Readit NewsIf person A slaps person B and person C goes "I didn't experience anything. There are no slaps in this company", does that sound reasonable?
Deleted Comment
I didn’t tell anyone to do anything. Please stop claiming this, it is false.
From the outside, I think the original author might be implying that it isn't anyone else's business and I will comply with proper tax filings.
I live in Canada, not the USA. My understanding with the IRS is that as long as you properly file with your primary residence and pay owed taxes everything is fine. This assumes you're legal to work for the entity there.
If you work at a company that says, you must live in New York, but you move to Austin, why should the employer be able to say no to that if you're hired under a remote contract? I hear the arguments of security, customer contracts, but then you have executives who travel for work outside of even the country and continue to do work. Double standards.
Even living in another state, why is the employer a part of this conversation? I don't think employers should be apart of the conversation of knowing if an employee is eligible to work for them or not. It should be the government who provides an employee number and as long as you have a valid one the employer shouldn't be involved.
For withholding taxes, the same thing, the employer should pay to the government in reference to the employee number, government withhold and deposit with the individuals configuration.
I know the argument is on the company's liability side regarding state laws, but those should be governed where the entity and employer contract is, not the individual's location.
For example, NY state had VERY different laws and obligations when it comes to a money transfer service. If you transfer money and you aren’t registered in NY state then you obviously don’t need to obey the regulations. For example all board member of the money transfer company need to submit financial documents.
However if an employee moves to NY, then the entire company would fall under the blanket of that because the company would need to register itself in NY. This is just 1 example. Colorado has laws regarding giving pay ranges on job postings. Many jobs no longer advertise in Colorado now because of it because they don’t want to fall under that blanket.
The same is not true of businesspeople.
Programmers do not pay taxes to every state in which a hotel is situated in which they write a line of code.
Corporate salespeople do not pay taxes to every state that hosts a conference in which they close a deal.
CEOs do not pay taxes to every state that hosts an event at which they speak to the public and recruit a new staff member.
Perhaps the tax authorities expect them to, but in general this is simply not done, any more than your bartender is claiming their cash tips.
It is perfectly legal for tax authorities to demand taxes for EVERY ONE of your situations you mention. They usually give a certain leeway because it’s impossible to catch every instance but if you blatantly disregard the tax laws in the country where you are at, you are setting yourself up for legal troubles.
Just because you can do it because the authorities don’t pursue it doesn’t mean that you can do it. You are saying “do it because no one will catch you” is advocating for tax evasion. You can also commit murder and possibly get away with it, it doesn’t mean that you didn’t commit murder.
You'll also note that the concept of "the place you reside" is somewhat of a leaky abstraction. Where do you reside if you own 12 flats in 12 different countries and spend 30 days in each of them per year?
Where do you reside if you are actually completely homeless and spend a month each in a different AirBnB living out of a suitcase in 12 different countries in a given year?
The case of having two or three homes in two or three different jurisdictions is a common one, though it usually has some convoluted rules for which qualifies as your "domicile" or "tax home".
Like I said, professional athletes have to pay taxes every day that they pay a game in a state/country. That means even if a professional athlete flies in for a game, and fly out the same day, they still have to pay taxes for the one day they were physically there.
Shakira is facing tax evasion changes and jail time because of a dispute as to where she was living.
You said “it’s nobody’s business where you sleep” which is patently false. Like I said, you are advocating tax evasion by not following the tax rules of every country where you sleep at night.
Such (pro)active denial usually indicates the denier has something to hide. Now that may not be the case here. But assuming you're right about this not being a Google problem but just small pockets like sexual harassment and racism.
Doesn't google still hold talks about racism & sexual harassment? I'm pretty sure they do. So why the voice against this talk, and this issue specifically?