The Standing Committee on Finance of the House of Representatives has considered the 2015 Tax Plan Bill. As expected, following all the attention in the (trade) press, the MPs have many questions (almost 12 A4 sheets). Answers to these questions are expected on Friday 17 October 2014. We briefly describe some of the questions below. The complete report can be found on the website of the House of Representatives, if desired.
Naturally, various categories of allowances and benefits in kind are being asked whether they cannot also be covered by the continued employee discount scheme and/or the new necessity criterion. The various lobbies are doing their work. In addition to tools, computers, means of communication and the like, could not items such as bicycles, fitness, (work) clothes, company outings and others be included? Another question is whether internet at the employee's home falls under the targeted exemption (necessity criterion) and how to deal with all-in packages in that case.
The obvious question is for further clarification of the new necessity criterion. In what way will the Tax Authority now test this in concrete terms? And won't the Tax Authority then sit too much in the entrepreneur's chair?
Another question is whether the workplace criterion in the context of nil valuations does not lead to an unfair situation with regard to itinerant workers. For the latter category, more would be included in wages than for an employee working at a fixed workplace.
Much misunderstanding exists for the distinction between workplace benefits in kind (often valued at nil) and allowances/disbursements outside the workplace. Examples cited include company drinks at work versus those elsewhere and parking for employees with their own car at the workplace or elsewhere.
The CDA and SP enquire how institutions that rely on a lot of volunteers (culture, nature, sports and social organisations) will be dealt with under the WKR. In particular, the question is raised whether volunteer allowances can be regarded as wage bill for the calculation of the free room (1.2% of the wage bill).
Tax practitioners will not be surprised that a number of times the question is raised as to how the term “interest” should be interpreted under the new group scheme. It is also rightly questioned whether it is wise to introduce a fourth separate group regime in Dutch tax law.
And yes; the (not unwarranted) question of whether it would not be wise to allow an extra year of transitional arrangements after all, is also in the report!
Once the answers are published, we will get back to you.