how to calculate it in 2026 with examples

Administrative language often includes confusing and complex terms, but they definitely affect your life. One of these terms is “regulatory base”, a concept that appears regularly in the regulations and conditions to determine how much are you going to charge for your benefit due to unemployment or during medical leave. However, and despite being a basic concept to calculate how much money you should receive in times of greatest work vulnerability, the regulatory base is not a fixed figure nor that it appears explicitly reflected on your payrollso we are going to explain how to calculate it and how it is applied with different examples. What is the regulatory basis of payroll If the labor market were a religion, the regulatory basis would probably be the equivalent of its bible. This concept is the pillar that allows you to calculate the salary that would correspond to you when you lose your job and begin to collect unemployment benefits, for the calculation of retirement and even for medical leave or permits. In summary, the regulatory base is the reference scale from which Social Security determines how much you will receive when you access a benefit. Depending on the amount of this regulatory base and the percentage that Social Security has established for a specific benefit, it will result in the amount that the employee will receive each month in their benefits. However, and despite the fact that its name may be misleading, the regulatory basis of the payroll, paradoxically, It does not appear on your payroll as such, but rather it is an average of certain contribution bases. Its calculation involves concepts such as the base salary, salary supplements, extra payments, Social Security contributions or withholdings that are applied to your payroll. Therefore, it is not a fixed amount as it is the gross salary or a certain percentage such as the personal income tax withholding that does appear on your monthly payroll. In other words, the regulatory basis is not something you need to know on your payroll, but only You’re going to need it when something interrupts your work life. and you must be compensated for it: medical leavematernity or paternity leave, unemployment or retirement. Difference with the contribution base One of the main factors to calculate the regulatory base is, precisely, the contribution base. That is, the monthly amount on both the employee and the company pay the contributions to Social Security every month. This contribution basis It is calculated by adding the employee’s base salary, the salary supplements he receives (seniority, tools, overtime, etc.) and the proportional part of the extra payments if they were prorated for collect them in 12 payments. Based on this amount, the percentages that both the worker and the company contribute to Social Security are calculated. Due to similarity, the regulatory base can be confused with the contribution base. However, unlike the regulatory base, the contribution base does appear reflected in the payrollso the worker can know it when he receives it, since the contribution base is what is contributed while working, unlike the regulatory base that is used to calculate the amount of the benefit when he stops working. Given that the amounts for which they are contributed are calculated in the form of percentages, the final amount of these contributions depends on the sum of the contribution base, since in some months you may receive more or less overtime or other supplements. Difference with base salary If the regulatory base serves to calculate how much do you earn in a job to, based on it, calculate the amount of a contributory benefit, wouldn’t the base salary serve as a reference? He base salary It is only the fixed part of the salary agreed in your contract. That is, the minimum salary you will receive for doing your job. However, this figure does not reflect the reality of your work since it does not include additional benefits such as prorated extra pay, monthly overtime or bonuses for objectives. By not reflecting the reality of your salarythis concept does not serve on its own to calculate benefits because, in reality, the employee does not receive that base salary, but rather the part of the Social Security contributions that correspond to him, as well as the deductions for personal income tax, are deducted from it. The regulatory base takes into account the contribution base, which includes all the amounts contributed to Social Security in a specific month, so its amount is different from that of the base salary. How to calculate the regulatory base of a payroll There is no single valid formula for all cases, because the calculation depends on the type of benefit for which it is made because Social Security establishes different percentages depending on whether it is for retirement, unemployment, paternity or maternity leave or due to sick leave. In common situations such as a temporary disability, the regulatory base is obtained by taking the contribution base for the month prior to the leave (that is, the base salary plus all salary supplements) and dividing it by the number of days to which said contribution refers (for example, 30 days if collected monthly). Each assumption is governed by different factors and percentages (calculation time range, economic factors, exemptions, etc.), so knowing the regulatory basis is only part of the calculation of the benefit. Regulatory basis for the self-employed In the case of the self-employed, the regulatory base is a little more complex to calculate since it is not based on a more or less stable figure as in the case of employees (base salary + supplements), since from the 2023 reformyour contribution base adapts to real income. And, therefore, the calculation of its regulatory base is as variable as it is. your contribution base. If, for example, a self-employed person has had four different contribution bases (because their income has fluctuated during the year), their regulatory base will be the average of those four contribution bases based on … Read more

We criticize the EU a lot with its obsession with regulating Big Tech. There are at least two examples that justify this obsession

