8 ms·
Relevant text: Oracle is implementing a more flexible employee work location policy and has changed its Corporate Headquarters from Redwood City, California to
by whatok 6y ago
Relevant text: Oracle is implementing a more flexible employee work location policy and has changed its Corporate Headquarters from Redwood City, California to Austin, Texas. We believe these moves best position Oracle for growth and provide our personnel with more flexibility about where and how they work. Depending on their role, this means that many of our employees can choose their office location as well as continue to work from home part time or all of the time. In addition, we will continue to support major hubs for Oracle around the world, including those in the United States such as Redwood City, Austin, Santa Monica, Seattle, Denver, Orlando and Burlington, among others, and we expect to add other locations over time. By implementing a more modern approach to work, we expect to further improve our employees’ quality of life and quality of output.
- dmode 6y agoWhat does this mean ? What does a HQ mean when people are permanent WFH ?
- aaomidi 6y agoIt means less taxes and less strict labor laws.
- dmode 6y agoHow does labor law impact anything when everyone is WFH ? Also, do taxes really have anything to do with your HQ location ? All corporations are registered in Delaware.
- TimTheTinker 6y agoAFAIK, WFH employees have CA tax obligations when the company HQ is in CA, even if they’re working from other states. So all non-CA employees have less of a tax burden as a result of the HQ relocation.
- dmode 6y agoI don't think this is true. Employees pay taxes based on residency requirement. So if you are not a resident of CA, you don't pay taxes, regardless of where your HQ is
- baskire 6y agoIf California can claim the work was done in or for California. They’ll tax it. If you work remote from Texas but hr says your desk is in California. You owe California taxes.
- throwawaygulf 6y agoThis is categorically false. If you're a Texas resident, working for a California based company, but doing your work remotely in Texas, you absolutely do not owe taxes in California. The concept of "work done for California" does not exist. If the work is done in Texas (at your house), you pay Texas taxes (no income tax).
- rmk 6y agoThere is some nuance to this. CA deliberately defines anybody who is in CA "other than for a transitory purpose" as a CA resident (for tax purposes). So if you happen to reside in TX but come to Redwood City for a couple weeks and work there, for example, CA can come after you. I am fairly certain this will happen more often once increasing numbers of people vote with their feet.
- throwawaygulf 6y agoEven this is not entirely correct. They do not consider you a CA resident, but they consider the income you make while (more than transiently) in the state taxable. Many states have similar clauses (NY, NJ, etc.), CA is not unique in this aspect.
- 6y ago
- satya71 6y agoCompany still pays most of its taxes in HQ.
- filmgirlcw 6y agoAnd many of those taxes are based on things like now many distinct offices you have for employees. This is one of the reasons we saw the death of private offices and a shift to the whole open workspace bullshit. Because you’d get taxed per office, whether it was being used 5 days a week or not.
- bch 6y agoDo you mean number of private workspaces that are called an “office” in a building affects how taxes are calculated? So reconfiguring the floors in a corporate building might affect how they file taxes? I’ve never heard of that before...
- filmgirlcw 6y agoYes. And it can be impacted at a municipality level, as well as a state or county level too. So the city of Seattle might have a different way they tax these things than the city of Redmond, in addition to whatever taxes are levied by King County or Washington State. ETA: there are very real reasons big companies have reconfigured workspaces and it isn’t about worker efficiency studies or even fitting more people into a space, but about taxes.
- eropple 6y agoThis is news to me. Could you provide some reading material on this topic?
- filmgirlcw 6y agoLook up B&O taxes. There’s often a square footage requirement to it and depending on where you are, there can be a surcharge or additional fee for what they deem distinct workspaces. So if it has a door, that’s a new place. Whereas open and more disparate spaces do not. Again, all of this is extremely dependent on where you operate and can vary based on what type of business you’re in, etc. etc. I wish I had more direct information. I was informed of this by a tax attorney, when I was complaining about how our shared employer was shifting away from individual offices, which had been a hallmark of the company and corporate culture. He told me that there had been some changes to the local B&O tax law that helped make the argument to to shared/team/open spaces. I did some research and found he was right, though again, the specifics are going to differ depending on where you are, what business you’re in, the size of the business, etc.
- singhrac 6y agoOften (maybe always?) employees pay income tax in the state where their company's headquarters is, or the local office in which they work.
- jldugger 6y agoIs that ever true? I'm pretty sure you pay income tax in the state in which you work, regardless of where HQ is.
- emteycz 6y agoYou're talking about the employee while the GP is talking about the employer. Both have their income (personal or corporate) taxes, so both statements are true.
- jldugger 6y agoAre you sure? > employees pay income tax
- singhrac 6y agoI am not a tax attorney obviously, but the information I've been given (by many sources) is that this year I'll pay taxes for the state in which my employer resides, not where I've been living. I think the decider is "state in which you work", which is what I meant by "local office" (i.e. I'm still considered to "work" in NY).
- lotsofpulp 6y agoNY’s position right now is ridiculous. I hope the courts rule that NY has no right to tax income for someone who hasn’t stepped foot in NY since March.
- dragonwriter 6y agoNew York is attempting to do that, true. Usually it is your state of residence and the state in which you physically work that tax you (both, if they are different), but New York’s novel claim is unlikely to succeed for work by non-NY residents that doesn't occur in NY.
- e40 6y agoIt means less taxes and less strict labor laws. Not for people that remain in CA, WFH or not. For those that move to TX, what you said applies.
- LinuxBender 6y agoThis can also paint a target on non TX workers. I have lived through that. HQ of a company I worked for in the past moved to TX and anyone that was not willing to relocate was part of the layoffs. Of course, it didn't start off that way. People were initially told they would be fine where they were. Our California office went from several hundred to six people.
- wolco2 6y agoLet me guess.. hp?
- hbcondo714 6y agoName anchor link to this text: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000156459020056896/orcl-10q_20201130.htm#ITEM_5_OTHER_INFORMATION https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000156459020... Interesting this sentence is at the end of this 40+ page document under the section "Other Information". The very first page says 2300 Oracle Way Austin, Texas but their previous quarterly reports shows 500 Oracle Parkway Redwood City, California
- muzz 6y agoThat seems represent the actual event that occurred, ie a changing of HQ address. Yet many are assuming that employees will be moving from CA to TX, despite no indication of that.
- gallego2007 6y agoI read this as the US Central time zone is convenient for working with people on both Coasts and those working remote.
- muzz 6y agoFunny that the don't mention Bangalore, where they have more people than HQ