Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Deutsche Bank’s work-from-home tax is economic insanity
Deutsche Bank’s work-from-home tax is economic insanity
Jul 6, 2025 8:05 PM

As if 2020 could not get any worse, this week intellectuals unleashed another pandemic: a new proposed tax. Deutsche Bank suggested that the government lay a 5% “privilege” tax on employees who work from home, on the grounds that they “disconnect themselves from face-to-face society.” This misguided scheme would engage in useless social engineering, disregard the needs and wishes of female employees, harm vulnerable workers, require a massive invasion of privacy, and subsidize failing business owners to cut low wages even further. More vexing yet, if it wished, Deutsche Bank could create even more funds than its proposed work-from-home tax would raise simply by making one corporate decision.

The facts are clear: People enjoy working from home and wish to continue doing so. Between 2005 and 2018, the number of people working from home increased by 173%, totaling a meager 5.4% of U.S. workers. The COVID-19 pandemic and its associated lockdowns swelled their ranks to 56% of the U.S. workforce, 47% in the UK. Both productivity and job satisfaction increased. A Cisco report issued last month found that 87% of workers globally would like to continue working from home, at least some of the time.

Deutsche Bank sees this as an impending catastrophe. “Remote workers are contributing less to the infrastructure of the economy whilst still receiving its benefits,” its new report, titled “What we must do to rebuild,” states. “Remote workers should pay a tax for the privilege.”

The section titled “A work-from-home tax” by Luke Templeman envisions a 5% “privilege” tax that works as follows:

[T]he tax will only apply outside the times when the government advises people to work from home (of course, the self-employed and those on low es can be excluded). The tax itself will be paid by the employer if it does not provide a worker with a permanent desk. If it does, and the staff member chooses to work from home, the employee will pay the tax out of their salary for each day they work from home. This can be audited by coordinating pany travel and technology systems.

The tax rate? Those who can work from home tend to have higher-than-average es. If we assume the average salary of a person who chooses to work from home in the US is $55,000, a tax of five per cent works out to just over $10 per working day. That is roughly the amount an office worker might spend muting, lunch, and laundry etc. [sic.] A tax at this rate, then, will leave them no worse off than if they had chosen to go into the office. …

A tax at this level means that panies or individuals will be worse off. In panies may be far better off as the savings from downsizing their office will more than make up for the cost of the WFH tax they will incur.

This new levy will create a new $1,500 annual transfer payment to the 29 million workers who cannot work from home and who make less than $30,000 (but do not receive tips). This would amount to €1,500 in Germany and £2,000 in the UK. It “makes sense to recognise that essential workers that assume covid risk for low wages,” the report states. “Those who are lucky enough to be in a position to ‘disconnect’ themselves from the face-to-face economy owe it to them.”

The work-from-home tax is a penalty in search of an infraction. The report offers no evidence that muters spend less money than those who work in traditional settings. They simply spend it differently. Rather than purchasing five lunches at a downtown bistro, they may splurge for a family meal once a week. They may use the money they would have spent on childcare to pay for an annual vacation. They do not contribute less to the economy or perpetrate some antisocial “disconnect” from humanity; they simply choose to spend their money on their own preferences rather than those of the government. This proposal amounts to another form of the broken window fallacy, identified by Frédéric Bastiat in his 1850 workThat Which is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen.

The government has pelling interest in punishing muters or funding brick-and-mortar employees. However, making it more difficult to work from home harms working women, who have told multiple surveys that their greatest desire is the flexibility to create a more satisfying work-life balance. Working from home, without paying $10 a day for the “privilege,” gives employers another tool to empower female employees.

For others, working from home is anything but a “privilege”; it may, however, be a necessity. Differing personality types have been understood since at least the second century after Christ, when the Greek physician Galen of Pergamon (c. 129-216 A.D.) classified the four temperaments into categories that persisted well into the Middle Ages: choleric, phlegmatic, sanguine, and melancholic. While working from home does not benefit extroverts and highly social people, circumstances may dictate they must work from home. Employees may choose to work from home even after a government lockdown order lapses if they orbidities that put them at greater risk of dying from COVID-19. While avoiding a breathless, lingering death benefits the worker and his or her family, this hardly constitutes “privilege.” Staying in a home office may be necessary to care for a sick child, or it could eliminate an otherwise arduous trip for a disabled worker. An impersonal tax bureaucracy cannot take account of any of these motivations or exigencies.

