Most people treat this question like a trap they need to escape. So they say something vague — "I'm open to negotiation" or "whatever's competitive for the role" — and think they've played it safe.
They haven't. They've just handed the employer the opening bid.
The mistake isn't naming a number. The mistake is naming a number before you have enough information to name the right one. There's a specific moment in the interview process where you should anchor a figure — and doing it any earlier consistently costs candidates thousands.
Why this question is so dangerous
The interviewer knows something you don't: their budget.
In most salary conversations, employers already have a ceiling in mind before they ask the question. When you name a number first, you're not revealing your worth — you're setting the upper boundary of what they'll consider paying. If you aim low, they pocket the difference and never tell you. If you aim too high, you might get screened out before you had a chance to demonstrate your value.
This information asymmetry is the core of the problem. You're being asked to make a bid in an auction where the other party already knows the reserve price.
The question comes early precisely because of this asymmetry. Recruiters often ask about salary expectations in the first phone screen — before you've had any real conversation about what the role involves, what success looks like, or how your experience maps to their specific needs. At that point, you're pricing yourself without context. That's when candidates lose money.
Understanding this reframes the whole thing. The goal isn't to answer the question as asked. The goal is to delay committing to a number until you've gathered enough information to name the right one.
What changed in 2026
Pay transparency laws have quietly shifted the balance of power.
Colorado passed the first major law in 2021. By 2026, salary posting requirements cover a majority of the US workforce — New York, California, Washington, Illinois, Massachusetts, and a growing list of states all require employers to include pay ranges in job postings. The EU Pay Transparency Directive is being implemented across member states. Canada has similar rules at the provincial level in British Columbia.
What this means practically: the employer's budget is often sitting right there in the job posting before you walk into the room. If you haven't read it, you've already undersold yourself. If you ignore it and lowball your ask, the interviewer knows you didn't do your research.
The second shift is AI salary tooling. LinkedIn Salary, Glassdoor's Employer Salaries, and Levels.fyi have been around for years — but the data has gotten more granular and more current. You can now cross-reference salary ranges by role, location, company size, and seniority in under ten minutes. AI tools can synthesise that data on request, pulling together a defensible number with sources. There's no excuse in 2026 for going into a salary conversation without a researched range.
The net effect: the information asymmetry that made this question so dangerous has narrowed considerably. Employers who used to hold all the cards now know that prepared candidates can see their posted ranges. That creates a new dynamic — candidates who do the research are in a stronger position than they were even three years ago.
The framework: early interview vs final round
The right approach changes depending on where you are in the process. Treating a first-round screen the same way you'd treat a final offer conversation is one of the most common mistakes candidates make.
The reason to distinguish these two stages: your negotiating position changes between them. In round one, they don't know yet whether they want you. In the final round, they do — and that shifts the balance entirely.
How to research your number before you walk in
Don't guess. Don't ask a friend in the same field who might be underpaid. Use actual data from at least three sources and triangulate.
LinkedIn Salary — filters by job title, location, years of experience, and industry. The dataset is large enough to be reliable for most professional roles. Check the median and the 75th percentile — the 75th is your anchor.
Glassdoor — cross-reference with LinkedIn, especially for specific company-level data. The "Employer Salaries" section shows what that company has paid people in your role type. If you're interviewing at a company with a Glassdoor profile, use it.
Levels.fyi — if you're in tech or adjacent to it, this is the most accurate source available. It tracks total compensation including base, bonus, equity, and signing bonus across hundreds of companies. The gap between base salary and total comp in tech roles can be significant; knowing both prevents you from comparing apples to oranges.
The job posting itself — if the role lists a salary range, read it carefully before you do anything else. In states and countries with transparency laws, this is the employer's declared budget. Anchor your ask to the top third of their stated range, not the midpoint. The midpoint feels polite. It costs you money.
When all three sources roughly agree, you have a defensible number. When they diverge significantly, pick the upper end of the consensus and be ready to explain why you belong there.
One more thing worth factoring in: total compensation. Base salary is only part of the picture. Equity, bonus structure, pension contribution, remote flexibility, and professional development budget all have real monetary value. When you name a number, you're usually talking about base — but it's fair to acknowledge that total package matters in your framing.
