GTN Mobility Tax Blog

As companies adjust to the new reality of work and reassess their mobility programs, there is an opportunity for them to examine the costs associated with running their mobility programs and explore innovative solutions. We are witnessing a renewed interest in mobility as companies seek to adopt the best structure for their business and employees. While non-traditional forms such as remote and hybrid work are becoming more prevalent, there is also renewed interest in both short and long-term assignments. 

Ransomware, phishing, hacking, malware, botnet, viruses, spyware, worms... the list goes on. You don’t have to be an IT specialist to understand that, in our digital world, such data security threats are very real. As personal data has become an increasingly vital asset to businesses, discussions of data privacy and security have graduated from the server room to the boardroom. While both the volume and value of data processed by companies grows, so do the risks associated with that data.

Tax equalization is a policy widely used by companies with mobile employees. At its core, tax equalization is a mechanism to ensure that an employee is neither better nor worse off financially, from a tax perspective, for having accepted an international assignment. However, there are many misconceptions about what exactly it means to be “tax equalized.” As one example, some companies will try to avoid the policy because they think it will automatically lead to high company costs and administration.

In today’s technological world, it is easier than ever for businesses to participate in the global economy through the use of business travelers, international assignments, remote workers, or permanent transfers. However, international tax compliance for cross-border employees can present unexpected challenges for both the employee and the company. Even a single day of work in a foreign location can trigger complex tax filings for the individual, as well as tax reporting and withholding obligations for the company in both the Home and Host countries. Failing to comply with these obligations can have serious consequences, such as unexpected tax bills, increased audit costs, financial penalties, and legal and reputational risks for the company and the employee.

Whether you manage business travelers, short-term international employees, or remote workers, you have no doubt heard about the “183-day rule.” Both globally and domestically, many tax jurisdictions expect an employer (as well as the employee) to track and report non-resident business travel. However, simply applying a “183-day” threshold does not always work to ensure tax compliance. Here we will take a deeper dive into the impact of income tax treaties on the tax cost of business travel, short-term assignments, and remote work scenarios.

If your auditor doubles as your company’s mobility tax services provider, you may have found benefits from this seemingly convenient arrangement.

It’s not unusual to see companies using the same firm to provide multiple kinds of accounting and tax services, especially for emerging and fast-growing companies. However, it is important to be aware of the challenges that may arise in this situation and understand why it may be beneficial to use different firms for your auditing and mobility tax needs.

By understanding your specific needs and the service limitations that can exist for audit firms, your organization will be in a better position to assess and select a vendor that will provide the experience needed for your mobility program and employees.