Although the tax would harm women and the vulnerable, it would do nothing to help the poor. A new government handout would merely subsidize business owners to cut e workers’ wages even further. After all, if the employee receives a $1,500 check from the government, the owner could cut his (or her) wages by $1,500, and the worker would be “no worse off” than he was before. This allows the owners to continue paying low wages, or to keep a failing business alive a bit longer, at the government’s expense. The money may lull employees into remaining stuck in a low-paying job rather than pursuing a more demanding position that would increase their productivity. Both halves of the proposal would fail to meet their stated objectives.

“This would break just about every principle of good tax design and is one of the worst ideas I’ve ever heard,” writes Julian Jessop of the London-based Institute of Economic Affairs. “It would be unfair, distortionary, inefficient, impractical – and a bureaucratic nightmare.” Jessop catalogues some of the Orwellian logistical measures necessary to calculate the WFH tax:

Indeed, who on earth will keep tabs on all this? Will people have to wear electronic tags, or is there a new role here for “Track and Trace”? Will tax inspectors snoop into people’s homes? Shouldn’t people then be able to claim more of their household bills as an employment expense?

Aside from being unnecessary and unworkable, there is a simpler solution to the “problem” of raising government revenue to assist essential workers – and it does not require the government to pass any new legislation. It lies entirely in Deutsche Bank’s hands.

Deutsche Bank, although it is a foreign business, received $354 billion in bailout funds from U.S. taxpayers during the Great Recession. DB ranked ninth among “institutions with the largest total transaction amounts (non-term adjusted) across broad-based emergency programs,” according to a 2011 Federal Reserve report.

If Deutsche Bank would refuse to take multimillion-dollar payments from foreign governments pensate for its insolvency-inducing errors – or restructure its business practices so it would not have to rely on bailouts if its leaders miscalculate – it would produce seven times as much revenue as its proposed “privilege” tax. Moreover, it would strike at the greatest form of privilege: the power to fail in your line of work, defraud your investors, inflict international devastation on the economy, and offload the cost of your poor choices onto the suffering populace your practices helped impoverish.

This proposal would solve one of the chief problems contemplated by its own report, which opens by proposing yet another set of government transfer payments and economic interventions to “save capitalism” from “populist” backlash fueled by “the anger of the youth.” Socialism enjoys its greatest popularity among those raised in the shadow of the subprime mortgage crisis, when government incentives, immoral business practices, and inept economic policies triggered the greatest wealth contraction in decades. Young people, who overheard their parents struggling to pay their bills while the firms that fomented the recession received rich government subsidies, understandably joined Occupy Wall Street protesters inasking, “Where’s my bailout?”

Deutsche Bank could remove this cause of offense by forswearing all further government bailouts. We await their response. In the meantime, people of faith should recognize that, arguably, the mere existence of government bailouts causes taxpayers to share in the sins of others by consent or provocation. They represent another way in which big government is a near occasion of sin.

Deutsche Bank would go further toward plishing it purported objectives by keeping its grasping hand out of the public till, rather than brainstorming paratively-paltry ways to get more people to join them. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Or as DB might put it, “Those who are lucky enough to be in a position to ‘disconnect’ themselves from the economic consequences of their own decisions owe it to us.”

