$310K Google L5 = $172K Real Take-Home (After SF Tax + 1.8× COL)
What $310K Actually Decomposes To
The recruiter quotes “$310K total comp” and you mentally compare it against your current $200K. That mental math is wrong on three axes.
We ran a representative Google L5 SF offer through the math.
The 5 Components
| Component | Year 1 | Annualized | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base salary | $200,000 | $200,000 | Bi-weekly direct deposit, the only “guaranteed” cash |
| Annual bonus (25% target) | $50,000 | $50,000 | Performance-dependent; treat 80% as the realistic floor |
| Sign-on bonus | $50,000 | $12,500 | Amortized over 4-year vest; clawback if you leave year 1 |
| RSU grant ($240K, 4-year vest) | $60,000 | $60,000 | At grant-date price; actual outcome depends on stock |
| 401(k) employer match (4%) | $8,000 | $8,000 | Free money — must contribute to capture |
| ESPP discount (10% × 15%) | $3,000 | $3,000 | Captured discount on stock purchase, not equity itself |
| Year 1 cash component | $300,000 | — | Includes full sign-on |
| Total annualized TC | — | $333,500 | Year 2-4 view (sign-on amortized) |
Year 1 looks like $300K cash + $71K equity-ish = $371K. Year 4 looks like $250K cash + $71K = $321K. The “annualized $333K” is what most TC-comparison tools (levels.fyi, Glassdoor) report.
Component 1 trap: bonus isn’t fixed
The 25% bonus is the target. Real outcomes:
- Top performer: 1.2× target = 30% of base
- On-track: 0.9-1.0× target = 22-25%
- Underperformer: 0.5-0.7× target = 12-17%
- Layoff year / company missed targets: 0% bonus possible
For offer comparison, model 0.85× target. A “25% bonus” really means $42-50K, not the recruiter-quoted $50K.
Component 2 trap: RSU appreciation is upside, not income
The $240K grant assumes the stock stays flat. If GOOG drops 30% (it did in 2022), your $60K/year RSU becomes $42K/year. If it appreciates 50% over 4 years, the $240K grant becomes $360K — a $30K/year upside.
For offer comparison: use grant-date price. The volatility is real but unpredictable. If both offers are RSU-heavy, modeling appreciation barely changes the relative answer.
Component 3 trap: ESPP value is the discount, not the stock
Many offer comparisons report “$30K/year ESPP” as if you’re getting $30K of stock. You’re not — you’re contributing $20K of your own money and capturing a 15% discount = $3K. Always model the captured discount, not the contribution amount.
Some plans add a “lookback” (purchase at the lower of start-of-period or end-of-period price). That can double the captured discount in down markets. We don’t model lookback in the simple breakdown.
The tax compression
| Item | Gross | Effective rate | Net |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total annualized TC | $333,500 | 33% | $223,500 |
| − California state tax | (already in 33%) | ||
| − Federal + FICA | (already in 33%) | ||
| Take-home | — | — | $223,500 |
A 33% effective rate is conservative for an SF resident — actual blended rate often hits 36-38% for L5 income because California’s 9.3-12.3% bracket stacks on federal 32-35% + FICA + Medicare + supplemental withholding on RSU vests.
The COL compression
San Francisco’s cost-of-living index relative to a national 100 baseline is approximately 180. That means $1 of spending in SF buys what $0.55 buys in a baseline-COL city.
| Nominal | COL-adjusted | |
|---|---|---|
| Total TC (gross) | $333,500 | $185,278 |
| Net (after tax) | $223,500 | $124,167 |
The headline $310-333K offer pays $124K of real purchasing power. That’s still a strong number — just not the $310K the recruiter quoted.
Apples-to-apples comparison
| Google L5 SF | Senior at Austin startup | |
|---|---|---|
| Base | $200,000 | $200,000 |
| Bonus (target) | $50,000 (25%) | $20,000 (10%) |
| RSU annualized | $60,000 | $0 (or pre-IPO illiquid) |
| 401(k) match | $8,000 | $8,000 |
| ESPP | $3,000 | $0 |
| Annualized TC (gross) | $321,000 | $228,000 |
| Effective tax rate | 33% (CA) | 25% (TX, no state tax) |
| Net TC | $215,070 | $171,000 |
| COL index | 180 | 105 |
| COL-adjusted net | $119,483 | $162,857 |
The “lower” Austin offer wins by $43K/year of real purchasing power. The SF offer wins on prestige, network, and optionality. Both are defensible — but the comparison is materially different from what the gross TC numbers suggest.
Where this framework doesn’t apply
- Pre-IPO startup equity. Grant-value math breaks down because the equity is illiquid and the strike price is set against an uncertain future. Use a separate framework that includes dilution, exit timing, and probability of meaningful exit. Our RSU Vesting Calculator is closer to public-company RSU; pre-IPO needs a different model.
- Non-US markets. 401(k) and ESPP don’t translate. UK has SAYE, Japan has employee stock options with different tax treatment. Set those inputs to 0 and add the local equivalent as a custom line.
- Founders / very-early employees. Equity grants of 1%+ company shares with strike prices below FMV require a different valuation framework.
- People who genuinely don’t care about purchasing power. Some people optimize for proximity to specific people, climate, or career capital. The TC math is one input, not the whole decision.
What to actually do
- Run your specific offer through the calculator. Use grant-date price for RSU, target × 0.85 for bonus, 4-year amortization for sign-on.
- Get your effective tax rate from last year’s W-2. Don’t guess — pull total tax ÷ total compensation from your actual 1040.
- Use a real COL index. Numbeo, BestPlaces, or the calculator’s defaults. Resist the urge to “feel” the difference.
- Compare COL-adjusted net, not gross. This is the only number that maps to “what can I afford”.
- Model two scenarios for equity-heavy offers: stock flat (the contract) and stock down 30% (the historical bear-case). If the offer still beats alternatives in the down-30% case, it’s robust. If only the optimistic case wins, you’re betting on the stock.
Open the Tech TC Breakdown Calculator → and run your specific offer. The number that should drive your decision is the COL-adjusted net — not the headline gross.