper County, MO8235.920.000018
Cole County, MO8288.700.000046
Dickinson County, KS9811.110.000112
States

By aggregate travel time to work

Aggregate travel time to work, per 1,000 residentsLocal income tax as a share of income
Highest
New York13,3931.01
Maryland13,1141.69
District of Columbia11,7274.16
Pennsylvania10,9280.735
Indiana10,3420.283
Lowest
Kansas8703.790.00054
Iowa8879.390.0602
Oregon9140.280.136
Kentucky9695.570.766
Michigan9867.680.135

By local income tax as a share of income

Aggregate travel time to work, per 1,000 residentsLocal income tax as a share of income
Highest
District of Columbia11,7274.16
Maryland13,1141.69
New York13,3931.01
Ohio9919.350.992
Kentucky9695.570.766
Lowest
Kansas8703.790.00054
Alabama10,2170.0541
Iowa8879.390.0602
Michigan9867.680.135
Oregon9140.280.136
Metro areas — Local income tax as a share of income is not published for metro areas

By aggregate travel time to work

Aggregate travel time to work, per 1,000 residentsLocal income tax as a share of income
Highest
East Stroudsburg, PA16,256—
Hemlock Farms, PA16,097—
Lake of the Woods, VA15,052—
Lexington Park, MD15,005—
New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ14,900—
Lowest
Wildwood-The Villages, FL4784.75—
Brookings, OR5612.12—
Baker City, OR5634.46—
Silver City, NM5661.40—
Mountain Home, AR5735.98—
Cities and towns — Local income tax as a share of income is not published for cities and towns

By aggregate travel time to work

Aggregate travel time to work, per 1,000 residentsLocal income tax as a share of income
Highest
Stroudsburg borough, PA22,655—
Lake Holiday CDP, IL21,994—
Kingston CDP, MA21,883—
Rancho Calaveras CDP, CA20,583—
Elmont CDP, NY20,308—
Lowest
Binghamton University CDP, NY1298.95—
The Villages CDP, FL1621.28—
Pelican Bay CDP, FL1659.32—
Sun City West CDP, AZ2114.39—
Desert Palms CDP, CA2198.71—
ZIP codes — Local income tax as a share of income is not published for ZIP codes

By aggregate travel time to work

Aggregate travel time to work, per 1,000 residentsLocal income tax as a share of income
Highest
ZIP 76073 (Wise County, TX)26,422—
ZIP 07462 (Sussex County, NJ)24,304—
ZIP 18328 (Pike County, PA)23,813—
ZIP 18302 (Monroe County, PA)22,783—
ZIP 92136 (San Diego city, CA)22,551—
Lowest
ZIP 71643 (Lincoln County, AR)1063.73—
ZIP 38677 (University CDP, MS)1071.71—
ZIP 13902 (Binghamton University CDP, NY)1298.95—
ZIP 32612 (Gainesville city, FL)1353.22—
ZIP 32162 (The Villages CDP, FL)1460.97—

Counties furthest from the pattern

Compared with the straight line that best fits all 554 counties: the five with far more local income tax as a share of income than their aggregate travel time to work would suggest, and the five with far less.

Aggregate travel time to work, per 1,000 residentsLocal income tax as a share of income
Above the line
District of Columbia, DC11,7274.57
New York County, NY12,8712.44
Bronx County, NY15,7872.44
Kings County, NY16,0282.42
Philadelphia County, PA12,2192.16
Below the line
Pike County, PA16,5170.0591
Owen County, KY16,1860.0609
Franklin County, IN14,7010.00274
Owen County, IN14,5400.00661
Meade County, KY14,3690.00759

Two series, one county

Both measures over time for a county you pick. The two charts are stacked, so they share only the years along the bottom. You can pick from the thirty largest counties reporting both. This panel covers 2010–2024, and a measure published only once shows as a single dot.

Loading…

Every version of the link

Each row measures the same link, from −1 to +1, in a different way. If the rows mostly agree, the link does not depend on one choice of method.

Before adjusting for anything+0.504554 counties reporting both
After adjusting for density, income and education+0.184the part of the link that is not just how urban, rich and educated a place is
Also adjusting for population size+0.181size taken out as well as density
Also comparing only within each state+0.186each county is compared only with others in its own state, so this is no longer a comparison between states
Giving bigger counties more weight+0.073the adjusted link for the average resident rather than the average county. With this weighting, the data counts for about 93 equally weighted counties
Middle value inside single states+0.470the link worked out inside each of 8 states with at least 20 counties reporting
Using ranks, after adjusting-0.106uses each county’s rank, not its value, so a few extreme counties cannot create the link

How much to believe it

Could it be chance?

The p-value is the chance of seeing a link this strong if there were really none. A value of 0.05 or less means the link is unlikely to be chance. Very small values are written in short form: 3.1e-16 means 0.00000000000000031, and the bigger the number after “e-”, the smaller the value. Treating every county as a separate case gives p = 1.4e-5. But counties in the same state tend to resemble each other, so the better figure allows for that: p = 0.022. The site tested 20,910 pairs, and testing so many turns up some flukes. The q-value allows for that too. For this pair it is 2.4e-5.

Do nearby places look alike?

Moran’s I measures how much nearby places look alike: 0 means no map pattern, and higher means neighbours are more similar. For the part of each county that the adjustment leaves unexplained, it is +0.48 (p = 0.001). That unexplained part still clusters on the map. So some regional factor shared by both measures is not accounted for.

Did they change together?

Not measurable: at least one of these is published for too few of the years a change needs (2014–2019 or 2019–2023), or for too few counties in both.

Related pairs

Association only. Nothing here shows that either measure changes the other. This describes counties, not the people in them. Two measures going together across places does not mean the same people have both. How the US county data works · Explore Aggregate travel time to work and Local income tax as a share of income