World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article

Take-home vehicle

Article Id: WHEBN0023221853
Reproduction Date:

Title: Take-home vehicle  
Author: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Language: English
Subject: Employee compensation in the United States, Income bracket, Selection ratio, Inquilino, Employment
Collection: Employment Compensation, Vehicle Law
Publisher: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Publication
Date:
 

Take-home vehicle

In some countries, police cars are frequently issued as take-home vehicles

A take-home vehicle, or company car is a

  1. ^ a b c d e f g h NÆSS-SCHMIDT, SIGURD; MARCIN WINIARCZYK (Copenhagen Economics) (May 2010). "Company car taxation". Taxation Papers (European Commission: Taxation and Customs Union DG) (22).  
  2. ^ Rivers, Nic; David Suzuki Foundation (December 2005). "Analysis of Proposed Changes in Tax Treatment for Company Cars in Canada (Company Car Tax Shift)". Retrieved 24 May 2012. 
  3. ^ http://books.google.com/books?id=aiQ09D7nWxYC&pg=RA3-PA1770&dq=%22take+home+vehicle%22&as_brr=3&ie=ISO-8859-1&output=html
  4. ^ http://books.google.com/books?id=OaCosT6pstkC&pg=PA89&dq=%22take+home+vehicle%22&as_brr=3&ie=ISO-8859-1&output=html
  5. ^ http://www.government-fleet.com/News/Story/2009/03/Sacramento-County-Take-Home-Vehicle-Policy-Under-Scrutiny.aspx?interstitial=1
  6. ^ http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bal-md.ci.cars10jun10,0,3956610.story
  7. ^ http://www.wbaltv.com/news/19705269/detail.html
  8. ^ http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/drc/localnews/stories/DRC_Sunshine_Week_0321.565f8588.html
  9. ^ Barrett, Beth (27 June 2011). "LOS ANGELES / Utility to re-examine policy on cars, perks". The San Francisco Chronicle. 
  10. ^ http://www.insideindianabusiness.com/newsitem.asp?id=15170

References

See also

The city of Evansville, Indiana reduced the number of take-home vehicles offered to city employees, but allowed public safety employees to keep theirs.[10]

The city of Los Angeles was criticized for issuing take-home vehicles to utility employees while raising rates to customers, though the city stated it would be a minuscule part of the budget.[9]

In Dallas, the city was having trouble obtaining data in attempting to determine the cost of take-home vehicles to taxpayers.[8]

In the city of Baltimore, the use of take-home vehicles by city employees has been questioned due to the distance that city employees drive them to their homes. It was determined in a report that two-thirds of city employees drive their vehicles outside city limits, some more than 100 mi (160 km) from the city, and the cost to taxpayers, which included fuel, was high.[6] Baltimore's former mayor Sheila Dixon was also criticized for having three tax-funded take-home vehicles parked at her house. She defended herself by saying she might need the vehicles if there were an emergency.[7]

In Sacramento, California, the issuing of take-home vehicles has come under scrutiny as the city has faced a budget deficit.[5]

When issued by a government agency, concern has been brought up by citizens and advocates over taxpayer money used to fund take-home vehicles. This has led some cities to cutting or reducing the number of employees to whom vehicles are offered.

Direct subsidy of public employees

Studies have shown that the subsidy encourages consumers to buy more and bigger cars than they would choose otherwise.[1] In many areas, fuel costs are also covered by the benefit, so that the marginal cost of driving may approach zero. In these areas consumers are encouraged to drive more frequently and farther than they otherwise would, and avoid other forms of transportation. Emissions of CO2 and other harmful gases are clearly higher as a result.[1]

Environmental damage

There is also a substantial tax loss resulting from the subsidy.[1]

There is a straightforward distortion in consumer markets as consumers through tax incentives are being encouraged to consume more car services than they would have been otherwise.[1]

Economic distortions

Issues with take-home vehicles

Police departments are among frequent participants in take-home vehicle programs, allowing officers to take home the police cars they use while on duty. It is considered to be a fringe benefit by the departments.[3] It has been viewed by some departments as a crime-fighting tool, given its cost.[4]

Usage by police departments

Contents

  • Usage by police departments 1
  • Issues with take-home vehicles 2
    • Economic distortions 2.1
    • Environmental damage 2.2
    • Direct subsidy of public employees 2.3
  • See also 3
  • References 4

The use of company cars is widespread in some regions. For example, business registrations account for roughly 50% of all car sales in the EU, largely due to taxation rules which give companies a strong incentive to provide the benefit.[1] The practice has been criticised by many groups who argue that the benefit encourages people to drive more (thus increasing CO2 emissions), reduces government tax revenues, distorts economic competition, and may work to neutralise other government programs and objectives.[1][2]

There are three main reasons which explain why the provision of a company car for private use as a benefit may be attractive for both the employee and the employer. The first reason is that companies can supply the fringe benefit at lower costs than the employee is able to achieve on their own – and consequently pass it on to the employee. Secondly, the tax system may encourage the provision of cars over monetary remuneration from the perspective of both the employer and employee. Thirdly, firms may want the employee to drive in a car of certain minimum standard or have access to a suitable vehicle at all times.[1]

[1]

This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and USA.gov, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for USA.gov and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
 
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
 
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.
 


Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Project Gutenberg are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.