CalcStack — free, instant, no signup. The interactive calculator loads automatically.
A 12-month non-compete on a $110k salary carries $4,950 of expected cost — that is the signing premium to ask for. Broad 24-month clauses can cost $16,500.
A non-compete is an insurance policy the employer buys against your departure — and you are paying the premium unless you negotiate. Price it: on a $110,000 salary, a 12-month restriction with a 15% outside-industry pay cut and a 30% chance you need to switch during the window costs $4,950 in expectation — exactly the signing premium to request. Broaden it to 24 months and a coin-flip switch probability and the clause costs $16,500. The legal landscape matters: the FTC's 2024 ban was struck down, so non-competes live under state law — banned in California, Minnesota, Oklahoma, and North Dakota, restricted for low-wage workers elsewhere. This calculator prices the clause so the negotiation starts with a number instead of a vibe.
Employees use it before signing: a 12-month non-compete on $110k carries $4,950 of expected cost — the signing premium to ask for — and the clause lives under state law, not the struck-down FTC ban.
State law owns this question, and the map moved recently. Fully banned: California, Minnesota, Oklahoma, North Dakota — plus effectively void for most workers in a few others. Restricted: a growing list (Colorado, Illinois, Washington, Massachusetts, and more) bans them below salary thresholds, requires advance notice, or caps duration at 6–12 months. The FTC's 2024 nationwide ban was struck down in federal court (Ryan LLC v. FTC) before taking effect, so the federal layer is gone for now; the healthcare-specific bans several states passed still stand. Enforceable-but-narrowed is the modal state: courts will blue-pencil (rewrite) or refuse clauses that are broader than necessary — overbroad geography or "any role in the industry" language fails reasonableness tests in many states, but you do not want to fund the lawsuit that finds out. Practical hierarchy: read your state statute first (one search, five minutes), then assume a narrowly drafted clause is enforceable even where a broad one is not, and negotiate scope rather than relying on unenforceability — courts are a strategy for the desperate, not a plan.
Five, in order of how often they succeed. Shorten: 12–24 months to 6 — the most common yes, because the employer's legitimate interest (client relationships, trade secrets) decays in months, and you are arguing their own logic. Narrow the scope: a named-competitor list instead of "the industry," one metro instead of nationwide, your function instead of any role — scope is where the expected cost in this calculator lives, and narrowing it is worth more than duration cuts. Add a termination trigger: the clause dies or pays garden leave if THEY lay you off — the fairness argument is obvious and this is the term to insist on hardest. Garden leave: they pay some or all of the restriction period — common in finance, spreading elsewhere. And cash: the expected cost from this calculator as a signing bonus or base bump — the direct conversion. What to sacrifice first if trading: customer non-solicits are usually reasonable and worth conceding for non-compete relief. Get one hour of an employment attorney ($300–500) to review anything broad before signing — cheap against the worst-case number shown above, and their markup of the clause gives you the negotiation script.
You have more room than the document suggests — enforceability is decided by courts, not contracts. First: check your state — in the banned states the clause is wallpaper regardless of what you signed; in threshold states confirm you are above the salary floor. Second: read the scope literally — most clauses are narrower than employees assume; "competitor" definitions, geography, and duration all bound what you cannot do, and employers drafting broadly sometimes create clauses courts will not enforce as written. Third: if a specific offer conflicts, options in ascending cost: ask the new employer's counsel to assess it (they often do — they have skin in your start date); negotiate a release with the old employer (surprisingly often free, especially if you are not client-facing or the new role is adjacent-not-competing); wait out a short restriction with a deferred start date (new employers do this for candidates they want); or litigate — the expensive last resort where the employer must prove legitimate interest and reasonableness. The DON'T list matters more: do not solicit clients or take documents on the way out (converts a weak clause into a strong trade-secret case), do not lie about your destination (the lie is worse than the breach), and do not ignore a cease-and-desist — respond through counsel, because many are bluffs that a lawyer's letter ends.