Are U.S. salaries typically measured/reported before tax, or after tax?
"In the U.S., virtually all salaries are expressed as ""gross salaries"", which are before the taxes that the individual must pay on their income. The numbers shown in the links are almost certainly gross salary figures. However, the ""gross salary"" is not the entire ""total compensation"" number, which is the total value of all compensation and benefits that the employee receives for his work. Total compensation includes not only salary and bonuses, but the cost or value of any employer-paid healthcare, retirement, company car, expense account, stock options, and other valuable goods or services. That's still not the total amount of money the company has to pay to have you; there are employer-paid payroll taxes totaling 6.2% of your gross salary, plus practical costs like the cost of your computer, cubicle or office furniture, and the portion of utility costs that keep you well-lit, clean and comfortable. This complete number is called ""total employee cost"", and the general rule of thumb is that it's double your gross cash compensation (salary + bonuses). Lastly, $100k in California isn't worth as much, in real terms, as $100k in other parts of the U.S. The cost of living in California, especially in Silicon Valley where the majority of the people who make six figures by being C++ programmers are located, is ridiculously expensive. There are other tech hubs in the U.S., like DFW, Austin TX, Atlanta GA, St Louis MO, Raleigh NC, etc where people earn less, but also spend less to live and so can use more of their salary in a ""discretionary"" manner."
"The S&P 500 index is maintained by S&P Dow Jones Indices, a division of McGraw Hill Financial. Changes to the index are made periodically, as needed.  For Facebook, you'll find it mentioned in this December 11, 2013 press release (PDF).  Quote: New York, NY, December 11 , 2013 – S&P Dow Jones Indices will make the following changes to the S&P 100, S&P 500, MidCap 400   and S&P SmallCap 600 indices after the close of trading on Friday,   December 20: You can find out more about the S&P 500 index eligibility criteria from the S&P U.S. Indices methodology document (PDF).  See pages 5 and 6: Market Capitalization - [...] Liquidity - [...] Domicile - [...] Public Float - [...] Sector Classification - [...] Financial Viability - Usually measured as four consecutive quarters of positive as   reported earnings. [...] Treatment of IPOs - Initial public offerings should be seasoned for 6 to 12 months   before being considered for addition to an index. Eligible Securities - [...]   [...]   Changes to the U.S. indices other than the TMIX are made as needed,   with no annual or  semi-annual reconstitution. [...] LabCorp may have a smaller market cap than Facebook, but Facebook didn't meet all of the eligibility criteria – for instance, see the above note about ""Treatment of IPOs"" – until recently. Note also that ""Initial public offerings should be seasoned for 6 to 12 months"" implies somebody at S&P makes a decision as to the exact when. As such, I would say, no, there is no ""simple rule or formula"", just the methodology above as applied by the decision-makers at S&P." "typically, your employer will automatically stop making contributions once you hit the 18k$ limit. it is worth noting that employer contributions (e.g. ""matching"") do not count towards the 18k$ employee pre-tax contribution limit. however, if you have 2 employers during the year their combined payroll deductions might exceed the limit if you do not inform your later employer of the contributions you made at your former employer (or they ignore the info). in which case, you must request a refund of ""excess contributions"" from one of the plans (your choice). you must report the refund as taxable income on your taxes. if you do not make this request by the time you file your taxes, the tax man will reject your filing and ""adjust"" your return with more taxes and penalties. sometimes requesting a refund of excess contributions might cause your employer to remove ""matching"" funds, but i am not clear on the rules behind that. there are some 401k plans that allow ""supplemental after-tax contributions"" up to the combined employee/employer limit (53k$ in 2015 and 2016). it is a rare feature, and if your company offers it, you probably already know.  however, generally it is governed by a separate contribution election that only take effect once you hit the employee pre-tax contribution limit (18k$ in 2015 and 2016). you could ask your hr department to be sure. 401k plans can be changed if there is enough employee demand for a rule change.  especially in a small company, simply asking for them to allow dollar based contributions instead of percent based contributions can cause them to change the plan to allow it. similarly, you could request they allow ""supplemental after-tax contributions"", but that might be a harder change to get." "Your ""average company and taxpayer"" generally wouldn't have significant off-shore/foreign income. In the U.S., for example, even if you have your employer deposit all of your salary to an account at a foreign bank, they would still report it to the IRS as income. Removing the money from your home country isn't what gets it out of being taxed, it's that the money was never in your home country." "Your question is based on incorrect assumptions. Generally, there's no ""penalty"", per se, to make a withdrawal from your RRSP, even if you make a withdrawal earlier than retirement, however you define it. A precise meaning for ""retirement"" with respect to RRSPs is largely irrelevant.