2018年3月29日星期四

通勤停车减税

许多雇主向员工提供停车,这些人可以被视为其工作的无懈可击的边缘好处。这种福利的价值取决于停车位的位置。如果雇主在不受欢迎的郊区或农村地区,那么停车通常为每个人都免费,那么这种边缘福利的价值很低。但是,如果雇主在一个城市地区的交通拥堵和停车场通常有货币价格的地方,那么这种福利的价值就可以更高。

Tony Dutzik,伊丽莎白Berg,Alana Miller和Rachel Cross,考虑其报告中的权衡,“谁支付停车?联邦税收补贴如何堵塞拥挤的城市,以及城市如何收回他们的街道。(2017年9月),由TransitCenter和Frentier Group出版。他们写:
"Because employer-provided and employer-paid parking is excluded from an employee’s income, the parking tax benefit accounts for an estimated $7.3 billion in lost federal and state income and payroll tax revenues every year. ... While the vast majority of Americans drive to work, most do not gain from the commuter parking benefit. The reason is that parking is so abundant in many places—especially in suburban and rural areas—that it essentially has no value as defined by the Internal Revenue Service. As a result, only about one-third of commuters benefit from this policy. In fact, most Americans are net losers from the commuter subsidies, as they must endure higher taxes or reduced government services—as well as increased congestion—to subsidize parking for a minority of commuters. ... The parking tax benefit disproportionately assists commuters who work in dense employment centers, such as downtowns, where parking is most valuable."
对IRS致力于在数十年中征税的员工停放的价值,在数十年中取得了最低的成功。但是,美国政府确实制定了一项政策,以便通过支付税前收入的交通和拼车可以支付抵押品补贴。(是的,这意味着官方政策既不征税)免费停车的利益,从而鼓励人们开车上班,而且也没有税收过境的价值,从而鼓励人们不开车上班。)过境利益的规模相对较小。
“努力抵消通勤停车场的效果,美国还补贴了不开车的人通过”通勤过境利益“ - 13亿美元的计划,使工人能够从雇主税收获得过境通行证或Vanpool服务 -自由。过境税收福利鼓励美国人通过税前收入支付的过境通行证或vanpooling来使用公共交通工具。然而,这是过境效益的有效性的主要障碍是少数工人收到它。只有7%的美国劳动力可以获得补贴的通勤过境福利,只有2%的美国劳动力使用它们。大多数雇主 - 特别是较小的公司 - 不要提供基于雇主的过境
福利程序。与停车税效益一样,运输税收税效益不成比例地辅助那些在密集市中心区的大型雇主工作的更高收入。10%的工人收入的10%是获得补贴过境福利的七倍,而不是收入范围的10%的人。“

雇主提供的通勤停车场价值的免税具有实际效果。它在高峰期通勤时间和较高的交通拥堵过程中对道路上的更多汽车。空中的额外污染物具有健康成本。在城市地区使用稀缺空间有机会成本 - 无论是在街道,表面批量或坡道上 - 停车车。

该报告表明了一系列的政策选择,没有认可或在这里反对,让我把它们放在那里,作为摇动一个人的想法,让他们成为有用的想法。

一个选择是国会(或国家政府)通过“停车兑换”法律,该法则要求公司确定其员工停车福利的市场价格。然后,所有雇主都将提供对所有员工的付款。那些选择继续驾驶和停车的员工只需直接支付停车费。他们将在财务方面糟糕,但他们更加了解停车效益的成本。那些找到替代办法的人可以将停车相关的支付视为额外收入。然后,税务机关将征收与税务相关的收入付款直截了当。作者写道:
“其他司法管辖区已采用或被视为”停车征收“ - 要求为其雇员提供免费停车的业务,以将非驾驶工人提供现金支付等价值。停车即可通过减少停车数而受益雇主。他们必须租用员工的空间。“
如果该方法在政治上是不可能的,那么当地选择是为了城市在通勤停车处提高自己的税:
"Cities generally assess parking taxes on commercial lots and garages (with some exceptions, see below), and assess the tax either at a flat rate or as a percentage of the parking charge. In large cities, parking taxes range from New York’s 18.4 percent to 20 percent in Chicago and Philadelphia to 25 percent in San Francisco and 37.5 percent in Pittsburgh. These rates of taxation may seem high, but they are insufficient to cancel out the tax incentive for commuter parking for many workers. In 2015, the combined average marginal tax rate for federal income tax, the employee share of federal payroll tax, and state income tax was 35.1 percent. The commuter parking benefit exempts workers from paying this tax on the value of employer-provided parking. To fully counteract that subsidy, municipalities would need to tax employee parking at a rate of roughly 54 percent—well above even the highest parking taxes assessed in American cities. Most parking taxes fail to counteract the effect of tax-free treatment of employer-provided parking in another way as well: they apply only to commercial parking facilities, not to the “free” parking offered by employers at their facilities. Several cities around the world have implemented taxes that apply to parking spaces regardless of
它们是免费的还是以成本提供。“
对于经济停车经济学的之前的帖子,请参阅: