Next stupid tax idea

If it involves Joe Public paying the bill, it'll float with these barstewards

 

Unbelievable. So then the money the companies' save by not having to provide office space, maintenance staff and catering goes where exactly?

 

I know FR, there's so much wrong with this. It's a wonder who dreams this stuff up. I presume it means employees of "companies", as I think window cleaners/plumbers etc are classed as self employed - maybe. Individuals shouldn't be held accountable for this, it's not a perk. If companies want you to work from home, so they don't have to provide office space etc. then they shouldn't be expecting individuals to pay more tax for this. Then, as you rightly say, what about the people that have been working from home for a while. It's the wrong approach again

 

Why penalise people who are actually doing something to help with reducing global warming? Absolute madness. We should be encouraging anything which reduces traffic on our massively overused roads and thereby reduce our carbon footprint.

As usual, it's the workers who are targeted rather than the businesses who are saving huge amounts by closing office space.

 

I can see both arguments here. Those that work from home will also save on transport costs. I have to work and travel to work. There are those that can work from home. In effect the whole wage is their own. You could argue move. However, I think you should tax people to fund the difference or make companies pay people who travel towards their costs. Too many people want things their own way. Life is give and take.

 

I saw this earlier and my immediate thought was it was such a crackpot idea. There are so many sources of tax that already exist that could simply be collected properly. But I suspect this government will encourage more offshoring once EU legislations are gradually repealed and amended so larger corporations will employ more (seeing as there seems an undercurrent of pushing self employed and small companies out of existence) and the public purse handing huge sums of money to bigger outsourcers.

For those who remain and can or do work from home, it seems to jar against other alleged priorities. We can build massive new empty buildings, or we could look at making existing homes more energy efficient and greener and even consider new builds to incorporate home office space or ways to adapt old homes to have greater balance to them to allow some home working.

To tax people who work from home goes against that and encourages more behaviours that generate emissions and pollution.

Work life balance has been a big thing for a decade but hardly got off the ground. A pandemic made businesses change overnight. Doubts of productivity gone and certainly from many examples I've seen, output and hours worked have actually increased.

It also flies in the face of inclusion and diversity.

And the other thing to say, there are plenty of tax deductible expenses people can claim through a company structure that subsidise working from home. From light and heat, water, costs associated with a room used to work in and even a proportion of mortgage interest.

My guess is this is an attempt to repeal those claims to a degree, but without the feel of taking something away. It's probably also been considered as a way of generating some form of tax to make up for train and public transport lost revenue with numbers likely to fall in the near term. But of course, they could just shelve HS2 and save over £100bn instead.

 

It kind of makes me wish I'd worked harder and had a job in middle management because even with the tax for working from home I'd still be better off.

 

Proposal is for it to be paid by the employer rather than the employee.

 

The spirit of socialism is alive and well.

 

Yes, you are correct. The person working from home will save on transport costs, but what about the costs the companies' are saving by not providing office space (heating, lighting, security etc). So the answer to both employees and employers saving is..... To tax the working man again. I suppose they're going to argue that they aren't paying VAT on petrol and clothing etc. so they'll have to reap it back with some other stealth tax.

 

I get your point where do you draw the line. It gets tit for tat eventually.

 

You have to pay travel costs because you have a job that is in a different town to where you live. If you did the same job in Rotherham hospital you could walk/cycle and it would cost you nothing. You have the choice to move nearer to work - and save transport costs - but you might miss out on other things (close family, friends, quality of life, affordability of housing, etc).

I've had a similar argument for years - I could have got a job in Leeds paying £5k more per year, but the cost of petrol, parking and time spent makes it not worth the effort.

If you take a job knowing you can work from home for most of the time, you can live anywhere as long as you do the work. I live on the edge of town and my office is in London - I've been three times, and not likely to go again in the next six months.

I was seriously considering a move south so for the next job I could look at commuting into London daily, but with Covid and life and the new normal meaning that I don't need to be near an office, if I move it will be somewhere coastal where we could enjoy more of life.

 

Well.... not really tit for tat is it. We'll all have to do with the Government says, it's the law isn't it, but it doesn't make it right does it? They'd tax the air that you breathe if they could get away with it, I'm sure about that

 

When I lived in Reading, I knew people who would get a job in London that paid an extra £10k p.a. but the downside was an 90 minute train journey both ways, adding 3 hours onto their working day. I know which I would rather do and it isn't spending 3 hours on a train every day.....

 

Working from home might save travel costs, but theres additional costs in heating and electric.

 

Not really, quote from the article:

"have proposed making staff pay a 5% tax for each day they choose to work remotely. "

 

Is that "Remotely" meaning "at home" (or the cafe/pub/other location not an office), "Remotely" as in "at a supplier/client site", or "remotely" as in "At a different site to normal"?