KEY POINTS

House Republicans are considering treating work benefits such as employer-provided transportation, free food and on-site gyms as a new source of taxable income to help pay for President Trump’s tax cuts.

These tax proposals are still in the early stages and other aspects of Trump’s tax promises would help workers, such as tax breaks on tips, overtime pay and Social Security benefits.

The concept of taxing employee perks has been debated before in Congress and never made it far, but with the size of the deficit and Trump wanting trillions of dollars in expiring and new tax cuts, some budget pay-fors will need to be found, and this one would dip into workers’ pockets.

all 21 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 26 points 2 years ago (1 child)

If anyone says they're surprised by this they're either lying or complete morons.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    They are going to raise taxes in order to lower taxes?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Companies will just get rid of those perks, won't they?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    My assumption is that the employee would pay them, not the employer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    in australia, we call this fringe benefits tax and it’s paid by the employer. it tends to lead to employers giving less of these benefits, which was the point: it raises salary by a reasonably comenceate amount so employees receive actual wages rather than benefits that they have no choice over

    interesting side effect is that there’s some FBT stuff that doesn’t apply to charities, so you can do a thing called “salary sacrifice” (which is a well known, approved by the govt thing) where you pay some of your pre-tax salary thereby reducing your taxable income, but the charity doesn’t have to pay FBT. it’s a cheap way of providing charities with ways of incentivising their employees to stay

    if you’re interested:

    https://www.ato.gov.au/businesses-and-organisations/hiring-and-paying-your-workers/fringe-benefits-tax

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child)

    I tried to track down some information for the US, but it seems like the tax code around it is incredibly complicated and it's been a long time since I had a job where any kind of "gift" was given.

    In my somewhat limited experience, American corporations tend to look at employee related expenses holistically, so regardless of who writes the tax check and how the paperwork is shuffled, the expense is considered roughly the same.

    Edit: to tie into my original comment, it means that the company has decided what it has budgeted for employees, and any additional taxes would come out of future compensation adjustments and/or reduction in staff instead of showing up as a line item on the paycheck

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    yeah so that all makes sense. i think though that what that would mean is when they reshuffle and things wash out, people will end up with a higher salary and fewer benefits than they would have otherwise

    that also makes it much easier for employees to evaluate new jobs directly on compensation rather that foggy benefits

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    oh shit this affects a friend I have in the USA.......

  • source
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Now why would Trump tax his buddy's business policies?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 8 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    He is taxing the workers, not the businesses.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I took "treating work benefits such as employer-provided transportation, free food and on-site gyms as a new source of taxable income" as this will be taxed on the employer side because these things don't come out of person's paycheck, directly. The company supplies it as an incentive to work there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 6 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Taxing employees for fringe benefits such as employer-provided transportation, free food and on-site gyms is up for discussion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yea but, again. Fringe benefits are what employers give to the employees. I don't pay for access to my company gym.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    And you would continue to not pay for it, but you would pay taxes on it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Doesn't money need to be exchanged to be taxed though?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    If enacted, workers would likely have to pay income tax on the fair market value of the fringe benefits they are getting from their employer, said Jeff Martin, tax principal at Grant Thornton’s Washington National Tax Office. This would make these benefits less valuable to employees when taxes are factored in.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments