Remote workers' tax

[Sebastian Cobb]

I admit I deliberately exaggerated the bluntness of my point, but that's because I expected a few comments demonstrating a reluctance to pay taxes that wouldn't look out of place in the comments section of a Daily Mail article and wanted to look like the proud tax-paying socialist I am.

In any case, you don't know how much I used to spend on public transport, am paid by my employer or is taken off me in taxes. If you did, you might agree with my point!

Just because I might support a homeworkers tax on those who can afford it, it doesn't mean I don't support other, better forms of tax.

Anyway, I don't know how you'd implement this tax and it will likely never happen so it's a moot point.

If you want to prevent needless consumption, and it's probably best that you do if you want the planet to be hospitable, then you should be subsidising working from home.

[flotemysost]

Yeah, reading through this thread and the original linked article again and really, it just feels like a rather depressing reversion to the patronising idea that working from home is a special privilege that has to be earned (and can be taken away), rather than a theoretically completely viable and in many ways, far more effective way of working for a lot of people. (And I say this as someone who hates working from home full-time. As I've mentioned here millions of times this year already.)

One of my colleagues was already working from home one day per week pre-pandemic (because they were unable to get a nursery space on that day) and even though my team's roles are entirely digital, apparently it was a real struggle getting HR to agree to it because basically the widespread perception was that if you're working from home, you're pissing about and not doing a real day's work. Even after said colleague had been working this way for months, I'd still get people trying to reschedule meetings or contact me instead, because they just couldn't get their head around the idea that this person was still working and present even though they weren't physically in the office.

Undoubtedly there are some financial savings to be made from working at home but I'd argue that it's unlikely to be hugely significant for most people - e.g. I never spent £7 a day on lunch when I worked in the office, admittedly I'm not on £35K, but presumably the person that Deutsche Bank's example has in mind lives and works in a city and so would most likely already spend a fair chunk of their salary on rent and general living costs (not to mention the increase in energy bills, added pressure to have a stable Internet connection etc. that working from home brings).

As mentioned in my earlier post, lots of people have of course reviewed their living situation this year and moved somewhere more affordable further away from the office, now that they can, but it seems that would come with a catch too.

Like the example of my colleague's childcare situation, there are countless scenarios where normalising remote working could have a real positive impact on fair, inclusive hiring and career progression, but no, we're all just spoilt children who want to doss around in our jimjams all day and not pay the price.

[All Surrogate]

Noticed this on the Pret a Manger wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pret_a_Manger#Affective_labour_issues

If what is on Wikipedia is true, sounds like a rubbish place to work for.

This instantly made me think of Office Space - Minimum Flair.

[Johnny Yesno]

I admit I deliberately exaggerated the bluntness of my point, but that's because I expected a few comments demonstrating a reluctance to pay taxes that wouldn't look out of place in the comments section of a Daily Mail article and wanted to look like the proud tax-paying socialist I am.

In any case, you don't know how much I used to spend on public transport, am paid by my employer or is taken off me in taxes. If you did, you might agree with my point!

Just because I might support a homeworkers tax on those who can afford it, it doesn't mean I don't support other, better forms of tax.

Anyway, I don't know how you'd implement this tax and it will likely never happen so it's a moot point.

Well, bully for you. The salary for my job has gone down significantly in real terms since 2010. Half the week, my job was within walking distance and I took my lunch with me because I couldn't afford to be paying the prices at my workplace. I don't see why I should pay more tax on the basis that I'm travelling less. How about employers pay those low paid workers more?

They're setting up Austerity 2.0 and idiots like you are falling for it again. No wonder you're a starmtrooper. How about a stupidity tax?

[Johnny Yesno]

I was talking recently to a couple of people who've had to turn their houseshare dining room into a makeshift open-plan office.

Oh, that does sound shit and I worry that there will be no protection or compensation for workers who end up having to do this. Losing a significant chunk of your home space to work when it's not your choice can't be good for a person. I'm lucky that I'm in a situation where that isn't a problem.

[Sebastian Cobb]

In some houseshares even being able to do that to a dining room, rather than bodge it into yet another makeshift bedroom to cram another tenant in, could also be seen as a mild privilege. More's the pity.

[Zetetic]

Reminder that you can claim £60 back on tax this year:
https://blog.moneysavingexpert.com/2020/04/martin-lewis--working-from-home-due-to-coronavirus--claim-p6-wk-/

(I haven't bothered. I don't know how to feel about it like I don't know how to feel about ticking the Gift Aid box.)

[Blinder Data]

Well, bully for you. The salary for my job has gone down significantly in real terms since 2010. Half the week, my job was within walking distance and I took my lunch with me because I couldn't afford to be paying the prices at my workplace. I don't see why I should pay more tax on the basis that I'm travelling less. How about employers pay those low paid workers more?

