Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be
-
@dyasny said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@Dashrender said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
But the reason for giving the car was to save the company money - not because the employee wanted a car more than they wanted cash.
There were more reasons than that. Even when the companies stopped making more money than they knew what to do with, company cars were a group benefit. An employee would pay something for the lease, but much less than he would be paying if he bought or leased a car on his own. A large IT company with a park of several thousand leased cars could get really good terms from the leasing company, and paying the initial downpayment, covering the gas, and paying a portion of the lease are all tax deductibles. Everyone wins
Of course - I thought I mentioned something to that effect? I did, in the next quoted part.
Cash would normally be the more desirable perk versus a car or other benefit - unless the benefit provided via the company was considerable less than what the employee could get it directly for.
When you get health benefits from a company, are they usually better than if you got the same conditions on your own? Why should companies provide health and dental if it's not a good business model for them? Same principle, only with car leases (in the latter stage). Imagine those health benefits costing you nothing, company covers 100% (that's how the cars were in the earlier stages), would you prefer not to take them?
It used to be covered 100%, but just like your car example, the costs of said insurance went up, tax benefit went down, so the companies started splitting the costs with employees (I pay 20%, company pays 80%).
Can I get as good of coverage as my company provides? Yes, will it cost me even more? yep... there is savings in collective purchasing, so it's more cost effective for the company to buy it, and me split it with them, again, just like your car example.Not saying it's bad - just saying each employee might want something different.
It was absolutely optional
You had the option to refuse the car, and get some cash value instead? Clearly you did the math and found that keeping the car was more financially sound, right?
-
@dyasny said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@scottalanmiller car resellers made their money, but they also hire people, and there's fleet management, repairs, towing etc etc etc. There was no law in place, in fact it was a law that eventually ended up killing that industry, but while it lasted, it kept thousands of families employed.
Any money that is sent into circulation is better than being put in a pocket. Taxes are quite often yet another pocket (or they get spent on bs like funding foreign interests which doesn't promote anything locally). Money spent in the local market on whatever, generates jobs, because money spent means demand, and demand has to be met by supply. Government encouraging companies to do that by lowering taxes is doing itself a favour, as well as the economy in general.
None of that applies. No one is saying the money is fake, it's that corruption is directing it into the hands of the wrong people. It doesn't help the economy in general. That's the fake part, it hurts the overall economy by taking money from those that would earn it and rewarding corruption instead of labour.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
Higher pay retains people too, and better I'd argue. I'll take pay over a car any day, in fact, I'd rather not have a car at all.
Look at it as if these were health benefits. As a group, you get better individual terms from an insurance company. The same happened with car leases. Of course, if you prefer to go without, you can, but the cash difference is laughable compared to the cost of leasing the same car privately. In Israel, public transport is total crap, so pretty much everyone needs to have a car to get around. And cars are double the US price for the same model (100% import tax). So it was really worth it, while it lasted.
-
@Jimmy9008 said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@Dashrender said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@dyasny said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@JaredBusch said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
That is totally creating fake jobs. Jobs that exist for no reason. Why should a company pay to lease cars it doesn't need? It could simply pay out mileage or some other small compensation that costs a ton less than leasing vehicles.
The company would make more profit, hopefully invest that back into growing the company more and creating a good cycle of growth.
No, the company would simply pay more taxes and instead of letting employees have better conditions, only the government benefits.
@JaredBusch missed the whole point of why cars were added - it was for salary position, i.e. the company having to pay less payroll taxes while 'paying' the employees more through the benefit of the lease being one of their benefits.
As mentioned above by me - some employees might want and be OK with this, while others would likely want the cash.
Here's another way to look at this.
In the US, larger companies provide healthcare coverage for their employees, this coverage is part of the employee salary package. There are tax benefits for the companies paying this.
But let's say an employee had their own health coverage - so they didn't want/need the company's supplied one - will the company give them the cash they would otherwise pay the insurance company? Some companies will, some won't.
I have a car. I'd want the cash thanks...
See @dyasny situation was different - every company he worked at for 20 years offered the car as part of his compensation, so likely he didn't own one himself. So that changes things.
