Tax those working from home an extra 5%?

My employer decided in August that the WFH thing was working so well that they could reduce overheads long term... they aim to have reduced office space by 50% by the end of 2021... that’s a hell of a saving for a global company but I can understand the effect on the business around each location.

that being said I see massive benefits too... the company is reducing their global carbon footprint created by the offices being open and also from the employees commuting.

they have also pumped millions Into the local economy by sourcing office equipment for each person able to work from home... a one off cost in most cases however the ancillary purchases will increase massively too... for example we had one printer between 12 of us in an office... we now have a printer each which will need toners thus boosting the supplies company we use

I am not particularly spending any less working from home except for fuel as I regularly walk got the local shop for a break and to get lunch/treats... I’d rather put my money in their pocket rather than Tesco like I did in the office
 
  • Like
Reactions: A
I guess there are different scenarios across the country -London based the travel card cost is a rather large saving which easily offsets the increased heating costs. There is less eating out as well so again more savings for those working from home. However I don’t see why that money should be taken away from them.

in other areas the wfh is really starting to bite as some of the more junior staff members in non London areas are really finding an increase in costs. They are requesting and rightly so in my opinion some help from their employers for this. If money is already tight then why should they have to pay additional costs.

as many have pointed out I think there are simpler ways to resolve this than the mooted 5per cent tax increase.
 
I think one lasting affect on the economy caused by Covid will be the tax burdens we will be lumbered with, due to the poor value the government has had from its huge spending, including many with strong links to tory MP's.

Eat out to help out anyone?
 
If you considers a lot of offices are probably in a lot if pension schemes so some our pensions would only suffer if offices closed
 
That's a pretty repugnant concept. If I want to work from home and my company allow me to I will. It's my home, I pay my taxes into the economy, why should I be charged from working from home?!
 
BoroMart said:
That's a pretty repugnant concept. If I want to work from home and my company allow me to I will. It's my home, I pay my taxes into the economy, why should I be charged from working from home?!
Click to expand...

Business rates , i think were all meant to get permission to use home address for work as well anyway .
 
festa5 said:
Given homeworkers are more likely to be female and more likely to be disabled where does this stand on grounds of discrimination? Even if employers have to pay it and then subsequently force people back in. It also makes the assumption that organisations with home workers can afford to pay it, which isn't necessarily the case.

That's probably just scratching the surface of what's wrong with it. Although looks like they're proposing it for the US where they obviously have a very different and more backwards (IMO) work culture than we do.
Click to expand...


The discrimination is making that assumption 😆🤔
 
Jonny Ingbar said:
I think one lasting affect on the economy caused by Covid will be the tax burdens we will be lumbered with, due to the poor value the government has had from its huge spending, including many with strong links to tory MP's.

Eat out to help out anyone?
Click to expand...
It would t surprise me if that came back in some form!!
 
Middlesbrough123 said:
Business rates , i think were all meant to get permission to use home address for work as well anyway .
Click to expand...
No we are not. People have worked from home instead of office and had small businesses working from home as long as there are no environmental issues, or changes to the property, then anyone can use their home for business.
 
'It argues this is only fair, as those who work from home are saving money and not paying into the system like those who go out to work.'

Who pays the extra cost of heating the home during office hours?
 
Barnsy said:
'It argues this is only fair, as those who work from home are saving money and not paying into the system like those who go out to work.'

Who pays the extra cost of heating the home during office hours?
Click to expand...
And running laptops/printers/lights everything else that would be switched off every day normally
 
Or alternatively, tax billionaires correctly and ensure the likes of Amazon pay their fair share.

But no, let's tax minimum wage call centre workers and admin staff more because companies would never pass this on 🙄😒.
 
Artie Fufkin said:
my company was adamant that WFH was not possible (this is pre-COVID), it was going through a rough patch (turns out it wasn't a patch but an irreparably bad strategy which they wont recover from, but that's another story) and i proposed that instead of fighting the union who wanted a 4% pay rise which was utter nonsense for a company who was only making 2-3 % profit, they should introduce WFH for 2/3 days a week for those who's jobs allow (i.e. a fuel/time/saving). this would obvs not be a pay rise, but would allow a little bit more cash in the pocket in lieu of a pay rise and assist people with a work/life balance. this was rejected as a pie in the sky suggestion and was rejected with force. Then COVID happened. All office staff successfully worked from home one the IT infrastructure was in place and bedded in. There were a couple of brown-nosers who wanted to go against the grain and side with management who insisted it couldn't work, but they also managed to do so when it was de rigeur

i suppose my long-winded point is that WFH is entirely possible for many and as Stu points out, it is much better from a local business POV, (a local sandwich shop, a local coffee house, etc.) and indeed a company POV - they dont need to pay for offices to house a person at a desk with a laptop. i accept there are incidental conversations, sometimes beneficial, that will be lost working this way, but IMO if you're that uncreative anyway and cant think to have a quick Teams/Zoom chat, you're value is not in a WFH role. my wife has WFH since early March and her productivity is way better since she isn't anywhere near as stressed
Click to expand...
You are spot on 👍
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top