They're setting up Austerity 2.0 and idiots like you are falling for it again. No wonder you're a starmtrooper. How about a stupidity tax?

No bother mate, I'd just bung it all in an idiotic ISA and avoid it ;)

Sorry for wanting to pay more tax. On reflection I can see that a home worker's tax is a silly proposal and will never happen. I just think it's unfair that millions of people like me (often middle-class) now have extra income when there are people out there who can't work from home and are getting fucked.

Also, you seemed to have missed this crucial point:

Just because I might support a homeworkers tax on those who can afford it, it doesn't mean I don't support other, better forms of tax.

[dissolute ocelot]

If I stay home and burn a gallon of petrol every day in my incense burner and go to the Subway round the corner, can I escape the tax? It does piss on everything we've heard for years about the damage commuting causes to the environment, to people's lungs, to those hit by cars, and those children who never see their parents because daddy or mummy has to leave at 6am and get home at 8pm.

Shortly before the whole Covid lockdown the Scottish government announced plans to tax workplace parking, and a lot of places are talking about introducing or extending congestion taxes and other ways to disincentivise driving. So are we talking about a situation where you get taxed if you go to work and taxed if you stay at home? Is that really Deutsche Bank's progressive socialist vision? On the other hand, the entire public transport system is about to go bankrupt so maybe we should just give them all our money.

[Johnny Yesno]

Sorry for wanting to pay more tax. On reflection I can see that a home worker's tax is a silly proposal and will never happen. I just think it's unfair that millions of people like me (often middle-class) now have extra income when there are people out there who can't work from home and are getting fucked.

Perhaps you should pay more tax on your wealth, then. That would actually be progressive. You could also argue for higher wages for low paid workers, which is where the actual problem lies.

Also, you seemed to have missed this crucial point:

Just because I might support a homeworkers tax on those who can afford it, it doesn't mean I don't support other, better forms of tax.

No, I didn't miss it. It's contradictory. Like much of 'centrist' thinking.

A homeworking tax is as stupid and regressive as a window tax and should be resisted aggressively by anyone who considers themselves remotely left wing. Fuck, I'm absolutely furious that that fucking treacherous rag has uncritically printed this cunt's propaganda.

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

I would have no problem paying more tax if that tax money would help pay the Pandemic Unemployment Payment and tide over local businesses (as in pubs and shops, big corporations can fuck off). I'm very lucky, I have a decent stable job and I've never been out of work in the sixteen years since leaving university. But at the same time adults of working age are living in fucking house-shares. So make big fucking business pay more fucking tax, the amount of money they have and the pissy little amount they get away with paying.

[bgmnts]

I would have no problem paying more tax if that tax money would help pay the Pandemic Unemployment Payment and tide over local businesses (as in pubs and shops, big corporations can fuck off). I'm very lucky, I have a decent stable job and I've never been out of work in the sixteen years since leaving university. But at the same time adults of working age are living in fucking house-shares. So make big fucking business pay more fucking tax, the amount of money they have and the pissy little amount they get away with paying.

This in a nutshell really.

[colacentral]

Within a couple of months of working from home, I received an email survey with the question: "since you are saving money working from home, would you rather continue to work from home for a slightly smaller wage in the future?" So a nice double whammy of tax and pay cut would cancel out the financial benefit of me working from home, at no extra cost (actually, to the profit) of my employer.

Silly me for wanting to save.

[flotemysost]

I would have no problem paying more tax if that tax money would help pay the Pandemic Unemployment Payment and tide over local businesses (as in pubs and shops, big corporations can fuck off). I'm very lucky, I have a decent stable job and I've never been out of work in the sixteen years since leaving university. But at the same time adults of working age are living in fucking house-shares. So make big fucking business pay more fucking tax, the amount of money they have and the pissy little amount they get away with paying.

Yes, absolutely this. I recognise I'm very fortunate to have been able to consistently earn my full salary throughout this year, while making some savings on transport and the occasional lunch/coffee out (I normally brought packed lunches to work and walked to the office when I could, as my rent is pretty extortionate so was already trying to save where I could - I definitely wasn't splashing £7 a day on chekky Prets).

I would very gladly pay an "arts/local businesses/relief for local people facing poverty, homelessness etc." tax, and I made a habit at the start of lockdown where I donate the amount I'd have spent that month on transport, the pub etc. to a different charity every payday.

However the implication that everyone who's working remotely is currently living the life of Riley and rolling in cash is frankly insulting. I'm one of the many many working adults living in flatshares (well, I actually just moved to a rented place on my own last week - which I can only afford because of working remotely/life being on hold generally, and I'll almost certainly have to move back to a flatshare once we get covid done) - and then you've got people with young families living in cramped accommodation (because that's all they can afford, having based their location on being close to an office in a city) who are trying to work while their newly-sequestered kids go batshit around them, etc. etc.

