Min commute distance for per diem in California?

[rooobosmith]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

I am considering a 6 mo. contract assignment on W2 represented as a "long term project" in a city 74 miles from my home. The recruiter has told me that no per diem can be paid in California unless the commute is at least 125 miles, but I can find no reference to any such state or Federal law, and the recruiter cannot cite any such authority. Is this a state or Federal law? Or just agency policy?

 

[Zigner]

What makes you think "per diem" must be paid?

 

[swalsh411]

An employer can reimburse an employee for any expense they choose to. The real question is whether or not that reimbursement is excludable from income. Reimbursing somebody for the cost of their commute could not be excluded from income as the employee could not themselves claim commuting costs as an unreimbursed business expense on their own income tax.

What the recruiter is telling you may be company policy which you are not going to find support for in the law either way.

 

[rooobosmith]

What makes you think "per diem" must be paid?

What makes you think that I think it "must be paid"?

The question is not whether it "must be paid," but rather how commuting expenses are treated for tax purposes.

 

[Zigner]

What makes you think that I think it "must be paid"?

The question is not whether it "must be paid," but rather how commuting expenses are treated for tax purposes.

That's not what you asked.

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

I am considering a 6 mo. contract assignment on W2 represented as a "long term project" in a city 74 miles from my home. The recruiter has told me that no per diem can be paid in California unless the commute is at least 125 miles, but I can find no reference to any such state or Federal law, and the recruiter cannot cite any such authority. Is this a state or Federal law? Or just agency policy?

 

[rooobosmith]

An employer can reimburse an employee for any expense they choose to. The real question is whether or not that reimbursement is excludable from income. Reimbursing somebody for the cost of their commute could not be excluded from income as the employee could not themselves claim commuting costs as an unreimbursed business expense on their own income tax.

What the recruiter is telling you may be company policy which you are not going to find support for in the law either way.

Thank you for your thoughtful response.

If it is just the agency's policy, then distance would have no effect on expense reimbursement exclusion from income for tax purposes, no matter what the distance; correct?

Yet somehow the recruiter managed to come up with the 125 mile figure....

I do see references to lawmakers getting per diem for travel of 125 miles to the capitol; at least in some states.

 

[rooobosmith]

That's not what you asked.

Correct. I asked whether there were CA state or Federal laws which limit per diem (expense reimbursement) to commutes greater than 125 miles.

I said nothing about any requirement that it "must be paid." In my case, it "must be paid" for me to consider taking the job.

 

[Zigner]

Correct. I asked whether there were CA state or Federal laws which limit per diem (expense reimbursement) to commutes greater than 125 miles.

I said nothing about any requirement that it "must be paid." In my case, it "must be paid" for me to consider taking the job.

Then don't take the job.

Good day.

 

[swalsh411]

Reimbursement for commutting expense (travel from one's home to primary work location) could not be excluded from income. That answers your tax question. I am not aware of any law which references 125 miles.

Whether or not your employer chooses to reimburse you is not a legal question. They can, but they certainly don't have to. (and if they do, it must be included in your taxable income on your W2).

 

[rooobosmith]

Then don't take the job.

Good day.

Because you've decided that they won't pay?

 

[Zigner]

Because you've decided that they won't pay?

Did you have further legal questions?

 

[LdiJ]

Thank you for your thoughtful response.

If it is just the agency's policy, then distance would have no effect on expense reimbursement exclusion from income for tax purposes, no matter what the distance; correct?

Yet somehow the recruiter managed to come up with the 125 mile figure....

I do see references to lawmakers getting per diem for travel of 125 miles to the capitol; at least in some states.

The employer has a choice to reimburse the employee for whatever they feel is appropriate, with whatever rules they care to put in place. However, if it is not allowed as an exclusion under the tax code, then the employee has to pay tax on it, as it is treated as income.

 

[cbg]

Just for clarification - While CA is one of only two states where mileage is ever required by law, even in CA no mileage is required for commuting to the regular place of business, no matter what the distance may be.

 

[rooobosmith]

Reimbursement for commutting expense (travel from one's home to primary work location) could not be excluded from income. That answers your tax question. I am not aware of any law which references 125 miles.

Whether or not your employer chooses to reimburse you is not a legal question. They can, but they certainly don't have to. (and if they do, it must be included in your taxable income on your W2).

Supposing the employer chooses to reimburse "relocation" temporary or full time for work locations greater than a number miles from a residence.

Could that be excluded from income for tax purposes? It's not technically commuting expenses, but would be in lieu of commuting.

 

[cbg]

YOU ARE NOT OWED reimbursement for commuting expenses! If they choose to reimburse you for it they may, but the law does not require that they do so, even in CA. How are you thinking it's ever going to be non-taxable?