Discussion Board

FBT gone? Take-home pay may be less now


Total 145 messages Pages | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5   Older >   >>
ashok kumar
this is a wrong article with wrong explainations
by ashok kumar on Jul 11, 2009 04:39 PM  | Hide replies

table is wrong... fringe benefit means..additional benefits except salary...that has been tazx relaxed..but this author is calculating tax on them....so redicu....

He is defaming congress in general with wrong figures...

    Forward  |  Report abuse
Aruna chalam
Re: this is a wrong article with wrong explainations
by Aruna chalam on Jul 15, 2009 11:29 AM
What is mentioned is correct, my friend. He is not against Congress. The matter is against salaried individuals. That is it.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Hebbar R
FBT gone? Your take-home pay may be less now!
by Hebbar R on Jul 11, 2009 03:58 PM  | Hide replies

PC as FM was targeting the Salaried Class directly. Now, we have a typical politician FM and Congressman, who taxes you more indirectly. This FM has left the Middle Class/Salaried class wit no benefit. The little benefit by way of increase in exemption limit is more than taken away by the steep increase in the fuel costs and the resulting increases in commodity prices. Shows that the Congress does not care for the Aam Aadmi.

    Forward  |  Report abuse
ashok kumar
Re: FBT gone? Your take-home pay may be less now!
by ashok kumar on Jul 11, 2009 04:34 PM
aam admi is the one who belong to per capta income of country. Just compare your salary and see if you are aam admi.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Indian hindu
Now where are all the Burnol vendors
by Indian hindu on Jul 09, 2009 02:20 PM

Now where are all the kangrass chamchas

    Forward  |  Report abuse
Welcome
God bless literate India
by Welcome on Jul 08, 2009 09:42 PM  | Hide replies

OMG, I can't believe that there are so many literate idiots adamantly arguing that the table is correct. In the proposed budget the tax on "fringe benefits" will be gone. Currently there is tax on fringe benefits. Within this table, 5 items qualify as fringe benefits and they are: 1) Club Membership, 2) Tour and Travel Reimbursement, 3) Hotel / Lodging Reimbursement, 4) Personal Conveyance Reimbursement, and 5) Gift Vouchers.
The guy who wrote this should have flipped the existing and proposed headings. The bottom line is the employee will take home more salary in the future. BTW, who ever wrote this is a real stupid. He flipped the heading, the spelling of lodging in the table is wrong, and most importantly the examples he took under the fringe benefits were wrong. Tour, travel, hotel and lodging can be accounted as actuals and goes under T&E expense for the company.

    Forward  |  Report abuse
Hebbar R
Re: God bless literate India
by Hebbar R on Jul 11, 2009 04:02 PM
The devil is in the detail. One still may have to see the fine print and there will be lots of fine print.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Aruna chalam
Re: God bless literate India
by Aruna chalam on Jul 15, 2009 01:32 PM
Boss, Just assume that the article is correct and be prepared for more tax. If you are correct, and it is not taxed, be happy. If this article is correct and the tax is levied, please don't be surprised. That is it.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Hebbar R
Re: God bless literate India
by Hebbar R on Jul 11, 2009 04:04 PM
The devil is in the detail. One still may have to see the fine print and there will be lots of fine print.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Manish Choudhary
confusion
by Manish Choudhary on Jul 08, 2009 01:28 PM  | Hide replies

Hi,
As part of FBT not all expenses were taxed at 100% of the expenses. e.g. Car related reimbursement only 20% of total was taxable, only personal travel and lodging were taxable.
so again we will have some amount added as perquisite value for any benefit that can be attributed to individual(e.g. Earlier ~1400 Rs were added for car). Let govt notify the rule and then have this debate.

    Forward  |  Report abuse
Rahul Goyal
Re: confusion
by Rahul Goyal on Jul 08, 2009 02:46 PM
I would say this article has been written by Duffers of First Order! The Government has abolished the tax, not the Fringe Benefits in itself. As such, the partial FBT that we were paying earlier (27K in above case), we would not have to pay any more. So this will get added onto out payouts.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Money Guruji
Re: Re: confusion
by Money Guruji on Jul 08, 2009 04:18 PM
Rahul "DUFFER" Goyal, Read the article again. It does not say the tax has been abolished. It says now you as the employer will have to bear the burden.

Stay a duffer, or learn that you are going to be taxed more.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Guest
Re: Re: Re: confusion
by Guest on Jul 08, 2009 04:32 PM
You both are duffers. The article does not say that fringe benefits have been abolished. Its the fringe benefits tax that has gone. Now the benefits will be taxed as perks. Second the tax will have to be borne by employees and not employers.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Rahul Goyal
Re: Re: Re: Re: confusion
by Rahul Goyal on Jul 08, 2009 04:50 PM
@guest - did you read my post completely before jumping in? I also said that it is only FBT thats been abolished, the FB is still going to be there. And, I am not too sure about taxation as 'Perks'. Can you please guide me to the source of your statement?

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Rahul Goyal
Re: Re: Re: confusion
by Rahul Goyal on Jul 08, 2009 04:48 PM
You seem to be the one who has written this article, else I do not see any point in name calling amongst us! Anyways, if you are still referring to the article, then I would like to tell you that article in itself is wrong. My company has been offering us FB, which has led to significant savings in the past. With the new regime in place, the small amount of tax that we were paying is also gone! Do you get this point??

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Raj Raja
Re: Re: Re: Re: confusion
by Raj Raja on Jul 11, 2009 03:54 PM
You are right @ rahul.

   Forward   |   Report abuse
Guest
Great
by Guest on Jul 08, 2009 12:30 PM

By this budget nothing will be left in the employee's hand.Y this govt focused on the employers,they do not have any corrupted money in their homes.Y not the cost for politicians can be reduced can't be this implemented in budget.when the ruling party leaders had corrupted money in their homes it doesnot mean that all will have money

    Forward  |  Report abuse
Total 145 messages Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5   Older >   >>
Write a message