Comment by Abishek_Muthian | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Abishek_Muthian | Hacker News Reader

Abishek_Muthian

The thing with excessive remuneration with startup’s are, it’s highly unlikely one could switch to a better paying job when the need arises.

Update : To people who ask why would someone need another job?

There are multitude of reasons, a well funded startup which could pay several times the industry standard - when fails; puts excessively paid employees to compete in the same standarised job market. If you live in the part of the world where the HR asks about your previous pay to assess your eligibility for current job, you will soon end up settling for a sub-par(quality) job with standard pay i.e after giving up the ego. Also if the high paying job didn't provide you with necessary foundation to consistently improve your skill set, the moment you are out to compete in open job market; you'll be facing tough competition from better skilled people with standard pay whom the companies would likely prefer. Again, my arguments are based on the fact that you live in part of the world where your previous pay matters for current job interview.

Sure, but at $3M a year, sock $2.5M away, live extremely comfortably, and have one hell of a rainy day fund.

or work for 5-6 years, and retire (while still working for your own sake).

I agree but you are not remotely considering taxes.

At $3M a year, taxes are probably the least of your earthly worries. And also, you probably make enough to get a good tax accountant.

At $3M a year taxes become a more significant worry.

The relative amount of taxes paid doesn't really change anymore once you've reached six figures. On the other hand, the absolute amount still increases, which makes it more reasonable to spend significant money on tax accountants. So, if anything, taxes should become less of a worry, because you can more easily let really good professionals take care of it.

But yes, I'm aware most people won't look at it rationally.

If you're an employee, you generally can't optimise much. Perhaps you can take some basic deductions, but that's in.

If you take two people earning $1M a year, the employee will in most jurisdictions (both relative and absolute) pay significantly more in taxes than the self employed person.

At the $1M you have much more options to optimise your tax eg in the UK ESI and VCT's become practicable investments which they would not really be at say $70k

Just being able to max out your Pension and ISA at $27k is a big win for those earning enough - basically you can put £20k a year beyond the reach of CGT and Dividend Tax per year

VCTs are generally high risk, though. You might not want to make investments that way, even if you're on £1m a year. Same applies to SEIS and EIS.

And while putting £20k a year in your pension pot is nice, it's hardly a massive saving on £1m.

You can put more than 20k into pensions its 20k for ISAs -though you do have to watch the max limit imposed by Red Osbourne

yes but if your on £1M a year you can risk 20-50k on EIS and VCT's don't foe get you get some very nice tax perks for VCTs (which are collective investments) et all unless your a rock star and snorting all the £ up your nose

And moving dividend paying equites into an ISA is decent tax saving esp for higher rate tax payers.

You cannot put away $2.5m while making $3m. At best you'll take home $1.5m.

If 80-90% of it is in stock / options with vesting (as I'd suspect it is based on that article) it is likely only true after the targets / target dates are hit.

> If 80-90% of it is in stock / options with vesting (as I'd suspect it is based on that article) it is likely only true after the targets / target dates are hit.

My initial reaction was:

Does anyone actually do this? If someone says "salary" package, I'd assume all of it is cash.

but then I took a peek.

> Top performers can make $1 million in salary and bonus a year, plus options, according to people familiar with its hiring. Total compensation can exceed $3 million. Zhang declined to comment on specific figures, saying most employees prefer stock over cash.

So it is $1M in salary/bonus and up to $2M+ in stock grants bla bla (paper that I can't spend).

> Zhang isn’t backing off his aggressive plans, despite the controversies over pay and business practices. Asked about one competitor's concern that Toutiao is trying to hire 200 AI engineers, a huge number given the limited pool of talent, Zhang says that's not quite right: "It may be more than 200.”

This is the interesting part. at $1M per head, 200 engineers is $200M. It sounds like a lot and it is. I feel like someone is getting taken for a ride and I suspect it is the poor idiots who are taking $3M+ in paper over a little under $1M in cash salary and bonuses.

I'd take the $1M cash and save like crazy because this is ridiculous overspending. I cannot imagine why you'd need 200+ data scientists to work on this project.

But then I want to remind the reader that I have been wrong before and spectacularly so about Dropbox. I cannot believe Drew and gang are doing so well for themselves. Make sense that I am a poor idiot on the Internet.

Because each of those data scientists are a billion+ dollar per year lottery ticket. $3mm per year is a steal when you look at it that way.

And assuming no dilution or other ways of reducing the value and the Chinese stock market does not even have the protections that the LSE or NYSE have for share holders.

Don't mean to nit pick but you are going to give up roughly a third of that to taxes.

Why would you ever need a better paying job afterwards?

Your assumption is that the position is tenured for life, which is not.

After you make seven figures for two years you don't really have to work anymore. You can just live off your savings.

I don't understand, how would having a higher pay disqualify you for a position? Has this happened to you?

Maybe a certain amount is enough.

Why?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com