-
@JaredBusch said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@dyasny said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@IRJ said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
Spending money for the sake of spending money and creating fake jobs because of it, is just smoke and mirrors. No real world problem is solved. It's ok though because we can just print more money. Economic Stimulus is nice and all, but it is really just a temp solution. You cant keep throwing out money to solve issues that dont exists. This is the kind of stuff that builds up over time and creates issues. You need to find a real solution of the long term that provides value.
Nothing fake about creating jobs there. I have friends who worked for those fleet management companies, and the food they put on the table was real enough.
That is totally creating fake jobs. Jobs that exist for no reason. Why should a company pay to lease cars it doesn't need? It could simply pay out mileage or some other small compensation that costs a ton less than leasing vehicles.
The company would make more profit, hopefully invest that back into growing the company more and creating a good cycle of growth.
Right, that's people getting paid for something that wouldn't be needed except for a corrupt tax dodge.
-
@Dashrender said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
You had the option to refuse the car, and get some cash value instead? Clearly you did the math and found that keeping the car was more financially sound, right?
absolutely. Nobody is stupid
-
@dyasny said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@JaredBusch said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
That is totally creating fake jobs. Jobs that exist for no reason. Why should a company pay to lease cars it doesn't need? It could simply pay out mileage or some other small compensation that costs a ton less than leasing vehicles.
The company would make more profit, hopefully invest that back into growing the company more and creating a good cycle of growth.
No, the company would simply pay more taxes and instead of letting employees have better conditions, only the government benefits.
That's a false comparison to make the corruption sound reasonable. The alternatives are not the taxes staying higher, but lowering evenly across the board.
If you feel that the government keeping money never goes back to the economy, then you believe that the corruption is even worse that we were saying.
-
@Dashrender said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
See @dyasny situation was different - every company he worked at for 20 years offered the car as part of his compensation, so likely he didn't own one himself. So that changes things.
LOL 16, not 20
I left that particular country after that -
@Dashrender said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@dyasny said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@Dashrender there's also a value in providing a benefit, employee retention is an important metric which translates to dollars. And a car is so much more than a coffee machine.
But the reason for giving the car was to save the company money - not because the employee wanted a car more than they wanted cash.
Cash would normally be the more desirable perk versus a car or other benefit - unless the benefit provided via the company was considerable less than what the employee could get it directly for.
Company A: offers me $100K,
company B offers me $97K + $3k car (lease)I might want the cash more than the car because I can get a cheaper car. the cash can go into savings for my retirement, etc.
Not saying it's bad - just saying each employee might want something different.
But in the old days - it was in the companies benefit to give the car as part because of less taxes paid.
And Scott is talking about doing the same for his non US resident employees.
Yup, everyone loses except for the "friends of the government." It's a horrible way to run a government, but the businesses are just responding in a logical way to being stuck in a corrupt system.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
Right, that's people getting paid for something that wouldn't be needed except for a corrupt tax dodge.
Are group benefits a corrupt tax dodge?
-
@Dashrender said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@dyasny said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@IRJ said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
Spending money for the sake of spending money and creating fake jobs because of it, is just smoke and mirrors. No real world problem is solved. It's ok though because we can just print more money. Economic Stimulus is nice and all, but it is really just a temp solution. You cant keep throwing out money to solve issues that dont exists. This is the kind of stuff that builds up over time and creates issues. You need to find a real solution of the long term that provides value.
Nothing fake about creating jobs there. I have friends who worked for those fleet management companies, and the food they put on the table was real enough.
That's not what he means by fake. Those jobs are real enough - but it's a fake economy created by laws that benefit the leasing companies. If the tax laws simply reduced taxes instead, the companies could pay the employees more, then the employees would have more money to spend, and other industries would be created where people want to spend their money. this would be a more natural economy, not a fake one created by tax regulation.
Right, they are "real" job in the same way that any welfare job is real. It's a "freebie" job that no one earns, and is created through corruption. This is standard the world over. And in the US we see this in non-profits constantly. Vendor A slips some cash or buys a golf club membership for a decision maker at a company (a bribe), that decision maker than gives that vendor the advantage to get contracts. In many cases, the person doing this also owns part of the vendor making the money.
-
@dyasny said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@scottalanmiller said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
Higher pay retains people too, and better I'd argue. I'll take pay over a car any day, in fact, I'd rather not have a car at all.
