A work-from-home tax?

[Stevicus]

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Choosing to earn a living from home once the pandemic ends is a privilege that you should pay for, according to strategists from Deutsche Bank AG’s research arm.

It's strange that a bank is actually proposing a new tax. And some people actually blame government for taxes...

“Working from home will be part of the ‘new normal’ well after the pandemic has passed,” the strategists led by Luke Templeman wrote in a note. “We argue that remote workers should pay a tax for the privilege.”

The team propose a 5% levy for those who work from home on a regular basis and not because of a government lockdown mandate. Such a measure could raise $48 billion a year in the U.S. and about 16 billion euros ($18.8 billion) in Germany, they say, to fund subsidies for low-income earners and essential workers who are unable to work remotely.

Working in the comfort of one’s own home saves money on travel, lunch and socializing, according to Deutsche Bank Research, and offers greater job security and flexibility, the strategists said. Yet people who are working remotely are also contributing less to the infrastructure of the economy, potentially extending the slump in national growth, they said.

“That is a big problem for the economy as it has taken decades and centuries to build up the wider business and economic infrastructure that supports face-to-face working,” Templeman said.

The proposed levy would be paid by the employer if they don’t provide their employee with a desk, whereas if the worker decides to stay home based on their own needs, they would be taxed for each day they work remotely, according to Deutsche Bank Research. In the U.S., the strategists calculate, such a tax could pay for a $1,500 grant to the 29 million workers making under $30,000 a year and unable to work from home.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

I can't confirm this but I've heard taxes are overall steeper for working from home vs. being employed anyway.

Edit: I mean being self-employed though. Not working for someone else from home. I guess this article might mean differently.

 

[Windwalker]

That's ridiculous.

 

[Audie]

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?



It's strange that a bank is actually proposing a new tax. And some people actually blame government for taxes...

Its good to be out of NYC!

 

[exchemist]

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?



It's strange that a bank is actually proposing a new tax. And some people actually blame government for taxes...

This article about explains the logic a bit better I think: Staff who work from home after pandemic 'should pay more tax'

Key points seem to me to be:

- applies only to those who opt to continue working from home permanently or semi-permanently after the virus restrictions are lifted

- these people would be no worse off, due to the savings they make on travel, lunch and work clothing

- it would help towards mitigating the deprivation of income suffered by the travel and hospitality sectors as a result of more home working.

- those with the option of working from home are mostly in the wealthier professions, whereas those in retail, hospitality, travel, construction etc that do not have the option tend to be less well off and in less secure employment.

So I don't think such a tax is quite as daft as it may initially sound. (Whether it could ever be collected effectively is probably another story.) There will need to be tax rises to pay for all this, that's for sure. So it's a question of who pays and how much.

But we do all need to start thinking about what practices in society are changing as a result of this virus experience and how government policy should adapt to cushion the blow on those that will suffer - and how to get the best out of the advantages.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?



It's strange that a bank is actually proposing a new tax. And some people actually blame government for taxes...

Im still flabbergasted on all these people thinking things are permanently amd forever changed. Even before this pandemic there were numerous and many studies showing people generally don't work as well when working at home (many freelancers rent and office because they don't work at home that well).

 

[Altfish]

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?



It's strange that a bank is actually proposing a new tax. And some people actually blame government for taxes...

People will just redefine a room at home as 'an office'

 

[Left Coast]

If you can do the same job from home that you did in an office, why should you pay an additional tax for it? I'm not understanding the reasoning here. You're not costing the system any more money.

 

[Nakosis]

This article about explains the logic a bit better I think: Staff who work from home after pandemic 'should pay more tax'

Key points seem to me to be:

- applies only to those who opt to continue working from home permanently or semi-permanently after the virus restrictions are lifted

- these people would be no worse off, due to the savings they make on travel, lunch and work clothing

- it would help towards mitigating the deprivation of income suffered by the travel and hospitality sectors as a result of more home working.

- those with the option of working from home are mostly in the wealthier professions, whereas those in retail, hospitality, travel, construction etc that do not have the option tend to be less well off and in less secure employment.

So I don't think such a tax is quite as daft as it may initially sound. (Whether it could ever be collected effectively is probably another story.) There will need to be tax rises to pay for all this, that's for sure. So it's a question of who pays and how much.

But we do all need to start thinking about what practices in society are changing as a result of this virus experience and how government policy should adapt to cushion the blow on those that will suffer - and how to get the best out of the advantages.

So you adjust your life/behavior to increase your available revenue. More money for you to save, perhaps provide for your retirement, less money for the government to spend on whatever the heck they feel is necessary to spend on.

The government doesn't like to figure out a way to reduce it's spending. They prefer instead to find a way to tax this new behavior.

A likely result is for people to again change their behavior. Perhaps return to work or find some other means to avoid the tax causing the government to come up with a way to tax the new behavior.

Seems a never-ending cycle of increasing taxes but never relief from them. Never, "we figured out how to reduce our ( the government's) spending so let's reduce the tax burden on the citizens. "

 

[Revoltingest]

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?



It's strange that a bank is actually proposing a new tax. And some people actually blame government for taxes...

I saw this in the news too.
Not every idea coming out of Germany is a good one.

 

[exchemist]

So you adjust your life/behavior to increase your available revenue. More money for you to save, perhaps provide for your retirement, less money for the government to spend on whatever the heck they feel is necessary to spend on.

The government doesn't like to figure out a way to reduce it's spending. They prefer instead to find a way to tax this new behavior.

A likely result is for people to again change their behavior. Perhaps return to work or find some other means to avoid the tax causing the government to come up with a way to tax the new behavior.

Seems a never-ending cycle of increasing taxes but never relief from them. Never, "we figured out how to reduce our ( the government's) spending so let's reduce the tax burden on the citizens. "

We are incurring costs of similar scale to those an economy incurs in wartime. Now is not the time to moan about taxes going up. They must and they will. It's just a question of who they are levied on and how much the levy will be.

 

[Nakosis]

We are incurring costs of similar scale to those an economy incurs in wartime. Now is not the time to moan about taxes going up. They must and they will. It's just a question of who they are levied on and how much the levy will be.

My concern is not so much the taxes but what this money is used for. It's not the government's money to be used for the government's benefit. Sometimes I feel politicians don't see it as such.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Its not a good idea to me. Businesses of all sizes tend to fall under the same regulations. Its already difficult to start a small business. Why make it even more complicated and stupid? Because government is always good and can't cause problems with its good intentions?

This will turn out to hurt those it purports to help, because businesses can pivot faster than the tax code can in this kind of tricky judgment call situation. Secondly it gives government more reasons to interfere in business operations. If its going to be taxed then why report to the government you are working from home? So then the government has an excuse to pay someone to check to see who is working from home -- and whatever else they happen to find out is icing. Its just a warrantless search. Its not good.

 

[MNoBody]

taxes are really punitive measures, punishments to goad people to move.