I feel like everyone in the comments is completely missing the point of OPs post. They aren't trying to teach you basic math of how to get to your hourly wage, they said thumbrule for a reason. It's pretty obvious OP isn't trying to show EXACTLY what YOUR hourly wage is based on your working hours. Goddamn is everyone commenting 2080 deliberately obtuse? More on reddit.com

Hourly Wage x 2080 = Yearly Salary

More on reddit.com

A lot of people on here probably don't contract full-time, year-round. There's one more factor involved than just converting your rate into an amount of money you want to make. It is what the market will bear for your skillset. A lot of people will say that the rule of thumb is to make ~double your current salary. So $150K -> $300K, to cover benefits and tax liability. The thing is, full-time (if you can get full-time contract work), that equates to $150/hr. In many markets, that rate can be seen as high for contractor. In some markets, $150K could be reasonable software engineer salary but $150/hr could not a reasonable contractor rate for the same skillset. You have to test the waters and see what the market will bear for your skillset. In reality, even in a big market like SF Bay or NYC, contract rates cap out at $200/hr for even the most experienced developers (even at the big tech companies). Most companies aren't willing to pay more than that-- they generally would rather decide to start a recruiting process to hire a FTE senior developer at $200K salary than pay $400K annual to a contractor making $200/hr. You have to remember that generally, contract employees are hired mercenaries. Architect/director-level contract roles are almost non-existent. That's why contract rates generally cap at $200/hr, because most contract hires are for mid to senior level work. The exception is if you have a niche skillset-- think legacy code or domain-specific knowledge. In my experience, what worked out best for me is to focus less on the rate and focus more on the quality of clients. Even if the client can't pay you that target rate, if the work is reliable and the point-of-contact is organized and pleasant to work with, it's totally worth it. Eventually you build a relationship with the client and are able to negotiate a retainer, which is almost like a salary (companies love fixed costs). But the nice thing is as a contractor, you can have multiple clients. Those retainers add up quick and you can make much more than you did on salary and have a higher level of job security because you have diversified income sources. After a few years of doing this, I currently make double what I made on salary (which is the "target") but don't have to deal with being unpaid for overtime (exempt status is a sham) and no commute (100% remote), never worry about being unemployed because even if one contract is dropped, I still have the other one(s). More on reddit.com

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't know why taxes would matter. Gross income is gross income, and if you earn (say) $75k in gross income, you're going to get taxed the same amount whether you earned it hourly or in salary. The real question for me would be how to consider the 5 hours a week of overtime. There really isn't one unique formula for "converting" hourly to salary; you have to define a hypothetical salary position and describe it in order to make a comparison. Would it also involve working 45 hours a week, in which case the comparable salary would just be your total income? Or would it just be a 40-hour-a-week job, in which case you'd have to decide yourself how much that extra 5 hours of free time is valued. Or would it be 50 hours, since they don't have to pay you for overtime? And what would vacation look like? So, really, there's not a calculator or formula except in the very simple case where you'd work the exact same amount of hours in a year, in which case the formula is: Total Amount You Earn Hourly in a Year = Equivalent Annual Salary More on reddit.com