Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

nolo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 462 posts

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#291

Post by nodesocket »

lopkeny12ko wrote: post #99

Many young people or those cheering for employee/consumer rights do not seem to understand that this does more net harm than good. For small businesses and startups, this can amount to millions of dollars of additional expenses. Like any economically rational entity, your employer is going to respond by reducing headcount, not hiring in CA anymore, cutting costs in your annual raises, or some combination of the above…

Not to mention I have seen people abuse home office budgets and buy things not related to work. You are already getting paid, as a small business owner this culture of abusing companies runs rampant especially with millennials for some reason.

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#292

Post by chasd00 »

pfannkuchen wrote: post #67
ghaff wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you're going to pay for an extra room--which seems very unlikely (or should be) to be reimbursable as opposed to working on the kitchen table--the actual incremental costs seem pretty trivial. Even if you reimburse some pro-rated amount of internet and/or mobile, that's maybe $100/month in the US. ADDED: If you don't have an option to go into an office, a stipend for a co-working space may be reasonable.

> working [full time] on the kitchen table Good luck with your debilitating back issues in 10 years.

> Good luck with your debilitating back issues in 10 years.

i said this up thread, make sure you get a good, solid, office chair. Work at the kitchen table but sit in something that's specifically designed to have a human in it for 8 hrs a day without killing the human.

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#293

Post by renewiltord »

sokoloff wrote: post #161
renewiltord wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but the rest of us don't want that because we have to pick up the slack in taxes. Personally, I would prefer if I just didn't pay any income taxes. That way, I would save a few hundred thousand and my employer could pay me a hundred thousand less and I'd come out ahead.

You should be opposed to this California law then, because it is codifying that these are required business expenses and eligible for exactly this treatment.

There's no new law. This is just someone's interpretation of existing tax law. You'll be hard-pressed to gain anything worthwhile from this. Doubt it will even exceed the standard deduction so no one takes it. If you do the whole "this area is my work space" deduction, you increase your chance of being audited. And then all the gains are wasted in handling that thing which is a bloody hassle.

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#294

Post by dehrmann »

hyperpape wrote: post #273
dehrmann wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California has more people, a larger economy, and more mindshare. It's probably safe to assume "CA" outside something obviously Canadian is California. Even Ontario CA is 50/50.

In the past few years, Canada's population passed that of California. Canada's population is growing very fast, while California's has grown modestly for a decade, and slightly shrank over the past few years.

Go into Spotify and search for songs with Canada in the name. Now try California.

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#295

Post by 8note »

FireBeyond wrote: post #272
PM_me_your_math wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might want to retake your constitutional law courses. The Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8) grants the government power to regulate business. It does not grant citizens the right to do business. The right to do business and participate in commerce and trade is a natural right. You do not allow businesses to exist. You are nobody.

Then being more specific: you do not have a right to a profitable/successful business. Nobody is required to inconvenience themselves for the benefit of your business and pocket.

More specifically, you don't have a right to limit your liability

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#296

Post by coffeebeqn »

ghaff wrote: post #266
changoplatanero wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On principle, yes. The superbowl halftime show is a good example. As an observer, sometimes its hard to tell if the artist in the halftime show is being paid by the NFL to entertain the fans or if they are paying the NFL (effectively accepting a negative wage) for the chance to promote their personal brand. If they can accept a negative wage when they want why can't I be free to negotiate the same for myself?

You pretty much can as a non-employee. I'm fully able to earn well below minimum wage writing a book for reputational purposes.

Heck - start a restaurant or something and make -$30k a year for a few years

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#297

Post by frumper »

jandrese wrote: post #259
cryptonector wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why not then demand that your employer cover your [reasonable] commuting costs, and even pay you for [reasonable] time spent commuting? That would greatly exceed your WFH costs, no doubt. It's trivial to add demands like this. Employers have more pull in the legislatures than employees, so be careful what you wish for.

I think California already requires employers to do that. What I find surprising is that everybody thinks employers are going to jump all over these requirements and work their hardest to make sure they are 100% in compliance instead of mostly ignoring them and making only a token effort to be in compliance. "We offered to buy chairs for the workers, what more do you want?"

California certainly does not require employers to cover commute costs.

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#299

Post by xyzelement »

ToucanLoucan wrote: post #252
chasd00 wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The last year or so I've had to make a lot of adjustments to my life to account for everything getting more expensive keep driving people out of business then get ready for lots more "adjustments" to your life and standard of living.

Honestly my life would get notably better if a few different VC-burning silicon valley companies would hop in a deep fryer, so this really isn't the threat you think it is.

//my life would get notably better if a few different VC-burning silicon valley companies would hop in a deep fryer

how?

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#300

Post by sokoloff »

renewiltord wrote: post #293
sokoloff wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should be opposed to this California law then, because it is codifying that these are required business expenses and eligible for exactly this treatment.

There's no new law. This is just someone's interpretation of existing tax law. You'll be hard-pressed to gain anything worthwhile from this. Doubt it will even exceed the standard deduction so no one takes it. If you do the whole "this area is my work space" deduction, you increase your chance of being audited. And then all the gains are wasted in handling that thing which is a bloody hassle.

What does an employer reimbursement of remote worker expense have to do with a standard deduction?
Post reply on HN