Remote scores 8.3 overall in our model — the highest of any vendor we cover — and 8.4 specifically on pricing. That second number surprises buyers who notice it has the highest published EOR rate in the category. The two facts are not in tension, and understanding why is most of what you need to know about how Remote prices.
The published numbers
| Billing | List price | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Monthly | $699 / employee / month | Highest published rate among vendors we score |
| Annual | $599 / employee / month | Identical to Deel's monthly list price |
| Setup / platform fee | None standard on EOR | Genuinely unusual in this category |
That annual row matters more than it gets credit for. Almost every "Remote is more expensive than Deel" comparison online quotes $699 against $599 and stops. On a committed annual term the two vendors' service fees are the same number, and the decision returns to where it belongs — entity model, coverage and support.
Why the pricing score is high despite the price
Our pricing criterion measures transparency and predictability, not cheapness. A vendor that publishes a rate, states that there are no standard setup fees, and explains deposit and FX policy on a public pricing FAQ is doing something most of this market refuses to do. Multiplier, Oyster, Papaya Global and Rippling are all quote-only — you cannot build a model without a sales conversation.
Remote's cons in our review include that $699 is higher than several published competitors and that its country count is lower than the 150-to-180 marketing peers. Both are true. Neither is a transparency failure, and the second is arguably the opposite.
What the owned-entity model changes about the invoice
Remote's core positioning is that it owns and operates local entities rather than reselling third-party EOR capacity. Its pricing page states hiring without an entity in 90-plus countries — a narrower figure than peers precisely because it counts a different thing.
Commercially, that shows up in three places. There is no partner margin stacked between you and the employing entity, so the quoted rate is closer to the delivered cost. Incident response has one accountable party rather than a coordination chain. And the legal employer question — the one you should be asking every vendor in writing — answers itself, because the answer is Remote in every market it serves.
The trade is reach. If you need to hire in a market Remote does not own, the model's advantage becomes irrelevant because it cannot serve you there. Check your hiring list against the published country set before anything else.
What still is not in $699
The same six lines that are missing from every vendor's headline rate:
- Employer social contributions — near 45% of gross in France, around 20% in Germany, near 30% in Spain. Larger than the service fee in essentially every market.
- Statutory and supplemental benefits — administered, not absorbed.
- Deposits — Remote does explain its deposit policy publicly, which puts it ahead of most peers, but a deposit is still a working-capital event finance should see before signature.
- FX spread — you fund in one currency, the employee is paid in another.
- Offboarding — notice-period payroll and severance administration.
- Benefits gaps — the supplemental package you need to actually win candidates in a competitive market.
On a €85,000 German hire, employer social contributions run near €17,000 a year against roughly $8,400 of Remote service fees. The vendor line is the small one. Model the country first in the Expansion Planner, then rank vendors in the cost calculator.
How Remote sits against the published field
| Vendor | Published EOR rate | Entity model | Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| RemotePeople | From $199 | Hybrid | 7.4 |
| Playroll | From $399 | Hybrid | 7.7 |
| Lano | From €499 | Partner-led | 7.7 |
| Deel | From $599 | Hybrid | 8.2 |
| Remote | $699 monthly / $599 annual | Owned | 8.3 |
Read down the entity column and the price ladder makes sense. You are paying for consistency of employer, and the vendors below Remote on price are all hybrid or partner-led. That is not a criticism of them — hybrid is how you reach 180 countries — but it is what the extra hundred dollars buys.
What to demand before signature
- Your country list checked against the owned set. Do this first; it can end the evaluation in ten minutes.
- An itemised sample invoice for one real market at a real salary.
- The deposit schedule per country, and whether a parent guarantee reduces it.
- The FX spread per corridor, in writing.
- Annual versus monthly terms — including what happens on early termination, since the $100 saving is bought with commitment.
Should you take the annual plan?
The $100 monthly saving is bought with commitment, and the commitment is the part worth thinking about. Twenty seats moved from monthly to annual saves $24,000 a year — real money, and the obvious answer looks like yes.
Three things complicate it. Headcount rarely moves in one direction. If your annual commitment is priced on a seat count you subsequently reduce, find out what happens to the rate before you sign, because contracts in this category often only contemplate growth.
Country mix changes the calculus. An annual commitment assumes you still want to employ in these markets next year. If your hiring plan is genuinely settled, that is fine. If you are mid-expansion and might discover a market does not work, monthly flexibility has a value that is hard to express as a number until you need it.
Early termination terms vary. Ask specifically what happens if you offboard someone in month four of a twelve-month commitment — whether the seat can be reallocated to a different employee, and whether the annual rate survives.
The pattern that works for most buyers: annual for the core markets you are confident about, monthly for the exploratory ones. Vendors will usually accommodate a mixed term if you ask at the right point in the negotiation, which is before you have signalled that you are committed.
Bottom line
Remote is the transparency leader in a category that mostly refuses to publish anything, and its premium is a real premium for a real thing — a single accountable legal employer in every market it serves. The $699 headline overstates the gap to Deel, because the annual plan closes it entirely.
Where Remote loses is reach: 90-plus owned markets against competitors marketing 150 to 180. Check your list, then decide. If the coverage fits, request a quote and read the full Remote review alongside it.
FAQ
How much does Remote EOR cost?
Remote lists $699 per employee per month, or $599 on annual billing. That is a service fee only — employer social contributions, statutory benefits and FX sit on top and are almost always the larger number.
Is Remote more expensive than Deel?
On monthly billing yes, $699 against $599. On Remote's annual plan the two are identical at $599. Buyers who compare monthly-to-monthly overstate the gap.
Does Remote charge setup fees?
Remote states no standard platform or setup fees on EOR, which is unusual in this category and part of why it scores 8.4 on pricing in our model. Deposits are separate and are explained on its pricing FAQs rather than hidden.
Why does Remote list fewer countries than competitors?
Because it counts markets where it owns and operates the employing entity, rather than everywhere it can reach through partners. 90-plus is a narrower and more verifiable claim than the 150-to-180 figures common in the category.
Is Remote worth the higher monthly price?
If entity ownership matters to your legal team, yes — you are buying a single accountable employer rather than a coordinator. If your hiring list runs into markets Remote does not own, the premium buys you nothing there because it cannot serve them.
Independent analysis for B2B buyers—not legal or tax advice. Facts change; re-verify pricing and entity claims before contracting. Author: Oscar Andersson. Related evergreen reading: how to choose an EOR, EOR pricing explained.