Anecdotally it's more than that among non-tech workers.
The bay is beautiful, but right now its best features are the weather and the fact that you can get to mountains, desert, snow, and beach in a day.
That's available elsewhere
2 Out of 3 tech workers would leave SF permanently if they could work remotely
11–20 of 35 posts
Re: 2 Out of 3 tech workers would leave SF permanently if they could work remotely
#12bs
Re: 2 Out of 3 tech workers would leave SF permanently if they could work remotely
#13How do companies know you actually live in SF? It seems like there is a real opportunity for near-remote - ala Fort Bragg, Santa Cruz, Sierras without this penalty.
Well, coronavirus situation excepted, they know whether you show up in the office every day.
Re: 2 Out of 3 tech workers would leave SF permanently if they could work remotely
#14How much of its tax base will CA loose to other states/countries over the next 10 years if WFH does become a thing? CA should really think super hard about incentivizing those leaving SF/Bay Area to settle elsewhere in CA. That will be a net benefit for California.
Probably none. They will sue saying you left to avoid taxes. The California courts will agree with the State. Now you get to pay taxes in both localities.
[deleted]
Re: 2 Out of 3 tech workers would leave SF permanently if they could work remotely
#15How much of its tax base will CA loose to other states/countries over the next 10 years if WFH does become a thing? CA should really think super hard about incentivizing those leaving SF/Bay Area to settle elsewhere in CA. That will be a net benefit for California.
Currently, I'm hiring for a remote US-based position, but may not consider candidates in CA. My HR department says that having a single remote employee in CA leads to tax claims on a company's overall revenue (and a lot of paperwork). Hopefully, most states will soon realize that having remote workers working for out-of-state employers is actually a very good deal for them (income from out of state, reduced road maintenance, etc.)
Re: 2 Out of 3 tech workers would leave SF permanently if they could work remotely
#16FYI, this is a survey of 4400 Blind users. Which basically means this is a garbage survey.
Re: 2 Out of 3 tech workers would leave SF permanently if they could work remotely
#17How much of its tax base will CA loose to other states/countries over the next 10 years if WFH does become a thing? CA should really think super hard about incentivizing those leaving SF/Bay Area to settle elsewhere in CA. That will be a net benefit for California.
CA companies won't pay CA level salaries to remote workers in other states.
Moreover, many won't even consider hiring out of state workers, as that would expose them to additional labor laws they would need to comply with, making remote workers in other states almost as expensive as in state remote workers.
Re: 2 Out of 3 tech workers would leave SF permanently if they could work remotely
#18I feel like there's an implied "and keep their comp". There are a decent number of remote jobs out there right now. They pay well, but certainly not SF TC.
More or less this. If you're making the same take home comp in SF as you are in the mid west, why go to live somewhere where the climate isn't as pleasant year round?
Re: 2 Out of 3 tech workers would leave SF permanently if they could work remotely
#19How much of its tax base will CA loose to other states/countries over the next 10 years if WFH does become a thing? CA should really think super hard about incentivizing those leaving SF/Bay Area to settle elsewhere in CA. That will be a net benefit for California.
Currently, I'm hiring for a remote US-based position, but may not consider candidates in CA. My HR department says that having a single remote employee in CA leads to tax claims on a company's overall revenue (and a lot of paperwork). Hopefully, most states will soon realize that having remote workers working for out-of-state employers is actually a very good deal for them (income from out of state, reduced road main…
Your HR department is wrong. California lets companies choose how their income should be allocated to the state. Employees in state is just one of the options. You should speak to a tax lawyer or accounting firm.
Re: 2 Out of 3 tech workers would leave SF permanently if they could work remotely
#20How much of its tax base will CA loose to other states/countries over the next 10 years if WFH does become a thing? CA should really think super hard about incentivizing those leaving SF/Bay Area to settle elsewhere in CA. That will be a net benefit for California.
CA companies won't pay CA level salaries to remote workers in other states. Moreover, many won't even consider hiring out of state workers, as that would expose them to additional labor laws they would need to comply with, making remote workers in other states almost as expensive as in state remote workers.
“ CA companies won't pay CA level salaries to remote workers in other states.” - this is True. However, in my experience the pay difference is smaller than CA income tax. And then there is cost of living