* Our U.S. neighbours have a 10% penalty on non-hardship early withdrawals (before age 59 &half;) from retirement accounts like the 401k and IRA. It's an additional measure designed to discourage early withdrawals, and raise more tax.  Yet, in Canada, there is no similar penalty. Individual investments inside your RRSP may have associated penalties, such as the dreaded ""deferred sales charge"" (DSC) of some back-end loaded mutual funds, or such as LSVCC funds that generated additional special tax credits that could get clawed back.  Yet, these early withdrawal penalties are distinct from the RRSP nature of your account.  Choose your investments carefully to avoid these kinds of surprises. Rather, an RRSP is a tax-deferred account, and it works like this:  The government allows you to claim a nice juicy tax deduction, which can reduce your income tax at your marginal rate in the year you make a contribution, or later if you should choose to defer the deduction. The resulting pre-tax money accumulated in your RRSP benefits from further tax deferral: assets can grow without attracting annual income tax on earned interest, dividends, or capital gains. You don't need to declare on your income tax return any of the income earned inside your RRSP, unlike a regular investment account. Here's the rub: Once you decide to withdraw money from your RRSP, the entire amount withdrawn is considered regular income in the year in which you make the withdrawal.  Thus, your withdrawals are subject to income tax, and yes, at your marginal rate.  This is always the case, whether before or after retirement. You mentioned two special programs: The Home Buyers' Plan (HBP), and the Lifelong Learning Plan (LLP).  Neither the HBP nor the LLP permit tax-free withdrawals.  Rather, each of these programs are special kinds of loans that you can borrow from your own RRSP. HBP and LLP loan money isn't taxed when you get it because you are required to pay it back, and you pay it back into your own RRSP: You always pay income tax at your marginal rate on your RRSP withdrawals.** * Above, I said a precise meaning for ""retirement"" with respect to RRSPs is largely irrelevant.  Yet, there are ages that matter:  By the end of the year in which you turn 71, you are required to convert your RRSP to a RRIF. It's similar, but you can no longer contribute, and you must withdraw a minimum amount each year. Other circumstances related to age may qualify for minor tax relief intended for retirees, such as the Age Amount or the Pension Income Credit.  Generally, such measures don't significantly change the fact that you pay income tax on RRSP withdrawals at your marginal rate – these measures raise the minimum you can take out without attracting tax, but most do nothing at the margin.** ** Exception: One might split eligible pension income with a spouse or common-law partner, which may reduce tax at the margin." "That's a very clear explanation, thanks! So a few additional things if anyone will humor my curiosity...  1. By ""one-time"" tax, does that mean a company that has, say, $5B overseas could bring that back into the US and just be taxed $500M, then keep the remaining $4.5B?  2. Could a company choose a percentage of their overseas money to transfer into the US? Like, only bring in 8% of that $5B ($400M) and be taxed $40M, while keeping all the rest outside the US? Or would it be mandatory to bring it all over?  3. Would most companies just start that same practice of routing to tax havens again after this tax is implented?" Since you worked as an RA, the university should send you a W2 form. The taxable wages line in that form would be the sum of both the direct salary and employer paid benefits that are taxable. As such you should not need to do anything than enter the numbers that they provide you. "If you're referring to times when they pay nothing (or receive a refund) at the end of the year, it's because they're paying taxes throughout the year. At the end of the year, the accountants find that they paid exactly what they needed to (or more), so they don't have to pay anything (or get money back) on their yearly forms.  I don't think there's a US corporation paying ""almost zero tax"" in the US." The are a couple of explanations that I can think of; though for determining exactly what is different you will want to print out both returns and compare them line by line to see how they differ. If the company grossed up your income to account for the taxes on housing (possibly by paying the additional withholding), you may be just benefiting from them estimating your tax rate. This can especially be the case if your only work was the three month internship. They would have to assume your salary was for the entire year. There is an earned income tax credit for low wage earners that you may have qualified for (it would depend your specific circumstances if you meet the criteria). But that credit for a range of income actually pays out more the more you earn (to encourage working that extra hour instead of reducing benefit because you had another hour of employment). As for the housing subsidy itself, while the value is quite high the IRS considers that to be a taxable benefit that the employer provided you and so it needs to be added to your W-2 wages. $8k a month seems quite high, but I don't know the quality of the apartment you were provided and what the going rates are in the area. Given that you said you worked for a major tech company, I can imagine that you might have been working in an area with high rents. If the employer did gross up your paycheck so as to cover your taxes, that $24k would also include that extra tax payment (e.g. if the employer paid $8k in additional taxes for you, then the housing cost that they directly paid were $16k).