Inflation has hit, $200K is no longer rich. I'm interested in hearing about people who earn more than $300K/year.
What was your journey? How did you get there?
What Jobs Pay $300K a Year?
pollambo on 13/07/2022 - 14:31
Comments
Engineering Technical Directors are at $300K+ easily.
Senior Construction Managers for the big firms too. 5+ years experience needed: https://au.indeed.com/viewjob?jk=fa6d26e970bb5159
Senior Construction Managers for the big firms too. 5+ years experience needed
Explains why stuff is falling apart. Construction firms will be uninsureable at this pace.
That's 5+ years as a construction manager, not 5+ years in construction only
Even worse. Stuff still falling apart, over budget, over deadline, sending your employer into bankruptcy.
Is that like Gerard Butlers character in Greenland?
Crypto investor? OF? BNPL founder/CEO?
Where is rekt recently?
got rekt on BTC, now living on the streets without internet access :P
Bitcoin meant to bank the unbanked. He is living the life of a homeless street banker.
@CrowReally: It's much warmer in the dip here with all the blood that has been spilled from getting REKT!
in the penalty box
doesnt show that on their user details
https://twitter.com/Amouranth/status/1545524158523588608
Having an army of simps certainly pays well
I will never understand simps. Where are they getting all of this money to support their simping? Why aren't the people that love them interventioning them about why they're spending significant proportions of their paycheck on some scantily-clad internet meme girl?
Imagine if 500 people gave you $7 a day everyday for a year.
It won't be the same 500 people everyday but they will be part of the community because they like you and want your attention.
@thestripedlion: 1000 fat chick's for $100 each or 100 really fat chick's for $1000 each.
The choice is yours…
@dickiee: Well, now that you're offering. Do these chicks lay eggs? And are the eggs golden and larger the fatter they are?
@thestripedlion: No joke. My wife and I do sell eggs funnily enough. Don't know how they do it but at least 80% of them from the farm we get them from are double yokers. Even had a triple once.
@thestripedlion: Like that phrase: “It’s better to have one million people paying you one dollar than it is to have one person paying you one million dollars.”
where are they getting all this money? that is ALL their money, they dont eat and give it to internet personalities instead
why?
dunno they got no friends i guess
If you're earning $300k a year on OF dust, you're sensationally hot. There are some pretty hot folk not earning anywhere near that.
SES Band 2 possibly
lol trying to get to EL2 is a bit of a challenge in itself let alone Band 2. I'm sure you've people having to throw heaps of others under the bus just to get to Band 1, the backstabbing is just stupid.
Might as well go contracting.
Yes there is an insane amount of politicking you need to do to progress past EL2!
lol trying to get to EL2 is a bit of a challenge in itself let alone Band 2
People in the APS don't know that the best way to get to EL2 is to get out of the APS. Similarly, the way to get from EL to SES is also to get out of the APS.
If you've found yourself bumming around APS6 for a while, go do something else - join a consulting firm that does work with the public sector, join a public policy thinktank, go work for a social impact org or whatever, you'll come back 2 years later as an EL2 easily.
Or just don't do the work that you are supposed to do.
@ozbjunkie: I have met ppl, APS 4 to 6 in one year Or APS 6 to EL2 in two years. They all came as technical background but wasn't good at it, but definitely good at jumping ranks super fast :)
@boomramada: Well that's the APS recruitment for you. If you're tip top on using the STAR model, then you can get anywhere with inimal experience. Explains alot of the clueless people sitting on EL roles.
Didn't happen to this dude I know. He was a 6, went over to EY for a year but nfi why he came back as a 1. He isn't EL1 material let alone 2, I suspect EY had shown him the door and luckily this asked for a sabbatical so he managed to come back no questions asked.
The whole APS system is a bit of a revolving door, I see APS disappear then come back as contractors or some deadbeat contractor wannabe who can't stomach the months leading up to June 30, went from APS to contracting and now back to where he got started.
Just move to Canberra…. you will get an EL2 easily. ;)
Seriously though…. depends on what part of the APS you are in. If you are in technology areas, consulting is the way to go at the moment to start moving towards the 300k mark.
@Philloau: Just be a contract project manager, I seen one getting like 100k per six month, that's like 10 years ago lol
@Philloau: Yeah nah, there's been some ridiculous contractor to conversion in recent times, they want a $250k+ contractor to convert to an EL1 position without any sort of package on top. I was like WTF are they thinking?
@mini2: There is a lot going on at the moment that push people away from the APS.
you have consulting companies paying over the odds for staff. They drain the market and then contract them back to agencies for big dollars.
organisations need to develop technical aps roles. If you had a designated ‘technical EL2’ role, you would attract more talent on a perm basis.
they stripped a lot of benefits that kept people in the system… like defined benefit super. (I got in with a db and won’t go anywhere as it’s too good to give up)
The list can go on.
But… while contractors add a lot to the bottom line, they also significantly improve agency reporting at EOFY as they have less perm staff on the books.
@Philloau: That's the whole stupidity with the APS at the moment and those staffing caps.