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Milton Friedman vs. Bernie Sanders
The presidential campaign of Bernie Sanders is about e to an end. Unfortunately, though, the Democratic Socialism espoused by Sanders will live on long after his presidential ambitions have faded. This type of socialism is nothing new, of course. For more than a century free market economists have been warning of the dangers of succumbing to the economic fallacies of democratic socialism. A prime example is the late, great Milton Friedman. Although he’s been gone for a decade, Friedman is...
Explainer: What You Should Know About ISIS and the Orlando Terrorist
On Sunday, an American-born terrorist named Omar Mir Seddique Mateen killed 49 and wounded 53 in Orlando. In a 911 call during the attack Mateen pledged his allegiance to the terrorist group ISIS. Although the group also claimed responsibility for the attack, U.S. officials said they haven’t seen a direct link between the gunman and the terrorist group. Here are five facts you should know about ISIS: 1. ISIS (aka ISIL, Islamic State, IS, Daesh) is the name of an...
Flag Day in the Era of Post-Authentic Patriotism
Today is Flag Day. You probably didn’t know. You probably didn’t care. Unless you’re Boy Scout or a member of the VFW, you probably don’t give the American flag much thought. And you likely don’t have any flags in your home. I don’t either. Not really. What I do have hanging on the walls of my home office are several variations of Jasper Johns’s paintings of the American flag. I have no idea what Johns thought about the works or...
Church of England: Maybe Margaret Thatcher Wasn’t So Un-Christian After All
“Economics are the method,” wrote Margaret Thatcher in 1981, “the object is to change the heart and soul.” Guided by her Christian faith, the prime minister believed that the welfare state was not only harming her fellow citizens but damaging the moral fabric of the United Kingdom. As Florence Sutcliffe-Braithwaiteexplains, Thatcher’s fears about the welfare state were twofold: First, she and her advisers thought that generous collective provision for unemployment and sickness was sapping some working-class people’s drive to work....
Radio Free Acton: Todd Huizinga Previews Brexit
On this edition of Radio Free Acton, we take a look at the ing referendum in Great Britain which will decide the fate of the UK’s membership in the European Union. Todd Huizinga, Acton’s Director of International Relations and author ofThe New Totalitarian Temptation: Global Governance and the Crisis of Democracy in Europe, joins the podcast fresh from his latest European trip and shares his analysis of the pros and cons for Britain, as well as the reaction in Brussels...
5 Facts About Acton University
This is the week for the annual Acton University, a unique educational experience focused on the intersection of liberty and morality. Here are five facts you should know about Acton U. 1. Acton University is a four day annual conference on liberty, faith and free-market economics held in Grand Rapids, Michigan. 2. Each even includes nine sessions in which attendees can create a customized learning path from 100+ courses taught by 55+ international, world class experts. 3. The conference is...
New Barna Study on Americans’ Confused Morality is … Confused
The Barna Group recently released a fascinating new study on morality in America. The press release is titled, “The End of Absolutes: America’s New Moral Code.” It summarizes the study: New research from Barna revealsgrowing concern about the moral condition of the nation, even as many American adults admit they are uncertain about how to determine right from wrong. Sounds like a problem. And, indeed, the data does give reason to be concerned. But the framing of at least one...
Perverse Incentives Hurt Poor Defendants
Since the landmark Supreme Court decision Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) every state has developed a system of public defense. The decision guaranteed that those accused of felony offenses are entitled to a lawyer under the rights outlined in the 6th Amendment, which include, the right to a jury trial, a public trial, and pertaining to Gideon, “to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.” In the wake of the Gideon decision each state was required to develop a system...
What Christians Should Know About Crony Capitalism
Note: Later today at the Faith & Freedom conference I’ll be speaking on a panel titled, “A Cronyism Crisis: How Corporate Welfare Undermines Markets and Human Flourishing.” If you’re at the conference please stop by this session. The Term:Crony capitalism (sometimes referred to as cronyism or corporatism) What it means:Crony capitalism is a general term for the range of activities in which particular individuals or businesses in a market economy receive government-granted privileges over their customers petitors. Why it Matters:...
When good intentions harm children
Imagine you are given three choices —A, B, or C. In the ranking, A is much preferred to B and B is exceedingly preferable to C. Which do you choose? Obviously, all else being equal, you’d choose A. Now let’s add the following restrictions to your choice: • You, your family, and your friends will all get A. But you must make the choice of A, B, or C, for other people who you will likely never meet. • If...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved