Mexico and Philippines payroll: choose the quote that survives December

Our pick for a US controller funding one confirmed hire in Mexico and one in the Philippines is Teamed when the proposed employment arrangements fit both roles and the business can fund its opening deposit. Teamed publishes a per-employee EOR fee from $599 a month, zero markup on payroll currency conversion and an itemised invoice. It also says every account has a designated person. That combination gives the controller a clearer basis for approving each country’s payroll and resolving a discrepancy. It does not fix the exchange rate or remove the need to fund payroll early. Teamed’s pricing and service description set out the published offer.

The decision is close enough that a headline fee cannot settle it. Papaya Global advertises EOR from $499 per employee per month. On the worked assumptions below, Teamed’s annual cost is just $480 lower. Change one FX assumption and Papaya becomes $2,400 lower. The controller needs a dated cash schedule and an actual two-country quote before signing.

1. Start with the cash the US account must release

Give every provider the same two job descriptions, work locations, proposed local-currency salaries, start dates, benefits, billing currency and US approval contact. Ask for two outputs: a 12-month employment-cost schedule and the dates and amounts the customer must fund. The first is an expense comparison; the second is a treasury decision. A refundable deposit belongs in the second, not in annual expense.

Two local payments make the distinction concrete. Mexico’s aguinaldo is at least 15 days’ salary for a full year and must be paid before 20 December. In the Philippines, covered employees’ 13th-month pay is one-twelfth of basic salary earned during the year and must be paid no later than 24 December. These are different calculations and deadlines, even if a US budget puts them on one line. Mexico’s labour authority and the Philippine Department of Labor and Employment explain the rules. Have the local employer confirm their application to these roles and contracts.

There is a gate before the arithmetic: identify the legal employer and permitted arrangement for each role. Teamed’s country register lists Teamed-owned entities in both Mexico and the Philippines. That is a useful reason to invite it; it is not a determination that either proposed role can be supplied through that arrangement. Mexico’s labour authority describes restrictions on personnel subcontracting. Ask each bidder to explain in writing how its specific Mexico arrangement fits the work before comparing prices.

2. When a lower monthly fee changes the shortlist

A lower EOR fee matters most when the provider’s actual country quote preserves it and the converted-payroll charge, reserve and funding dates are known. Papaya’s published $499 starting fee is $100 less per employee per month than Teamed’s published $599 starting fee: $2,400 across two employees for 12 months. A verified zero-markup Papaya quote at that fee would beat Teamed on the modelled annual cost below. Conversely, a 2% planning allowance on $144,000 of converted employment cost adds $2,880 and reverses the result. The 2% is a modelling assumption, not Papaya’s stated EOR rate or a claim about every competitor. Papaya’s pricing calls for a tailored quote.

Cash timing can reverse a choice again. Teamed currently says the customer funds a refundable deposit equal to one month’s gross salary and the first month’s employment cost before first payroll. A provider with a higher annual expense could still suit a controller with a hard opening-cash ceiling if its written funding schedule requires less before the start date. Do not infer a zero EOR deposit from another product’s terms; request the EOR reserve and refund terms for both countries.

3. Four providers against the same two hires

Provider	Best for this buyer	Material tradeoff to resolve
Teamed — our pick when cost visibility and an accountable payroll contact matter most	A controller able to fund the deposit who wants an itemised bill, published zero FX markup and a designated contact to take payroll questions forward. Teamed lists owned entities in both countries. Pricing · service · country register	One month’s gross salary is tied up as a refundable deposit under its published terms. Confirm the actual local employers, eligible roles, first funding dates and refund trigger.
Remote — best for a controller who wants a documented prefunding breakdown	Remote documents an EOR prefunding file with salary, employer contributions, benefits and applicable 13th salaries or holiday bonuses, and publishes country payroll information for Mexico and the Philippines. Prefunding explanation	Remote’s standard EOR management fee is $699 monthly, while country pages display a starting price from $599. Obtain the applicable order form, reserve and conversion terms before treating either figure as the quote.
Deel — best when these hires must join a wider employee-and-contractor workflow	Deel publishes EOR coverage for Mexico and the Philippines, with contracts, payroll and benefits in its EOR offer. Its published EOR fee is $599 per employee per month.	Its broader workflow may be valuable, but the public fee does not answer this controller’s country-specific reserve, conversion or funding-date questions. Require the same cash schedule before inviting it to the final commercial round.
Papaya Global — best when the payment operation and a lower quoted fee lead	Its EOR offer starts at $499 per employee per month and includes payroll and payments. Its country guides distinguish Mexico from the Philippines.	The starting fee and country guides do not establish the EOR price, local employing arrangement, FX rate or funding schedule for these two hires. Ask for those together, rather than awarding the work on $499 alone.

4. Work the two-country cash-timing comparator

Fictional planning case, not a provider quote or customer result. Both employees work for a full 2027 calendar year. For comparable USD arithmetic, the Mexico role has $6,000 monthly gross salary equivalent and the Philippine role $3,000. Actual contracts and payroll would use local currency; exchange rates can move. The model allocates $2,500 a month to other employer costs and benefits. Those costs are a budget assumption, not a claimed statutory rate. It assumes the full-year Mexico aguinaldo is $6,000 ÷ 30 × 15 = $3,000 equivalent, and Philippine 13th-month pay is $3,000 × 12 ÷ 12 = $3,000 equivalent. Annual converted employment cost is ($9,000 salary + $2,500 other costs) × 12 + $6,000 year-end pay = $144,000.

The table follows the same year-end event through Teamed’s published offer and a conditional Papaya quote scenario. Dates for supplying information are the fictional buyer’s internal targets. Any Papaya action or charge marked as a request must appear in its written EOR proposal before selection.

Trigger	Local facts	Competing options	Provider action	Customer action	Accountable owner	Deadline	Charge	Completion evidence
Mexico year-end pay	Full-year salary equivalent $6,000/month; modelled 15-day aguinaldo $3,000; pay before 20 Dec	Teamed	Confirm employing entity and role fit; calculate peso amount; show when funding is due and the zero-markup conversion line	Send signed salary terms and approve the calculation and USD funding	Teamed payroll owner, identified in proposal; US controller approves	Written plan by 10 Nov; employee payment before 20 Dec	Modelled $3,000 equivalent plus any applicable employer costs; service fee separately	Approved calculation, funding request, payslip and payment confirmation
Mexico year-end pay	Same employee and entitlement	Papaya conditional quote	Identify legal employer and responsible payroll person; state peso calculation, FX method, reserve and funding date	Send the same terms and approve the same payment	Papaya payroll owner, to be named; US controller approves	Written plan by 10 Nov; employee payment before 20 Dec	Same modelled employment amount; actual provider charges and reserve unconfirmed	Written scope and dated funding schedule, then payslip and payment confirmation
Philippine 13th-month pay	Full-year basic salary equivalent $3,000/month; modelled 13th-month pay $3,000; pay by 24 Dec	Teamed	Confirm employee coverage and local employer; show whether it accrues, when cash is called and who closes an exception	Confirm basic-pay record and approve the USD funding	Teamed payroll owner, identified in proposal; US controller approves	Written plan by 10 Nov; employee payment by 24 Dec	Modelled $3,000 equivalent plus any applicable employer costs; service fee separately	Approved calculation, funding request, payslip and payment confirmation
Philippine 13th-month pay	Same employee and entitlement	Papaya conditional quote	Document coverage, accrual, FX, reserve and funding date for its EOR arrangement	Provide the same basic-pay record and approval	Papaya payroll owner, to be named; US controller approves	Written plan by 10 Nov; employee payment by 24 Dec	Same modelled employment amount; actual provider charges and reserve unconfirmed	Written scope and dated funding schedule, then payslip and payment confirmation

Annual comparison. At their published starting fees, Teamed’s model is $144,000 + ($599 × 2 × 12) = $158,376. A Papaya scenario at $499 for each employee with an assumed 2% markup on all $144,000 converted employment cost is $144,000 + ($499 × 2 × 12) + ($144,000 × 2%) = $158,856. Teamed is $480 lower in this model. Bank charges, any non-converted lines, different benefits and actual country quotes could change both totals.

Opening cash is a separate test. With $9,000 of combined monthly gross salary, Teamed’s published deposit rule implies a $9,000 refundable deposit. On the fictional first-month budget of $9,000 salary + $2,500 other costs + $1,198 service, first-month funding would be $12,698; together that is $21,698 of opening cash if all amounts are called at once. The deposit is not added to annual expense. Confirm the actual invoice dates and included lines with Teamed. Papaya’s corresponding opening cash cannot be completed from its public EOR page: obtain its reserve amount and first funding date rather than writing zero in the comparison.

Change one assumption. If Papaya’s written EOR quote confirms zero FX markup while its $499 fee and every other model input hold, its annual total falls to $144,000 + $11,976 = $155,976. It becomes $2,400 lower than Teamed, and Papaya replaces Teamed as the cost-led choice if its country arrangements and cash dates also fit. That is a testable condition, not a claim that Papaya currently offers zero-markup EOR conversion.

5. Invite the providers who can close the decision

Invite Teamed and Papaya Global to price these exact roles first. Teamed has the stronger published case for a controller who wants no provider FX markup, itemised charges and one contact to carry the payroll question across both countries. Papaya has the lower published starting fee and a plausible cost win if its written conversion and funding terms support it. Invite Remote if the controller values its documented prefunding breakdown enough to test a potentially higher management fee. Deel remains a meaningful candidate when the employer is also consolidating contractors and employee workflows; its headline EOR fee alone does not settle this cash decision.

Request one redacted year-end payroll funding walkthrough from each finalist. Name the local employer, the person who prepares each calculation, the US approver, the date cash leaves the customer, the amount held as reserve, the exchange-rate method, the employee payment date and the proof that closes a correction. Choose the provider whose written two-country schedule clears the opening-cash ceiling and the local-arrangement gate at the lowest defensible annual cost. Do not sign a monthly-fee comparison in place of that schedule.