When they hire contractors, they don't just pay the big bucks to them, there's 6.85% payroll tax that funds Andy Barr and his mates, there's GST and there's the cut that the pimps add on top. A $180/hour SAP grunt isn't just $180, it's a fair bit more than that. They wondered why there's a brain drain and branches or sections overspent at the best of times. They need to sort out the staffing cap and re-introduce financial packages that can be applied on top of their banding salary.
Technical EL2's aren't going to fix that problem. A top of band EL2 is just around $145-150k plus 15.4% super, that's still a bit lower than a $120/hour contractor.
@mini2: I agree it wont fix the problem…. but a tech EL2 does provide the ability for some stability.
Its just a crazy market at the moment and it benefits those who are happy for a change.
@Philloau: In the current climate, anyone who's half decent, NV1 cleared and has govt experience won't be out of a job at all.
The grass isn't always greener seems to be true though. Better the devil you know…
@Philloau: Average developers or BAs or testers don't make anywhere close to that figure even in contracting I reckon.. doesn't matter whether with government clients or the private ones. Maybe project manager may but then those vacancies are very few.
@virhlpool: You would be surprised how much contractors make. I have seen the figures of some and wow… just wow.
Also… in certain markets, you are also getting govt agencies competing against each other for the same talent.
@boomramada: Yep.
Developers, architects etc….. there is good coin out there if you have any level of experience.
Even on a $300K salary, the post-tax amount isn't good enough to live an extravagant lifestyle. But it's good enough to support a whole regular-sized family with normal needs.
need to get a trust/business
trusts dont help unless you have over 18 year olds with no other income. Even splitting with your spouse will likely only save 10-15% of tax (so about 5-7% higher after tax income)
is there a how to guide on making '18 year olds with no other income'
Not true, you can permanently cap your tax at 25%, kids or not
@Bargain-er: That doesn't help if you want to enjoy it, and limits you to the an effective tax rate of 25% on anything you use personally. Also if you take out more from the company Division 7A kicks in and you end up either with loans, or having deemed income anyway
@Bargain-er: Sometimes, although it depends when you take the money back out, but potentially, unless you're taking money out of the company to pay it back and recycling
Also kind of defeats the purpose if you're just holding money outside of the company to not use or invest
The ATO would take a dim view of it if they see you doing it
@RMBC: "unless you're taking money out of the company to pay it back and recycling" —> Is this not allowed?
@Bargain-er: Unfortunately no, falls foul of the anti avoidance provisions, although timing makes a big difference
Basically you're getting the benefit of the money without paying the tax whilst your company doesn't benefit
At the end of the day it will fall to the substance of the transactions, but it's generally risky when repeated
@RMBC: This would only be true if you set it up poorly. A good accountant can solve these problems for you.
@RMBC: Div 7a isn't a bad thing though - gives you access to the money with a long time frame and the interest payments come out in the wash to be your own profit if you're using the money to invest and the interest is deductible?
@Scantu: I agree, Div7A is a great tool when used correctly, especially if the funds are used for revenue/capital generating purposes, or if you have a lumpy need for cash in one year. It's also very useful when using one entity as a funding vehicle for the rest
A lot of people use it year after year, and get to the point where they're paying interest on something that is assessable on one side, non-deductible on the other, and would have been in a better position if they'd just paid tax on their drawings in the first year
The point above was about drawing the funds for personal use and then recontributing at year end, creating an artificial situation where there are no, or minimal amounts borrowed at the point of measurement, ie year end, yet the funds were used for other reasons during the year
@RMBC: Yep fair. I'm more at the start of this journey but what you're saying about the year after year thing makes sense, to me this is a bit of an air gap if I'm investing amounts that are no longer satisfied by my PAYG…. I'm basically buying myself a year of grace if I start to consistently use Div7a year after year. Time to deem some dividends 😭
@Scantu: And strategies like that are great. Amounts owed at 30 June can be repaid by lodgement date of the next year's tax return without incurring interest (generally) under Div7A. It is definitely best used as a tax delaying tool, as it can be quite beneficial
Yep - need other ideas for income! Salaries don't realistically get much higher than that.
1 person making $300k is about $168k take home.
Which is about the same as 2 people making $120k each 2x $80.6k take home.
The benefits is also you get child care subsidy at 50% (cut off at about $254k) rather than $0 at $300k (until labour changes it this year).
$120k if manageable for most people working in a decent size company
Best thing would be if both people were on $150k then go to 4 days a week and take 80% pay ($120k) that is the life.
TWO people making $300K each would be fine too! 😁
I'd do a $300k job and ask my boss for a 20% pay cut to do 4 days a week. I'd even do 3 days a week. That is a $180k, spend the rest of the time kicking back do some gym, swim, get some sun in etc.
At some point money just becomes a drag. Had a job at an investment bank once. Working 12 hour days and basically racing to buy food before super market closes (10pm), cook, shower, sleep and back at it the next day. Spent the weekend trying to unwind. No life.
ask my boss for a 20% pay cut to do 4 days a week
I seriously considered this, but the nature of my role just means that I'd end up with less pay and the same amount of work compressed into four days. The work can't just be handed over every few days. People will still call on the day off too. It just wasn't worth it!
