3 ms·
Protecting worker-rights was the reason why Germany's oldest democratic party SPD (and thus the base of German democracy) was founded, emerging from unions. It
by allendoerfer 6y ago
Protecting worker-rights was the reason why Germany's oldest democratic party SPD (and thus the base of German democracy) was founded, emerging from unions.
It totally makes sense to continue to adapt those rights to changing environments. Like the proposed "off-times" while working from home.
What I don't like is the tax-system getting ever more complicated. Now we are talking about a 600 € deductible for working from home, which is more easily attainable than the already existing deductibles for your home office. Both will exist alongside each other. Then we have deductibles for commuting to work, which of course is counter-productive to deductibles against climate-change and makes no sense combined with the deductibles for staying at home. Why deduct both possible options, if you could just lower the tax-rate?
The existence of these rules, does not make the system fairer, it just makes it more and more complicated. You will never be able to complete it. A simpler system would benefit more people. If you earn less, it's likely you won't be able to apply for all these things anyway or properly fill out your tax statements. So I think we desperately need a shift here: Abolish all of these rules, at least the ones, which are actively harmful. If you really want people to keep more of their money, lower the tax-rate!
I would also reduce worker-protections for the highest earners, especially freelancers. At some point they are just getting in your way and are not protecting you, but actively hindering your progress. So I would propose, that both parties get more freedom to design their contracts, as soon as the employee has net earnings of say the top 10% or top 5%.
- WanderPanda 6y agoI generally agree with you but I don‘t like the > I would also reduce worker-protections for the highest earners, especially freelancers. It should be for all freelancers or for none. Otherwise a situation like with the „accredited investor“ is created which is harming poorer but responsible people from taking opportunities.
- allendoerfer 6y agoWhat I am proposing is: Keep everything for employees/freelancers < top 5%. If you earn more, you are obviously not being exploited, so there is no danger of false self-employment you have to be protected from.
- Lariscus 6y agoRemove workers protections from freelancers and suddenly there are no more normal jobs available. No thanks, companies already try to game the system that way and this would only make it worse.
- allendoerfer 6y agoI agree, that you have to be careful with this. That's why I am proposing a hard threshold. You have to give a person an exceptional amount of money, but then you are free (or at least more free) to negotiate a contract. Hindering someone to do their work, who is earning way more than an employee is one of the reason why IT and engineering salaries in Germany are so low. IT freelancers in Germany are hindered by regulation originally designed to prevent outsourcing of factory staff to the lowest bidder.
- sleavey 6y ago+1 for the point about the complexity of the German tax code. As a foreigner it's even worse for me, given the frequent use of German words never encountered in every day language. When the majority of people either ignore it or employ an accountant to do their taxes for them, the system is broken. I came from the UK where it's relatively simple and basically automatic if you're not self employed.
- closeparen 6y agoThe framing of “tax credits for working families” neuters some of the ideological opposition you would otherwise get to “tax cuts” or “spending” even if all three are economically equivalent.