The exact words to use
In an early-stage interview — deflect and anchor a range:
"Before I give you a number, I want to make sure I fully understand the scope of the role and what success looks like in the first year. What I can tell you now is that based on my research into the market for this type of position in [location], I'd expect something in the range of [X–Y]. Is that aligned with what you have budgeted?"
That last question is important. It invites them to confirm or correct without committing you to the lower bound.
If the job posting lists a salary range:
"I've seen the range you've listed, and based on my experience I'd be targeting the upper end — around [X]. Does that work for you?"
Anchor to the top third. Most candidates anchor to the middle. The difference, compounded over three years, is significant.
In a final-round interview — name a specific number:
"Based on everything I've learned about the role and my research into the market, I'm targeting [specific figure]. That's based on [X years of experience / the scope of responsibility / market data for this level in this region]. Total compensation matters too — so I'm open to a conversation about how bonus or equity factors in."
Specific. Grounded. Not apologetic.
What if they push for a number right now?
Here's the counterintuitive part: giving in to pressure early costs you more than holding firm.
Recruiters sometimes push back on a deflection. "I just need a ballpark to make sure we're in the right territory." The instinct is to comply, because it feels like the path of least resistance and you don't want to seem difficult.
But when you name a number under pressure before you have context, you're not being cooperative — you're surrendering your negotiating position to avoid a moment of discomfort. That momentary awkwardness is worth enduring. The number you name in that pressured moment becomes the ceiling for every conversation that follows.
The graceful response to pressure isn't capitulation and it isn't stonewalling. It's this:
"I want to give you an informed number rather than a guess, so I'd rather wait until I have a better sense of the full scope. What I can say is that I've done my research, and based on what I know about this level of role in this market, I'm not expecting to be dramatically out of range. Can we revisit this once I've had a chance to learn more?"
Most good interviewers respect this. The ones who don't are often testing how you handle pressure — and holding your ground calmly is itself a demonstration of how you negotiate.
What NOT to say
- "I'm flexible" — This isn't an answer, it's an abdication. It signals either that you haven't researched the market or that you're so eager for the job you'll accept anything. Neither reading is helpful.
- "Whatever is competitive for the role" — Same problem as "flexible". You're asking them to anchor, which they'll happily do — to the bottom of their range.
- "I'm currently making [X]" — In many US jurisdictions it's now illegal for employers to ask this. If they do ask and you answer, you've set your starting point at your current salary rather than market rate. Your current salary is irrelevant to your market value.
- A range wider than 20% — "Somewhere between £40,000 and £65,000" tells the interviewer you have no idea what you're worth. A range that wide reads as unprepared. Keep it to a 15–20% band at most.
- An apology before the number — "I know this might be high, but…" opens your negotiation with a concession. If you've researched your number and you believe it's right, say it without pre-emptively softening it.
What easedit.co sessions show about this question
Salary expectations come up consistently in easedit.co coaching sessions, and the pattern is striking: most candidates who underprice themselves don't do it from ignorance. They do it from discomfort with the conversation itself.
They know roughly what the market rate is. They've seen the posted range. They even have a number in mind. But when the question lands live — with a real interviewer, in real time — the discomfort of saying the number out loud causes them to back off it. They add softeners, hedge the range downward, or abandon the research entirely and say something like "I'm open to what you have budgeted."
Practising the answer under interview conditions closes that gap. It's not about memorising a script. It's about making the discomfort familiar enough that it doesn't override the research.
The same preparation that sharpens your salary answer will make the rest of the compensation conversation easier — and it connects directly to where do you see yourself in 5 years, where demonstrating long-term commitment to the role gives you more standing to negotiate. And when the one question that decides who gets the offer comes at the end, the confidence you built in the salary conversation carries through. Also worth thinking about before your next interview: questions to ask at the end of an interview — including whether it's appropriate to ask about salary review timelines during the interview itself.
At easedit.co, you can practise this exact question with a voice AI that knows your CV and the role you're targeting — so when the salary conversation happens for real, you've already had it. Practise your answer — from $39, no data stored.