The work can't just be handed over every few days. People will still call on the day off too. It just wasn't worth it!
True. But then it can also be 4 days over 5 days.
@bobbified: It was hard enough leaving work at work before the pandemic. Taking a day off will still mean work needs to be done on that day off. For me at least.
@bobbified: That's the dream isn't it. But as most people know, it never works as a 4 day work week. It ends up being either 4 insanely hectic days, or 4.5 days of work, or 4 days work + 1 day of non-stop phone calls
My wife found this out during maternity leave. She went back to 3 days per week but the workload was the same, and she was already doing 60hr weeks before!
@netjock: The jobs that pay 300k have an expectation of unpaid overtime. Cutting to 4 days is just making life harder for yourself for less pay.
@Boshait: Everyone has heard of it. But few have achieved it.
It either means you live below the poverty line to save up that cash then live a meagre lifestyle after you retire.
I've spreadsheets that I'll hit the lifetime super cap by 60 years of age. But I am not going to retire at say 40 and live on $40k for the next 40 years. I don't spend $40k right now but after inflation you are stuffed.
Also your costs actually go up if you stop working because you start finding stuff to do.
@netjock: Invest hard in superannuration early. Work part time after 45 to cover expenses. Kick back and let your investments continue to grow.
It's called coast fire / flamingo fire
Invest hard in superannuration early. Work part time after 45 to cover expenses. Kick back and let your investments continue to grow.
Even if you maxed out your super from 2010-2020 you'd have probably $0.8m (say you put $50k pa and it doubled up to 2020 and now down 20%). It depends on what your expectation is.
There is no way a grad in 2010 can put $50k pa into super (and pay off a mortgage) and semi retire by 30. Maybe if you bust your guts for 20 years and semi retire at 40.
You'd think building industry's gone gang busters for the last 10 years and everyone's retired that is why the skills shortage.
@netjock: Lol you had weekends available and finished before 10pm? I would have killed for that when I was a junior
@camz0r: But I wasn't a junior that is the point. It was more like people wasting my time rather than being productive. Moved onto same pay and did more like 8-6.
@netjock: In a $300k job - if you only work 4 days a week, you will be doing 5 days worth of work when you are there…. probably not worth the hassle.
Had a job at an investment bank once. Working 12 hour days
Guess you weren't working on the finance side. More like 15 hours
eh? its roughly $182k take home isn't it?
Depends on which take home calculator you use. Whether you include super, HECS, Medicare surcharge.
Either way I was trying to demonstrate better two incomes making up $300k than work one person to death for $300k.
Close, it's $188k take home pay. However at that income, it's hard to imagine that they haven't set up some kind of business or bought investment properties that they are "losing" money on in order to save the lion's share of $112k tax/year.
@supersabroso: If you are negatively geared, you are losing money on those properties, not “losing” money. It’s not the best strategy to optimise your taxes.
If you are -$10k a year in a loss and tax deduct, $5k still go out of your pocket!
it's hard to imagine that they haven't set up some kind of business or bought investment properties
Everyone says that. What can be setup to reduce the tax? As an employee, there's not much to claim as deductions because work already covers all expenses. For investment property, every dollar you claim as a deduction means that you've already lost $0.52c or so. You're relying on a big enough future capital gain to make all those losses that back.
@bobbified: You don't have to loose the 52c first. Most of the deductions are from depreciation. Which isn't costing you anything
Which isn't costing you anything
Whatever it is that's depreciating eventually has to be replaced. So in effect, it's not costing anything immediately, but eventually it will when it comes time for replacement.
The tax office ain't giving us something for nothing! haha
@bobbified: There's plenty of houses older than 40 years that are still standing not needing to be replaced.
@redfox1200: I could argue that you've already paid for (or are paying for the building in your mortgage). When you eventually sell it, it won't be a brand spanking new building anymore and the value of the building will be less. So it's a "loss" on that part.
The part of the property that's the most valuable is the land. As an investor, you hope that the land appreciates in price enough to cover what you originally paid for the now-depreciated building. Investors often don't care about the state of the building itself because they know that the value is mainly in the land only.
Even with depreciation, the amount in question that tax is reduced by is quite insignificant in comparison to what people expect when they say that "these people" have special ways to avoid tax.
@redfox1200: Not really. 'Deductions' are made of depreciation, interest paid (minus rent), property management fees, council fees, repair and maintenance, insurance, etc. You can't say what % of this is depreciation - it really depends on a case to case basis. In general, you will be making some sorta 'loss' to cover that loss by 30-48% depending on the income slab so it doesn't make sense to make that loss in the first place.
@virhlpool: You absolutely can say what percentage is depreciation. You literally get a depreciation schedule with a new house.
@supersabroso: This losing money is after tax cash flow. You'd run out of cash before you will end up in lower tax band.
Lol
Another post masquerading as “underpaid”.