Look at it as if these were health benefits. As a group, you get better individual terms from an insurance company. The same happened with car leases. Of course, if you prefer to go without, you can, but the cash difference is laughable compared to the cost of leasing the same car privately. In Israel, public transport is total crap, so pretty much everyone needs to have a car to get around. And cars are double the US price for the same model (100% import tax). So it was really worth it, while it lasted.
That's just more corruption - again the taxes are being used to drive this fake economy. If taxes were more normal/fair, then people would buy their own cars, driving the prices down, and more money to be spent in free enterprises.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
That's a false comparison to make the corruption sound reasonable. The alternatives are not the taxes staying higher, but lowering evenly across the board.
Lowering taxes is not an option over there. One of the main painpoints that made me leave.
If you feel that the government keeping money never goes back to the economy, then you believe that the corruption is even worse that we were saying.
Government spending is not under the control of the citizens, whatever we all want to believe. I'm pretty sure your government doesn't give you an account of where each dollar you paid in taxes went.
-
@Dashrender said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
But let's say an employee had their own health coverage - so they didn't want/need the company's supplied one - will the company give them the cash they would otherwise pay the insurance company? Some companies will, some won't.
Right, those "benefits" apply unevenly and are better for the companies, but worse for the employees. People in dual income families (generally the poorest parts of society) get hurt the most as they need the money more and are less able to leverage the benefits as the benefits are not individually tailored (normally.)
-
@dyasny said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
It was absolutely optional
What was the alternative? More pay equal to the cost of the car?
-
@dyasny said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@scottalanmiller said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
Right, that's people getting paid for something that wouldn't be needed except for a corrupt tax dodge.
Are group benefits a corrupt tax dodge?
If taxes are the benefit - then yes. it's a corrupt tax dodge.
But the insurance companies themselves offering lower prices to their customers has nothing to do with taxes.
-
@Jimmy9008 said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@Dashrender said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@dyasny said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@JaredBusch said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
That is totally creating fake jobs. Jobs that exist for no reason. Why should a company pay to lease cars it doesn't need? It could simply pay out mileage or some other small compensation that costs a ton less than leasing vehicles.
The company would make more profit, hopefully invest that back into growing the company more and creating a good cycle of growth.
No, the company would simply pay more taxes and instead of letting employees have better conditions, only the government benefits.
@JaredBusch missed the whole point of why cars were added - it was for salary position, i.e. the company having to pay less payroll taxes while 'paying' the employees more through the benefit of the lease being one of their benefits.
As mentioned above by me - some employees might want and be OK with this, while others would likely want the cash.
Here's another way to look at this.
In the US, larger companies provide healthcare coverage for their employees, this coverage is part of the employee salary package. There are tax benefits for the companies paying this.
But let's say an employee had their own health coverage - so they didn't want/need the company's supplied one - will the company give them the cash they would otherwise pay the insurance company? Some companies will, some won't.
I have a car. I'd want the cash thanks...
Same here. Company cars are great for company owners where it's just a tax free way to buy a car. For staff, it's a questionable value at best.
-
@Dashrender said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
That's just more corruption - again the taxes are being used to drive this fake economy. If taxes were more normal/fair, then people would buy their own cars, driving the prices down, and more money to be spent in free enterprises.
That is not an option over there unfortunately. I'm talking about what was happening in given conditions, not about how to change the way the government works in a particular country. Moreover, I was unhappy enough with the way things were over there to have immigrated 9000km away.
The entire car leasing thing would have kept working, if the government didn't decide it's a taxable benefit, and raised the tax to the point it was cheaper to just buy a car (double the normal price and all)
-
@dyasny said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@scottalanmiller said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
That's a false comparison to make the corruption sound reasonable. The alternatives are not the taxes staying higher, but lowering evenly across the board.
Lowering taxes is not an option over there. One of the main painpoints that made me leave.
why is it not an option? What stops the government from lowing taxes?
-
@dyasny said in Finally leaving my job, and it's just as annoying as I thought it would be:
@Dashrender reducing taxes is never an option there, unfortunately. I was paying 56% before I left.
That's not a realistic comparison, though. That's just highlighting what a terrible government it is and pointing out the corruption. In fact, it sounds like they are using the fake jobs of the car tax deal to hide a "tax ratchet" effect.
