{"id":"get-guide","summary":"Read one published guide in full: metadata plus the Markdown body.","method":"POST","inputSchema":{"type":"object","properties":{"slug":{"type":"string","description":"Guide slug from list-guides"},"locale":{"type":"string","enum":["en","es"],"description":"Content language (default en)"}},"required":["slug"]},"exampleInput":{"slug":"1099-vs-w2-the-real-math","locale":"en"},"exampleOutput":{"slug":"1099-vs-w2-the-real-math","title":"1099 vs W-2: the real take-home math","description":"Why dividing a salary by 2,080 hours is a trap, what employer benefits are worth in dollars, and the conversion in both directions.","published":"2026-08-20","updated":"2026-08-22","category":"rates","country":"us","relatedTools":["w2-vs-1099-rate-calculator","1099-take-home-calculator"],"url":"https://workingfigures.com/guides/1099-vs-w2-the-real-math","markdown":"The honest shortcut, up front: divide the salary by 1,000 and you have the hourly\nfloor. A $100,000 job with ordinary benefits converts to roughly $100 to $105 per\nhour of contract work, not the $48 a naive division suggests. Every freelancer\neventually faces the conversion question, from one side or the other: a recruiter\nconverts your rate to a \"salary equivalent\" that sounds huge, or a job offer\nconverts to an hourly that sounds insulting. Both conversions are usually done\nwrong, and always in the direction that favors whoever is doing them.\n\n\n \n The same gross pay1099W-2\n both halves of FICA, no benefitsemployer pays half, benefits included\n \n \n\n\n## The trap: salary ÷ 2,080\n\nThere are 2,080 working hours in a year of 40-hour weeks. Divide a $100,000 salary\nby it and you get $48. So a $60/hour contract beats the job, right?\n\nWrong twice.\n\n**First: benefits are invisible salary.** The employer also pays their half of\n[FICA](https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/self-employment-tax-social-security-and-medicare-taxes)\n(7.65% of salary), health premiums (commonly $550 to $700 a month for single\ncoverage), and a retirement match (3 to 5%). On a $100k salary that hidden layer is\neasily $18,000 to $20,000. As a contractor, every one of those costs transfers to\nyou.\n\n**Second: 2,080 billable hours do not exist.** A contractor bills maybe 25 to 30\nhours of a 40-hour week and works maybe 46 weeks. Real billable capacity: 1,100 to\n1,400 hours. The same total compensation spread over half the hours doubles the\nrequired rate.\n\nRun both corrections and the honest equivalence appears: our\n[W-2 vs 1099 calculator](/calculators/w2-vs-1099-rate-calculator) puts a $100k\nsalary with ordinary benefits at roughly **$100 to $105 per hour** of contract work.\nThe lazy division said $48. The gap between those numbers is why so many freelancers\nwork hard and stay broke.\n\nChecked 2026-08-22 against [the IRS FICA and self-employment tax rates](https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/self-employment-tax-social-security-and-medicare-taxes).\n\n## The other direction: is that contract good?\n\nTake the contract rate, subtract expenses, then run the double tax hit (SE tax plus\nincome tax). The [1099 take-home calculator](/calculators/1099-take-home-calculator)\ndoes the whole chain: $75/hour at 30 billable hours, 46 weeks, with $8,000 of\nexpenses nets roughly $70k before health insurance, which is not what $75/hour\nsounds like at a party.\n\n## The rule of thumb that survives scrutiny\n\nThe **salary ÷ 1,000 hourly floor** from the top of this page is not an accident:\nonce benefits and billable reality are priced in, it lands surprisingly close to\nthe full calculation for typical inputs. It is the single most useful number to\ncarry into any conversion conversation.\n\nFreelancing still wins on things no calculator prices, autonomy above all. It just\nshould not win by accounting error."}}