Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Beelzebubba
If Raul, had legal residence elsewhere and his employer needed his presence in the D.C. area on a consistent basis, providing him with a place to stay would be the employer's expense and taxable to the employer, not the employee.
51 posted on 02/18/2009 6:42:45 AM PST by Dixie Yooper (Ephesians 6:11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]


To: Dixie Yooper

If Raul, had legal residence elsewhere and his employer needed his presence in the D.C. area on a consistent basis, providing him with a place to stay would be the employer’s expense and taxable to the employer, not the employee.


That would be true if (like a nanny or caretaker) he had to live in that particular place in order to perform the work. But simply providing him a place to live is a taxable benefit, same as meals. It’s a close case as you phrase it, and it he had been reimbursed for hotel costs, the reimbursement would be non-taxable.


61 posted on 02/18/2009 7:49:00 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson