This layer shows housing costs as a percentage of household income. This is shown by tract, county, and state boundaries. This service is updated annually to contain the most currently released American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year data, and contains estimates and margins of error. There are also additional calculated attributes related to this topic, which can be mapped or used within analysis. Income is based on earnings in past 12 months of survey. This layer is symbolized to show the percent of renter households that spend 30.0% or more of their household income on gross rent (contract rent plus tenant-paid utilities). To see the full list of attributes available in this service, go to the "Data" tab, and choose "Fields" at the top right. Current Vintage: 2019-2023ACS Table(s): B25070, B25091 Data downloaded from: Census Bureau's API for American Community Survey Date of API call: December 12, 2024National Figures: data.census.govThe United States Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS):About the SurveyGeography & ACSTechnical DocumentationNews & UpdatesThis ready-to-use layer can be used within ArcGIS Pro, ArcGIS Online, its configurable apps, dashboards, Story Maps, custom apps, and mobile apps. Data can also be exported for offline workflows. For more information about ACS layers, visit the FAQ. Please cite the Census and ACS when using this data.Data Note from the Census:Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error. The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error. The margin of error can be interpreted as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of error and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower and upper confidence bounds) contains the true value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a discussion of nonsampling variability, see Accuracy of the Data). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables.Data Processing Notes:This layer is updated automatically when the most current vintage of ACS data is released each year, usually in December. The layer always contains the latest available ACS 5-year estimates. It is updated annually within days of the Census Bureau's release schedule. Click here to learn more about ACS data releases.Boundaries come from the US Census TIGER geodatabases, specifically, the National Sub-State Geography Database (named tlgdb_(year)_a_us_substategeo.gdb). Boundaries are updated at the same time as the data updates (annually), and the boundary vintage appropriately matches the data vintage as specified by the Census. These are Census boundaries with water and/or coastlines erased for cartographic and mapping purposes. For census tracts, the water cutouts are derived from a subset of the 2020 Areal Hydrography boundaries offered by TIGER. Water bodies and rivers which are 50 million square meters or larger (mid to large sized water bodies) are erased from the tract level boundaries, as well as additional important features. For state and county boundaries, the water and coastlines are derived from the coastlines of the 2023 500k TIGER Cartographic Boundary Shapefiles. These are erased to more accurately portray the coastlines and Great Lakes. The original AWATER and ALAND fields are still available as attributes within the data table (units are square meters).The States layer contains 52 records - all US states, Washington D.C., and Puerto RicoCensus tracts with no population that occur in areas of water, such as oceans, are removed from this data service (Census Tracts beginning with 99).Percentages and derived counts, and associated margins of error, are calculated values (that can be identified by the "_calc_" stub in the field name), and abide by the specifications defined by the American Community Survey.Field alias names were created based on the Table Shells file available from the American Community Survey Summary File Documentation page.Negative values (e.g., -4444...) have been set to null, with the exception of -5555... which has been set to zero. These negative values exist in the raw API data to indicate the following situations:The margin of error column indicates that either no sample observations or too few sample observations were available to compute a standard error and thus the margin of error. A statistical test is not appropriate.Either no sample observations or too few sample observations were available to compute an estimate, or a ratio of medians cannot be calculated because one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or upper interval of an open-ended distribution.The median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution, or in the upper interval of an open-ended distribution. A statistical test is not appropriate.The estimate is controlled. A statistical test for sampling variability is not appropriate.The data for this geographic area cannot be displayed because the number of sample cases is too small.

Average weekly household expenditure on goods and services in the UK. Data are shown by region, age, income (including equivalised) group (deciles and quintiles), economic status, socio-economic class, housing tenure, output area classification, urban and rural areas (Great Britain only), place of purchase and household composition.

Monthly data showing the proportion of gross income spent on rent for new tenancies across the UK, from Dataloft Rental Market Analytics (DRMA). These are official statistics in development. Source: Dataloft. Dataloft is a PriceHubble company.

This section of the Rental Report provides a summary of the affordability of rental housing for lower income households in Victoria. The method used in this section measures the supply of affordable new lettings based on the Residential Tenancies Bond Authority data used in this Report. The affordability benchmark used is that no more than 30 per cent of gross income is spent on rent. Lower income households are defined as those receiving Centrelink incomes. The Rental Report provides key statistics on the private rental market in Victoria. The major source for the statistics presented in the Rental Report is the Residential Tenancies Bond Authority which collects data on all rental bonds lodged under the Residential Tenancies Act 1997.

