Mileage/nanny using her car to pick up child

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You seem to misunderstand the IRS reimbursement rate, 15:01. It doesn't matter what job you do, it covers the reasonable expenses of driving on the job. It sounds like your husband's employer has decided that to retain certain employees it is worth it to offer extras, like insurance payment. Good for him. But you need to understand that is unusual and unnecessary and the IRS rate is standard for a reason. It is fair and sound policy for anyone who drives on the job.

Nannies are not some special class who should get more because they drive on the job.

Ok, your jab was unwarranted. I don't have any pretensions about being special but I do have a fair knowledge of government contracting. Having answered plenty of RFPs I can tell you government reimbursement rates reflect the needs of the average government contractor, doing a large volume of business over a long term contract making it possible to achieve economies of scale. I can also tell you there are exemptions for solo contractors, such as those for group home workers, that give higher reimbursement for using a personal vehicle. I assume there is an increased risk transporting the mentally ill or individuals with behavioral issues. My point is, the IRS rates are ill fitted for your nannies work tasks compared to the average govt contractor - even the government observes exceptions.

I'm not the poster with whom you're sparring, but I too fail to understand your position. The IRS regulations are extremely clear, are expressly designed to cover wear and tear on a vehicle in addition to direct expenses, and do not distinguish categories of entitlement for additional compensation.

If a given employer chooses to give more per mile, or additional benefits, that's fine, but there is nothing inherently different about a nanny position that changes the applicability of the IRS regulations. Ask any accountant who routinely handles these compensation issues and perhaps that will be helpful.

To be clear, you are saying that a person who is hired by the government, who puts highway miles on their car driving to a work site where no other person will will be transported in the vehicle, with no minors in the car creating distractions, no risk of any damage to the vehicle but their own negligence is the same as what a nanny does? Really? Ok lady, if you believe that then more power to you.

[Anonymous]

Anyone drives clients for their federal job? I am trying to think of a federal job driving a passenger vehicle that requires the employee to use their own car.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You seem to misunderstand the IRS reimbursement rate, 15:01. It doesn't matter what job you do, it covers the reasonable expenses of driving on the job. It sounds like your husband's employer has decided that to retain certain employees it is worth it to offer extras, like insurance payment. Good for him. But you need to understand that is unusual and unnecessary and the IRS rate is standard for a reason. It is fair and sound policy for anyone who drives on the job.

Nannies are not some special class who should get more because they drive on the job.

Ok, your jab was unwarranted. I don't have any pretensions about being special but I do have a fair knowledge of government contracting. Having answered plenty of RFPs I can tell you government reimbursement rates reflect the needs of the average government contractor, doing a large volume of business over a long term contract making it possible to achieve economies of scale. I can also tell you there are exemptions for solo contractors, such as those for group home workers, that give higher reimbursement for using a personal vehicle. I assume there is an increased risk transporting the mentally ill or individuals with behavioral issues. My point is, the IRS rates are ill fitted for your nannies work tasks compared to the average govt contractor - even the government observes exceptions.

I'm not the poster with whom you're sparring, but I too fail to understand your position. The IRS regulations are extremely clear, are expressly designed to cover wear and tear on a vehicle in addition to direct expenses, and do not distinguish categories of entitlement for additional compensation.

If a given employer chooses to give more per mile, or additional benefits, that's fine, but there is nothing inherently different about a nanny position that changes the applicability of the IRS regulations. Ask any accountant who routinely handles these compensation issues and perhaps that will be helpful.

To be clear, you are saying that a person who is hired by the government, who puts highway miles on their car driving to a work site where no other person will will be transported in the vehicle, with no minors in the car creating distractions, no risk of any damage to the vehicle but their own negligence is the same as what a nanny does? Really? Ok lady, if you believe that then more power to you.

To be clear, I'm stating what the law is. Period. Go argue the IRS regulations with your employer if you wish, but it is the law. All employers are subject to the same IRS regulations, not just the government. All employers who reimburse legally are following IRS regulations, which do not specify particulars about the destination, passengers, time of day, color of the vehicle, age of the occupants, duration of the trip, or mental status of the driver.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You seem to misunderstand the IRS reimbursement rate, 15:01. It doesn't matter what job you do, it covers the reasonable expenses of driving on the job. It sounds like your husband's employer has decided that to retain certain employees it is worth it to offer extras, like insurance payment. Good for him. But you need to understand that is unusual and unnecessary and the IRS rate is standard for a reason. It is fair and sound policy for anyone who drives on the job.

Nannies are not some special class who should get more because they drive on the job.

Ok, your jab was unwarranted. I don't have any pretensions about being special but I do have a fair knowledge of government contracting. Having answered plenty of RFPs I can tell you government reimbursement rates reflect the needs of the average government contractor, doing a large volume of business over a long term contract making it possible to achieve economies of scale. I can also tell you there are exemptions for solo contractors, such as those for group home workers, that give higher reimbursement for using a personal vehicle. I assume there is an increased risk transporting the mentally ill or individuals with behavioral issues. My point is, the IRS rates are ill fitted for your nannies work tasks compared to the average govt contractor - even the government observes exceptions.

I'm not the poster with whom you're sparring, but I too fail to understand your position. The IRS regulations are extremely clear, are expressly designed to cover wear and tear on a vehicle in addition to direct expenses, and do not distinguish categories of entitlement for additional compensation.

If a given employer chooses to give more per mile, or additional benefits, that's fine, but there is nothing inherently different about a nanny position that changes the applicability of the IRS regulations. Ask any accountant who routinely handles these compensation issues and perhaps that will be helpful.

To be clear, you are saying that a person who is hired by the government, who puts highway miles on their car driving to a work site where no other person will will be transported in the vehicle, with no minors in the car creating distractions, no risk of any damage to the vehicle but their own negligence is the same as what a nanny does? Really? Ok lady, if you believe that then more power to you.

To be clear, I'm stating what the law is. Period. Go argue the IRS regulations with your employer if you wish, but it is the law. All employers are subject to the same IRS regulations, not just the government. All employers who reimburse legally are following IRS regulations, which do not specify particulars about the destination, passengers, time of day, color of the vehicle, age of the occupants, duration of the trip, or mental status of the driver.

My job reimburses mileage at a higher rate then the Feds, I do not believe the IRS rate are the law in the way you describe. I think it may be the cap for government employees though. Far as I can tell there is no 'law' governing rates for private sector.

[Anonymous]

The law comes into play with what is taxable income vs reimbursement. You can legally pay $10/mile for driving or nothing. But, only the amount up to the it's rate is not taxed.