Randal L. Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote...
>>>>>> "David" == David Kaufman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> David> ... they had made it quite clear that it was a Monday
> David> to Friday, 9-5 full-time onsite position, for which i'd just
> David> have to pay my own taxes (which is fine with me -- i just
> David> wouldn't get benefits, but hey, i pay my own taxes and
> David> insurance as a contractor anyway... and i don't have the
> David> reliable 40-hour/week billing!) but yet i had stupidly told
> David> them i wanted what amounts to $140,000/yr salary and would
> David> settle for no less! <smacks self in head> -- oh, well. we
> David> live, we learn, we cry, we learn. we lose, we learn.
>
> No, you really do need $70/hr contract to make the equivalent of
> $70K/yr salary, even if you could manage to bill 2000 hours per year
> (which you probably won't be able to do). I've owned Stonehenge since
> 1985, and would be glad to discuss specifics with you, but the rule of
> thumb fits very well with my experience.
right. i would need to bill $70/hr ...if i was hoping to *net* $70K/yr
after taxes, insurance, retirement and other expenses *and* hoped to
contiue to do work for various clients from a home office.
but i wasn't. i was looking for a salaried job. and just hoping to find
one at around at least 2/3 of my former salary (with the economy swirling so
low in the bowl, of late) which means i would have been happy to bring home
something at least in the mid-to-high 50's. if a "good" job is defined as
one where the employer pays all the major medical insurance and matches
retirement contributions, i haven't had a good job since 1995 :-) at least
around here, my employers have paid only around half of my family medical
insurance, and while some have "offered" a 401K retirement plan, none
offered to put any of their money into it, much less match my contributions
(as it seems most employers once did). so these factors, that were once
given, have since fallen by the wayside as past "perks" that employers
seldom offer anymore (at least around here), since it has become such an
employers' job market.
>> From that $70/hr comes your "other half of FICA", your business
> licenses, medical benefits, retirement benefits, any ongoing training,
> "office expenses", additional accounting, legal fees for maintaining
> the above, reserve for sick-time, vacation-time, bad debts, late
> payments, conferences, etc etc.
true again, not that i'd need to maintain an office, as i'd be working
onsite at theirs. and i wouldn't have time to do work for multiple clients,
so i don't think i'd have to worry about bad debts, late payments, business
licenses, or accounting and legal fees. i've always done my own taxes, but
maybe that's just because i've always made so little money ;-o
but i don't think, in my case, had i lowered my hourly rate to $35 or $40
and taken this full-time onsite contract, i would have had to pay much more
in income tax -- around 15-20% self employment tax is all --as a contractor
instead of an employee.
> I've heard far too many horror stories from people who do the first
> cut at the math ("wow, $140K!"), and then later go "geez, this just
> isn't working out". I suppose it's like insurance... sometimes you
> get lucky and get to keep 75% instead of 50%, but 50% is all you can
> count on.
i suppose i've just been pretty lucky then. i've just always reserved 30%
of revenue for income taxes, and am usually pretty close. but as i said,
i'm not paying an accountant or lawyer, i'm not going to conferences or
training (other than self-study and lots of reading) -- and i vacation?
whats a vacation? sick-time? that's the time you spend working *while*
you're sick, right? :-)
but yeah, i obviously didn't expect to make 140K a year -- that was my
problem -- i could have, and should have quoted my hourly rate for this
particular job (or any medium-to-long term, 40 hr/week contract) as around
$35-45, to meet my goal of finding the equivalent of a 60-80K/yr job, and
then only if i expected to be there, like the guy who interviewed me, full
time for the whole year, rather than looking for more work, in a few
months...
the $70 rate, in my mind, just allows for the fact that, yes, between
finding jobs, doing the work, trying to get paid, and finding more, i'm
lucky if i can bill 20 hrs/week on average, doing shorter term jobs for
multiple clients. some weeks are much better than others, and ... has
anyone else noticed that espcially when the weather gets warmer, business
seem to get much worse?
-dave