Die Studie über Wohnen und Bauen wurde vom Institut für Demoskopie Allensbach im Auftrag des Presse- und Informationsamtes der Bundesregierung durchgeführt. Im Erhebungszeitraum 03.08.2024 bis 15.08.2024 wurde die deutsche Bevölkerung ab 16 Jahren in persönlichen Interviews zu folgenden Themen befragt: Bewertung der Lebensqualität am Wohnort, Zufriedenheit mit der Wohnsituation bzw. Änderungswünsche, Erfahrungen während der Wohnungssuche, finanzielle Belastung durch Wohnkosten und Modernisierungsmaßnahmen, Bekanntheit und Bewertung verschiedener wohnungspolitischer Maßnahmen sowie Wissen zum Mieterschutz. Die Auswahl der Befragten erfolgte durch eine Quotenstichprobe. Bewertung der Lebensqualität am Wohnort; Split A: besonders wichtige politische Themen, Split B: größte Probleme beim Thema Wohnen (Ende Split B); Zufriedenheit mit der eigenen Wohnsituation; Änderungswünsche in Bezug auf die Wohnsituation; Umzugswunsch; Gründe, warum die befragte Person bisher nicht umgezogen ist; Charakterisierung des Wohnungsmarktes und generell der Wohnsituation in der Wohngegend; in den letzten fünf Jahren auf Wohnungssuche bzw. auf der Suche nach einem Haus zur Miete; Erfahrungen während der Wohnungssuche; Dauer der Wohnungssuche; nicht realisierter Wohnungswechsel oder Umzug; Haus/ Wohnung entspricht den Vorstellungen vs. musste Kompromisse eingehen; Art der Kompromisse; Veränderungsbereitschaft hinsichtlich der zukünftigen Wohnsituation; Split A: Gründe gegen eine eigenes Haus bzw. eine Eigentumswohnung, Split B: Gründe für ein eigenes Haus bzw. eine Eigentumswohnung (Ende Split B); Wohnkosten: Belastungsempfinden durch die Nebenkosten; Wohnstatus (eigenes Haus, Eigentumswohnung oder zur Miete); Belastungsempfinden durch die Mietkosten; Anteil der Wohnkosten am Haushaltsnettoeinkommens; Wohngeldempfänger im Haushalt; starke Mieterhöhung in den letzten Jahren; Sorgen über unbezahlbare Wohnkosten und Ausmaß der Besorgnis; Modernisierungsmaßnahmen durchgeführt in den letzten zehn Jahren; Bilanz der Modernisierungsmaßnahmen in Bezug auf Verbesserungen; finanzielle Belastungen durch Modernisierungsmaßnahmen; Split A: Besorgnis über finanzielle Belastungen durch Vorgaben für Heizen und Energieeffizienz; Besorgnis über finanzielle Überforderung durch diese Kosten (Ende Split A); Split B: Modernisierungsmaßnahmen in den kommenden fünf Jahren erwartet aufgrund von Reparaturbedarf, wegen der neuen Vorgaben für Heizen und Energieeffizienz bzw. zur Erhöhung des Wohnkomforts und Verschönerung; erwartete Verbesserungen durch die anstehenden Modernisierungsmaßnahmen; Besorgnis über finanzielle Belastungen durch die anstehenden Modernisierungsmaßnahmen (Ende Split B); Bekanntheit verschiedener wohnungspolitischer Maßnahmen; Bewertung dieser wohnungspolitischen Maßnahmen als richtig vs. nicht richtig; Selbsteinschätzung Wissen über Mieterschutz; Gesetze und Regelungen für Mieter und Vermieter begünstigen eher die Mieter oder eher die Vermieter. Demographie: Geschlecht; Alter; Alterskategorien; Schulabschluss; Berufstätigkeit; berufliche Stellung; Monatsnettoeinkommen des Hauptverdieners (gruppiert); Hauptverdiener (befragte Person, andere Person im Haushalt); Kinder; Anzahl der Kinder; Alter der Kinder; Anzahl der Kinder im Haushalt; Mehrpersonenhaushalt oder Singlehaushalt; Anzahl Personen im Haushalt mit eigenem Einkommen; monatliches Haushaltsnettoeinkommen (gruppiert); Familienstand; Zusammenleben mit einem Partner/ einer Partnerin; Bundesland; Einwohnerzahl des Wohnortes (Ortsgröße); Charakter des Wohnortes; gesellschaftlich-wirtschaftlicher Status; Politikinteresse; Parteisympathie. Zusätzlich verkodet wurde: externe Fragebogennummer; Kennzeichen der Halbgruppen, Kennzeichen der Bogen West-Ost; Gewichtung; befragte Person hat mindestens einen der jeweils abgefragten Punkte genannt. The study on housing and construction was conducted by the Allensbach Institute for Public Opinion Research on behalf of the Press and Information Office of the Federal Government. During the survey period from 03.08.2024 to 15.08.2024, the German population aged 16 and over was surveyed in personal interviews on the following topics: assessment of the quality of life in the place of residence, satisfaction with the housing situation or wishes for change, experiences during the search for housing, financial burden of housing costs and modernization measures, awareness and evaluation of various housing policy measures and knowledge of tenant protection. The respondents were selected using a quota sample. Assessment of the quality of life in the place of residence; split A: particularly important political issues, split B: biggest problems with housing (end of split B); satisfaction with own housing situation; wishes to change the housing situation; wish to move; reasons why the respondent has not moved so far; characterization of the housing market and the housing situation in the residential area in general; looking for an apartment in the last five years or looking for a house to rent; experiences during the search for a flat; duration of the search; house/flat meets expectations vs. looking for a house to rent; experiences while looking for a house; length of time spent looking for a house; change of residence or move not realized; house/flat meets expectations vs. had to make compromises; type of compromises; willingness to change with regard to future living situation; split A: reasons against owning a house or condominium, split B: reasons for owning a house or condominium (end of split B); Housing costs: perceived burden of utility costs; housing status (own house, condominium or renting); perceived burden of rental costs; share of housing costs in net household income; housing benefit recipients in the household; large rent increase in recent years; concerns about unaffordable housing costs and extent of concern; modernization measures carried out in the last ten years; balance of modernization measures in terms of improvements; financial burden of modernization measures; Split A: Concern about financial burdens due to specifications for heating and energy efficiency; concern about being financially overburdened by these costs (end of split A); split B: Modernization measures expected in the next five years due to need for repairs, due to new specifications for heating and energy efficiency or to increase living comfort and improvement; expected improvements due to the upcoming modernization measures; concerns about financial burdens due to the upcoming modernization measures (end of split B); awareness of various housing policy measures; assessment of these housing policy measures as correct vs. not correct; self-assessment of knowledge about tenant protection; laws and regulations for tenants and landlords tend to benefit tenants or landlords. Demography: Sex; age; age categories; educational attainment; occupation; occupational status; monthly net income of main earner (grouped); main earner (respondent, other person in household); children; number of children; age of children; number of children in household; multi-person household or single household; Number of people in household with own income; monthly net household income (grouped); marital status; living with a partner; federal state; population of place of residence (city size); character of place of residence; social and economic status; interest in politics; party sympathy. Additionally coded: external questionnaire number; indicator of the semi-groups, indicator of the West-East questionnaire; weighting; respondent has mentioned at least one of the items asked.

FOCUSONLONDON2010:INCOMEANDSPENDINGATHOME Household income in London far exceeds that of any other region in the UK. At £900 per week, London’s gross weekly household income is 15 per cent higher than the next highest region. Despite this, the costs to each household are also higher in the capital. Londoners pay a greater amount of their income in tax and national insurance than the UK average as well as footing a higher bill for housing and everyday necessities. All of which leaves London households less well off than the headline figures suggest. This chapter, authored by Richard Walker in the GLA Intelligence Unit, begins with an analysis of income at both individual and household level, before discussing the distribution and sources of income. This is followed by a look at wealth and borrowing and finally, focuses on expenditure including an insight to the cost of housing in London, compared with other regions in the UK. See other reports from this Focus on London series. REPORT: To view the report online click on the image below. Income and Spending Report PDF PRESENTATION: This interactive presentation finds the answer to the question, who really is better off, an average London or UK household? This analysis takes into account available data from all types of income and expenditure. Click on the link to access. PREZI The Prezi in plain text version RANKINGS: This interactive chart shows some key borough level income and expenditure data. This chart helps show the relationships between five datasets. Users can rank each of the indicators in turn. Borough rankings Tableau Chart MAP: These interactive borough maps help to geographically present a range of income and expenditure data within London. Interactive Maps - Instant Atlas DATA: All the data contained within the Income and Spending at Home report as well as the data used to create the charts and maps can be accessed in this spreadsheet. Report data FACTS: Some interesting facts from the data… ● Five boroughs with the highest median gross weekly pay per person in 2009: -1. Kensington & Chelsea - £809 -2. City of London - £767 -3. Westminster - £675 -4. Wandsworth - £636 -5. Richmond - £623 -32. Brent - £439 -33. Newham - £422 ● Five boroughs with the highest median weekly rent for a 2 bedroom property in October 2010: -1. Kensington & Chelsea - £550 -2. Westminster - £500 -3. City of London - £450 -4. Camden - £375 -5. Islington - £360 -32. Havering - £183 -33. Bexley - £173 ● Five boroughs with the highest percentage of households that own their home outright in 2009: -1. Bexley – 38 per cent -2. Havering – 36 per cent -3. Richmond – 32 per cent -4. Bromley – 31 per cent -5. Barnet – 28 per cent -31. Tower Hamlets – 9 per cent -32. Southwark – 9 per cent