The Application Compensation Field Reference, One Row per Prompt

This is a lookup document for filling in whatever pay field the application form in front of you is asking for, without re-deciding from scratch on every posting. It is for anyone applying across many companies at once, where the same handful of compensation prompts recur in slightly different words. Jump to the row that matches your form, read what it screens for and how it misleads, and enter the value.

The top-ranking pages on this topic each argue one all-purpose answer - "write negotiable," "enter 000," "put market rate" - as if every pay field were the same field. They are not. Application forms recur with at least six distinct compensation prompts, and they behave differently, screen for different things, and carry different legal status. Treating them as interchangeable is how a flexible candidate self-eliminates or volunteers a number they were never obliged to give.

The six compensation prompts, and what each one screens for

Application forms use at least six distinct pay prompts. They split cleanly on two axes: time direction (what you want going forward versus what you earn now) and answer type (a number, a range, or a yes/no gate).

For most companies salary budgets are predetermined. When you state your expected salary, recruiters assess whether you fit inside that budget, and if your asking price is too high they may remove you from consideration early. That is the shared logic behind desired salary, salary expectations, and minimum acceptable salary. Minimum is the sharpest of the three: practitioners advise picking the lowest number that still makes the move worthwhile, then justifying it later with scope and market context.

Total compensation is the one prompt people underread. Desired compensation takes into account base salary and non-cash compensation such as benefits, vacation, stock options, health insurance, and 401k. Non-cash compensation is typically valued at 40 to 60 percent of the total package, so a total-comp field is not a rephrased base-salary field.

The current-salary line, and where you are not obliged to answer

Current or past salary is the only prompt in the set that is legally restricted, and the line is time direction. Every state law reviewed restricts questions about what an applicant used to earn, not what an applicant expects or requires going forward. Asking about salary expectations or range fit is treated differently from asking about pay history.

That distinction is load-bearing. Employers keep the expectations question everywhere. It is fine for them to ask "What are your expectations with respect to base salary, bonus or benefits?" or "What is your desired compensation?" even in a ban state. So desired, expected, minimum, and range-fit are generally fair to answer; current and past salary is the one to guard.

A verified practitioner list states that, as of August 12, 2026, eighteen states plus Washington, D.C. restrict employers from asking about or relying on a job applicant's pay history statewide: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington. Virginia's law takes effect July 1, 2026. North Carolina and Pennsylvania restrict the practice only for state government employers through executive order, not for private businesses statewide.

Source counts disagree because some trackers add localities and public-only bans. An employer-side tracker counts 22 statewide bans. The first was Massachusetts, in August 2016. Because effective dates move and the list grows, do not memorize a number - re-check a running tracker such as the HR Dive or SHRM state-by-state list for the state you are applying in.

New York shows how the detail matters: the four-or-more-worker requirement went into effect September 17, 2023, and New York City civil penalties can reach $25,000 for willful violations. California's ban has applied to all employers, including government, since January 1, 2018.

What actually happens after you hit submit

The screening risk is one specific mechanism - the range-fit knockout - not the text quirks people worry about. A knockout question routes non-matching applicants to a rejected pool automatically, with zero human review.

Knockout questions can eliminate an application instantly, but the idea that an algorithm reads every resume and silently torches it is mostly folklore. The two are different things. The knockout is real and mechanical; the silent-resume-shredder is a myth. For roles receiving 200 or more applications, auto-rejection can eliminate 30 to 60 percent of the pool before a human reviews a CV, and the range-fit field is a common trigger.

The two ways to survive the knockout are simple. Enter a range rather than a single number, so part of it lands inside the budget, and if the posting published a band, echo it. A single number above budget triggers the gate; a range keeps you inside.

The screening risk is the range-fit knockout, not the wording of a text field.

Free text versus numeric only: exactly what to enter

For a free-text field, enter a range or a market-anchored phrase. For a numeric-only field, enter your target number - and be aware that the standard advice conflicts here, which is why this row needs care.

For free text, the dominant published advice is a range or a phrase such as "industry standard" or "market average." That satisfies the field, signals you know the market, and avoids naming a single figure you would rather negotiate.

Numeric-only is where sources split. One recommends that if a numerical value is required and text is not allowed, entering "0" is the best approach. Another says to enter "000" and mention in a notes section that salary is negotiable. A third recommends entering your Target - not your dream number and not your panic number. The conflict is real and worth naming: salary-negotiation coaches favor the placeholder to dodge the field, while the screening systems those forms run on treat placeholders as a problem. Entering "99999" or "00000" appears unprofessional and may cause automated systems or recruiters to flag your application.

