11–20 of 264 posts
In the US of course, we deduct our home office from our taxes, meaning that our fellow citizens, or debt, support working from home. Thos seems like a saner solution.
This is the case only if you think that paying taxes is some form of duty.
> The judges estimated a monthly compensation of CHF150 ($154) for the employee’s rent to be justified. I thought it was a token amount, but then I don't know what rent in switzerland is like. Is that like 3% or 30% ?
In Zurich 1500 would be a low rent, and 3000 would get you a 2 bedroom with view and quite spacious +80m^2
In the US of course, we deduct our home office from our taxes, meaning that our fellow citizens, or debt, support working from home. Thos seems like a saner solution.
I see this pattern amongst Americans these days thinking these sorta of shenanigans and morally questionable laws is unique to them? Is it a form of self flagellation?
Certain European countries let tax payers pay for 80% of their foreign/migrant workforce without getting their growing revenue or equity to the state.
I'm confused, what is the additional expense that employees are incurring by being home? Don't they pay the same rent either way?
I don't get it. Why should someone working from home make more money than someone who does not?
That's not what this is. This is: Your employer should provide the means for you to do the work they ask of you.
As a person in the US where "health insurance" is so tangled up with employers I can tell you, the last thing anyone should want is more financial entanglements between employees and employers.
In the US of course, we deduct our home office from our taxes, meaning that our fellow citizens, or debt, support working from home. Thos seems like a saner solution.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2020/03/23/wor...
> The judges estimated a monthly compensation of CHF150 ($154) for the employee’s rent to be justified. I thought it was a token amount, but then I don't know what rent in switzerland is like. Is that like 3% or 30% ?
For reference, in Norway, a lower-tier apartment would go for about >9000 NOK/month. You could find cheaper, but that'd be <20 square meters, or really kind landlords. (I've managed to secure two short-term contracts for a small urban apartment and a small rural house for 6000 NOK respectively, but that wasn't market rate in either case.)
- Companies that now realised that remote schemes works for them, will push for that scheme to remain, with the aim of reducing their fixed costs (office rent, utilities, insurance, etc).
- This eliminates a big chunk of fixed costs... as most are shifted to the employees.
- If authorities/employees start demanding that part of those costs are covered by the company, companies will push to get avoid work-from-home schemes, as they will want more control over those expenses...
I'm sure that there are other unintended consequences, such as higher rents, but who knows.