As someone that has the utmost respect for his accountant i have serious issues with almost every point in this post. The logic is juvenile ultimately because t

As someone that has the utmost respect for his accountant i have serious issues with almost every point in this post. The logic is juvenile ultimately because the management team is responsible for the organisation and the accountant will balance the books and with the help of the CFO use and manage capital effectively. The justification to purchase the cars was idiotic. The capex spent on leases is corporate tax deductible, not so much when you buy them and they become depreciating assets (yes the paltry depreciation is tax deductible but the capex used to buy the cars isn’t). Organisations also use leases so they don’t have to manage the wear and tear maintenance on vehicles. Even when an organisation has a fleet manager logistically picking up broken down cars and taking them to garages is very expensive. For you techies this is similar to tech debt, imagine you cut corners on a project you did and left the organisation the person picking up after you will have to redo quite a bit of the work to finish it. I would argue an organisation should never be held ransom to a pay rise. You simply acknowledge they are valued and promise to address at the next review. It sets a bad precedent to manage these processes adhoc.