The resolution is whether a notes box exists. If there is a place to explain, a placeholder plus a flexibility note is defensible. If there is not, a defensible target number is the safer entry, because a bare placeholder reads as a flag with no context to soften it.

Range: $95,000 - $110,000, depending on total package and scope.
Phrase: Open to market rate for this role and location.
Posting-matched: In line with the posted range; flexible on the mix of base and benefits.

The step-by-step: from prompt to submitted value

Work the same seven steps on every form. The whole pass takes a few minutes once the market anchor is in hand, and most of that time is one-time research you reuse across postings.

How this goes wrong: failure modes and false positives

Most of the damage on pay fields comes from a short list of predictable misfires. Each has a tell you can check before you submit.

"Negotiable" in a numeric field. If it is a numeric field that expects a number, "negotiable" won't work as written. The form silently rejects or blanks it and you may never know. Read the field type before typing a word.

Placeholder 000 or 999. It looks like a clever dodge and reads as unprofessional. Placeholders like "99999" or "00000" may cause automated systems or recruiters to flag your application. Use one only when a notes box lets you explain the flexibility behind it.

Lowballing to seem honest. Posting a desired salary lower than what the role is offering is not honesty, it is self-sabotage. Application numbers are not binding, so a low figure buys you nothing and costs you the ceiling of the conversation.

Range-fit knockout misfire. A candidate who enters $95,000 for a role budgeted at $85,000 might be entirely flexible, but is auto-rejected before that conversation can happen. Enter a range that overlaps the band, or if the posting published a number, stay inside it.

Mistaking auto-confirmation for rejection. You may receive an auto-confirmation email and read it as a rejection. Actual CV-review rejections take hours or days, not seconds. A fast reply is a receipt, not a verdict.

Answering a current-salary prompt where it is banned. Bans do not forbid you from volunteering, so the field will still take your number. But a volunteered figure can anchor your pay downward, and you were never obliged to give it. In a ban state, leave it blank.

Hourly versus annual unit mismatch. When a posting quotes a rate and the form still demands your own number, entering an annual figure in an hourly field, or the reverse, produces an absurd number that reads as a knockout fail. Check the unit label before entering.

Why "match the posted range" works: who is on the other side

The person judging your number is almost always a generalist recruiter checking it against a band someone else set, which is why echoing the posted range is the reliable move. The specialists who actually build pay bands are a small population next to the recruiters who enforce them at the form.

In Refolk's index of professional profiles, there are 111,339 US recruiter and technical-recruiter profiles - the group most likely to configure salary knockout fields - against just 4,298 US compensation-analyst and manager profiles, the specialists who set the bands these fields screen against. That is roughly a 26-to-1 gap.

The practical consequence: the number in the field is usually judged by a generalist against a band they did not set. Matching or landing inside the posted range is what clears their check, because their check is "does this fit the band on file," not "is this the market-optimal figure." If you want to see who those screeners are for a given kind of employer, Refolk can surface them by title, market, and stage.

The pattern is also lopsided by country. Refolk's index returns 7,259 UK recruiter and technical-recruiter profiles against 111,339 in the US, a US-to-UK ratio of about 15.3x - consistent with the US patchwork of state salary-history bans versus the UK's absence of a comparable statutory regime.

The fear that drives most lowballing is largely unfounded. Application numbers are not binding, and Procurement Tactics found in 2024 that 94 percent of negotiated offers remain intact, so revising upward at interview rarely costs the offer. Refolk writes your resume from your own history, tailors it to each posting, and scores how well you fit, which removes the guesswork that pushes people toward a defensive low number in the first place.

Keep the entry current before you call the field done

Run this checklist on any pay field before you submit, and re-check the jurisdiction list periodically because effective dates move and states are still being added.

The one part of this reference that ages is the jurisdiction list. Effective dates land in the future - Virginia's takes effect July 1, 2026 - and trackers disagree on the count because some fold in localities and public-only bans. Do not carry a memorized number from posting to posting. When the state changes, re-open a running tracker such as the HR Dive or SHRM state-by-state list and confirm the current status for the exact state you are applying in. Everything else in this document - the six prompts, the field-type logic, the failure modes - holds regardless of which state added a ban last.