Also it's unfairly punitive to workers who are now having oportunities opened up to them that would previously have been shut off by needing to physically be in an office - e.g. people not from a socioeconomic background that means they can live rent-free in a city while going to job interviews/doing unpaid work experience, those with disabilities that make it hard to commute or work from an office, etc.

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

They just really want to keep people poor and prevent them from having kids.

[Johnny Yesno]

Within a couple of months of working from home, I received an email survey with the question: "since you are saving money working from home, would you rather continue to work from home for a slightly smaller wage in the future?

'Have you stopped beating your wife?'

[olliebean]

Within a couple of months of working from home, I received an email survey with the question: "since you are saving money working from home, would you rather continue to work from home for a slightly smaller wage in the future?" So a nice double whammy of tax and pay cut would cancel out the financial benefit of me working from home, at no extra cost (actually, to the profit) of my employer.

Silly me for wanting to save.

I'd have been inclined to respond, "Is the work I've been doing from home worth less to you than the work I do in the office?" I suppose "Since you are saving money by having me work from home, would you rather I continue to work from home for a slightly larger wage in the future?" might be pushing it a bit.

[JaDanketies]

Seems reasonable. I'm saving a chunk of my salary not getting the train everyday or buying lunch/coffees. Poor buggers who can't work from home like me are getting screwed. As long as they don't take the piss and those on higher wages pay a larger share, I'd gladly pay more tax.

Sorry mate but it's not for workers to have savings. You need to be continually one paycheque away from devastation for the economy to function correctly. If you're not rich enough to hoard rather than save, then we're not going to support you. 

[paruses]

Within a couple of months of working from home, I received an email survey with the question: "since you are saving money working from home, would you rather continue to work from home for a slightly smaller wage in the future?" So a nice double whammy of tax and pay cut would cancel out the financial benefit of me working from home, at no extra cost (actually, to the profit) of my employer.

Silly me for wanting to save.

Jesus. Can I ask what industry you work in? Is it a big company?

[bgmnts]

So the wages you get for your job are partially expenses for travel and food? Madness.

[Sebastian Cobb]

You'd think companies would mind their own business after they've paid you but they won't.

One I worked for was very aggressive with pushing staff into buying shares, to the point one of the directors started sending me beggy emails because whilst they couldn't make me get them, it was one of their KPI objectives to have 100% take-up.

While they would've matched what I bought, so buying then cashing out would've amounted to free money, I couldn't be bothered with the admin, didn't want the shares and resented the hard sell so refused to annoy them.

[wooders1978]

So the fact I've spent a fortune going to and fro from work for the last 20 years counts for nothing?

They should also tax people who walk or cycle to the office and people who bring their own lunch shouldn't they? According to their own logic

[olliebean]

Obviously they should absolutely tax the fuck out of anyone who earns enough from their own labour (as opposed to other people's) to cover more than the bare minimum required to survive.

[IsavedLatin]

Within a couple of months of working from home, I received an email survey with the question: "since you are saving money working from home, would you rather continue to work from home for a slightly smaller wage in the future?" So a nice double whammy of tax and pay cut would cancel out the financial benefit of me working from home, at no extra cost (actually, to the profit) of my employer.

Silly me for wanting to save.

A couple of other posters have jumped to the conclusion that this survey came from your employer, colacentral: can you confirm whether this was the case, or was it just some crap market research co.?

[paruses]

Ah - fair point. Hadn't processed the email survey bit.

[colacentral]

A couple of other posters have jumped to the conclusion that this survey came from your employer, colacentral: can you confirm whether this was the case, or was it just some crap market research co.?

I am on a long term contract in financial services, so the agency that provides my contracts sent it to me. I know people working through other agencies who received the same.

So far they haven't announced anything, but I assume once it's renewal time there will be new terms.

[IsavedLatin]

I am on a long term contract in financial services, so the agency that provides my contracts sent it to me. I know people working through other agencies who received the same.

So far they haven't announced anything, but I assume once it's renewal time there will be new terms.

What absolute horseshit, colacentral, really sorry to hear that.

[olliebean]

Oh, an agency. Chances are they're not offering the employers lower rates, just trying to get away with leeching a bit more off your wages for themselves for doing absolutely nothing.

[Pinball]

Remote working should be incentivised as it benefits the environment, not penalised as taxation. Always it's the ordinary, powerless worker who gets screwed.

[JaDanketies]

Remote working should be incentivised as it benefits the environment, not penalised as taxation. Always it's the ordinary, powerless worker who gets screwed.

The citizens get screwed and the climate gets screwed so people with obscene sums of money can sponge up even more, despite the fact that this increased income will make no difference to their quality of life. And the world keeps turning.