The Digital Markets Act (DMA) and the AI Law They are two of the great exponents of something that the European Union is highly criticized for: his regulatory obsession. It is true that these regulations restrict companies and can slow down European innovation – this has happened with AI – but these worrying side effects are accompanied by others that are much more welcome. Especially because this regulation has made the world a little more interoperable. There are two great examples of this. First example: USB-C. The adoption of the USB-C connector as the mandatory Being able to charge mobile devices and other hardware products is undoubtedly positive for users. Although the standard has its own problemsits use as a universal connector has avoided the use of proprietary connectors that made interoperability difficult and caused greater problems for the environment in the form of electronic waste. Second example: Universal AirDrop. We have also recently seen how Google offered support on the Pixel 10 to be able to transfer data to an iPhone or iPad thanks to AirDrop support in QuickShare. That support will be extended to other Android phones soon, and that improves interoperability between both platforms. From now on it will be much easier to transfer photos directly from mobile to mobile (be it iPhone or Android) wirelessly, and there we have to thank the European Unionwhich forced Apple to modify the way AirDrop works to comply with the DMA. And there is still more. These efforts to improve interoperability will soon be even more rewarded. Google and Apple have announced their collaboration in making portability between different platforms much easier. Thus, changing from an Android mobile to an iPhone or vice versa it’s going to be easier thanks to the efforts that both companies are making. Why have they made that decision? Again, due to the “regulatory obsession” of the EU. The EU sticks out its chest. Euroregulators in fact celebrated this decision by Google and Apple these days, and affirm that the renewed interoperability “is an example of how the Digital Markets Act (DMA) offers benefits to both users and developers.” That same regulation was what allowed iOS 26 to add support to transfer an eSIM to and from an Android mobile, for example. The EU against (almost) everyone. The EU’s regulatory obsession may often be criticized, but the truth is that it is the great reference when it comes to confronting the unlimited ambition of Big Tech. It has done so in the past with the RGPD or with the DSA and the DMAand now with the AI ​​Law. In all of them the ultimate goal is normally reasonable, although it often happens that the regulation ends up being exaggerated or, as with AI, comes too soon. The last chapter of obsession. European regulators suspect that Google is using content from news publishers and other creators to train their generative AI without permission and without offering compensation. These practices may constitute an abuse of Google’s dominant position in the market, which would negatively affect both competition and content publishers themselves. This research also affects “AI Overviews,” which extract and summarize information from other websites, potentially reducing traffic to those original sources. Brussels Effect. The application of these regulations in a market like the European one causes the so-called “Brussels effect”. For large technology companies such as Apple or Google, it is more efficient and profitable to adopt a single standard for all their products worldwide than to design specific versions only for the European market. Thus, this obsession not only benefits us European citizens (when it does), but also ends up becoming the de facto standard worldwide, as has happened with the USB-C connector. This regulation ends up becoming a powerful engine of global change. It is not perfect by any means, and we are seeing it with the AI ​​Law or the cookie nightmare, but even in those cases the EU seems to have realized and is trying to change things. The challenge of the AI ​​Law. If the DMA pursues interoperability, the AI ​​Law seeks transparency and compensation to prevent these monopolies from consolidating in this era of generative AI. The investigation into Google is not only a defense of copyright, but a preventive measure against competition. Meanwhile, the US and China seem turn a blind eye and we have even seen how the leaders of big technology companies They ask that copyright laws not be applied arguing the famous “fair use” of those contents that have little de jusot, at least for content providers. In Xataka | All the big AIs have ignored copyright laws. The amazing thing is that there are still no consequences

These are just two examples of how China is buying Europe

For more than a decade, Chinese capital has been buying hundreds of European companies, one after another. Centenary brands, technological leaders, industrial jewels. A map of acquisitions that has changed the ownership of some historic companies. This is the x-ray of the main European companies that are in Chinese hands, sector by sector. Automotive The Swedish and Italian assault. The automobile sector has been one of the main objectives from the beginning. Technology and robotics The German jewel. China has targeted strategic technology companies, especially in robotics and engineering. Agribusiness The Swiss giant. One of the largest Chinese acquisitions in Europe, and in the world. Energy and infrastructure Ports and nuclear. China has invested in strategic energy and port infrastructure assets. In some cases it remained an attempt that did not bear fruit. Tourism and hospitality The European tourism and hospitality sector has also attracted Chinese capital: Luxury goods and fashion European luxury brands have been another strategic target. Lanvin (France): Fosun acquired the French fashion house, one of the oldest haute couture brands in the world, in 2018 for an undisclosed amount. Time after adapted the name of its fashion division. Telecommunications A sensitive sector where operations have encountered more resistance. Also in Spain. Missing? Sectors such as banking, where Chinese acquisitions have been more limited by regulation, and defense, practically shielded. Also the pharmaceutical sector, where they have barely achieved important operations. The context. This shopping list is a good reflection of the Chinese strategy of the last 15 years: Access to technology. Global brands. And strategic positions in Europe. But the panorama has changed. Large acquisitions have given way to ground-up investment, especially in electric vehicles, concentrated in countries like Hungary that offer tax advantages and somewhat more regulatory laxity. BYD is a great example. Just like CATL. turning point. Europe is tightening its surveillance now that China changes tactics. Spectacular purchases have been reducing. Now is the time for new factories, electric cars and a subtler battle for the continent’s industrial future. In Xataka | Alibaba’s strategy with AI is very simple: achieve the same thing that Google achieved with Android Featured image | Luca Massimilian

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.