Tools & Product Building

How to Compare a Dubai Offer With One in London or Bengaluru

Gross salary does not survive a border. Four numbers do travel, and knowing which ones they are is most of the work of comparing two offers in different tax systems.

Take-home payNet salaryEffective rateMarginal rateEmployer cost

Someone holding an offer in Dubai and an offer in London is usually comparing two numbers that are not the same kind of number. In the UAE the headline figure is close to what arrives in the account. In Germany it is about 63% of it. The two are written the same way and mean different things.

Currency is the obvious problem and the least interesting one. The harder one is that each system takes its cut at a different point, on a different base, with a different set of things it calls a deduction.

Every figure below comes from the Salary & Offer Studio, calculated under each jurisdiction's own 2026 rules.

01

The problem

The headline number does not survive the border.

"AED 240,000" and "£70,000" describe different things. The first is close to money received. The second is a figure from which income tax and National Insurance are still to come. Putting them side by side and converting the currency produces a comparison that looks rigorous and is not.

It gets worse with the systems that deduct most. A €60,000 salary in Germany produces €37,694.00 of take-home, because income tax, pension, health, care and unemployment insurance all come out before it reaches you. Nothing about the number €60,000 suggests that.

The Studio deliberately bundles no exchange rate. A rate baked into a tool is stale within a day and invisible to the person relying on it, which is worse than no rate at all. Where two offers are in different currencies, you enter the rate yourself and you know exactly how old it is.

02

What travels

Four numbers that do compare.

Each of these is a ratio or a local-currency amount, which is what makes them portable. None of them requires you to believe an exchange rate.

Gross is the one figure on an offer letter that compares least well across two systems.
MeasureWhat it answersWhy it travels
Kept shareWhat proportion of gross reaches youA ratio, so currency cancels out
Marginal rateWhat the next 100 of gross is worthThe number a raise or a bonus is measured in
Employer costWhat the role costs the companyShows what is being spent that you never see
Take-home in local currencyWhat you can actually spend where you liveCompared against local costs, not converted
03

Side by side

The six, each at its own headline figure.

These are not equivalent salaries. They are six ordinary figures in six currencies, shown so the shape of each system is visible. Read down the kept-share and marginal columns, not across the gross column.

2026 rules in each jurisdiction, ordered by kept share. What the employer pays on top is the next section. No employee pension, provident fund or social insurance rate was entered for the three that ask for one.
JurisdictionGrossTake-homeKeptMarginal
UAEAED 240,000AED 240,000.00100%0%
India — new regime₹15,00,000₹14,02,500.0093.50%15.60%
China — residentCN¥300,000CN¥268,920.0089.64%20.00%
Canada — OntarioCA$80,000CA$59,683.2374.60%33.65%
United Kingdom£70,000£51,158.0073.08%42.00%
Germany — class I€60,000€37,694.0062.82%47.15%
04

The wedge

How much of what you cost actually reaches you.

Employer cost reframes the same arithmetic in a way that changes how the offer reads. A German employer spends €72,690.00 on a €60,000 salary; the employee receives €37,694.00. Slightly over half of what the role costs arrives in the person doing it.

This is not an argument about which system is better — the contributions buy healthcare, pensions and unemployment cover that other systems charge for separately or not at all. It is an argument about reading an offer accurately. A number that looks low in one system may represent a much larger commitment than a higher number in another.

It also matters in negotiation. Where employer contributions are steep, every increase you ask for costs the employer more than it costs elsewhere, and that shapes what there is room for.

India and China are flattered by the omissions noted above. The other four include every employer contribution the tool models.
JurisdictionEmployer costReaches the employeeShare
UAEAED 240,000.00AED 240,000.00100%
India — new regime₹15,00,000.00₹14,02,500.0093.50%
China — residentCN¥300,000.00CN¥268,920.0089.64%
Canada — OntarioCA$86,018.75CA$59,683.2369.38%
United Kingdom£79,749.40£51,158.0064.15%
Germany — class I€72,690.00€37,694.0051.86%
05

The edges

Five places the arithmetic surprises people.

Every one of these is a case where the headline rate and the real rate diverge, and where a calculator that walks a simple bracket table gets the wrong answer. The Studio measures the marginal rate by computing the net at gross plus 100, rather than asserting a band, so these show up on their own.

A marginal rate that falls as income rises, and one above 100%, are both real. Neither comes out of a simple band walk.
WhereWhat happensThe figure
UK, £100,000–£125,140The personal allowance is withdrawn by £1 for every £2 earned, so each extra pound is taxed and also exposes 50p that was untaxed62.00% marginal, against 42.00% below it
India, just past ₹12,00,000 taxableSection 87A marginal relief holds the tax to the income above the limit, and the 4% cess rides on top of that104.00% marginal until taxable income reaches ₹12,70,588
Canada, CA$80,000Alberta costs more than Ontario despite a personal amount nearly twice the size, because its first bracket is 8% against Ontario's 5.05%CA$4,954.48 provincial against CA$4,454.52
Germany, above €69,750The health and care ceiling is passed, so further income no longer attracts those contributions and the marginal rate falls47.15% at €60,000, 42.60% at €70,000
China, ¥200,000 to ¥300,000The comprehensive income table steps from 10% to 20% in a single moveKept share falls from 94.26% to 89.64%
06

The limits

What this comparison still cannot tell you.

Take-home is one input to a decision about moving countries, and it is the only one arithmetic can settle. Everything below changes the answer and none of it is in the calculation.

Cost of living is the largest omission. A higher kept share in a city where housing costs three times as much is not a better offer. Schooling, healthcare that the employer does or does not carry, the value of a state pension you may never draw, visa terms, notice periods and statutory severance all sit outside the numbers.

The UAE's end-of-service gratuity is the clearest example: it has no equivalent in the other five systems, it is worth a substantial sum over a long tenure, and it appears nowhere in a kept-share comparison. Compare mode prints that caveat next to any UAE side for exactly that reason.

Progressive disclosureTechnical Notes

No market data of any kind

There are no salary benchmarks, no cost-of-living indices and no exchange rates anywhere in the tool. Every figure is arithmetic on what you typed, which is why it can be exact about the calculation and says nothing about whether the offer is competitive.

Each jurisdiction states what it leaves out

Germany's solidarity surcharge is omitted because the 2026 single-filer threshold could not be confirmed from a primary source. India's old regime and its deductions, Canada's Quebec and provincial surtaxes, China's special additional deductions and the UK's Scottish rates are all listed as not modelled, on screen and in the exported PDF.

From note to action

Continue through the system.

Keep reading

Related practical notes.

Apply the note

Working on a similar problem?

Bring the current system, failure point or desired outcome. We can scope the architecture, implementation and verification path.

Start a Project Try the Related Tool