Giving private medical care to some employees but not others
Discussion
I am wondering if anyone knows if i am allowed to offer private medical care to some but not all of my employees?
Basically i would like to look into offering private medical care to my manager and software developers but was wondering if this is allowed based on the fact i would be excluding that benefit to general customer service & warehouse staff etc.
Basically i would like to look into offering private medical care to my manager and software developers but was wondering if this is allowed based on the fact i would be excluding that benefit to general customer service & warehouse staff etc.
Perfectly normal in the same way you can pay them different amounts or give them cars etc. The only caution I would add is to be careful of claims of discrimination e.g. If the group you offer it to are all male and those who do not get it are female etc.
Many large companies provide medical cover for managers and above and increase the coverage e.g. family etc, the more senior you are.
The reason companies initially offered this benefit, and stilll a large part of the rationale for many, is to enable those covered to be focused on work and take minimal time off when they or their family are ill. It is not just about paying better benefits to attract/retain staff. When you think about it that way, and consider it is expensive to provide, it makes sense to target this on key employees only - those whose absence could seriously damage the business.
Many large companies provide medical cover for managers and above and increase the coverage e.g. family etc, the more senior you are.
The reason companies initially offered this benefit, and stilll a large part of the rationale for many, is to enable those covered to be focused on work and take minimal time off when they or their family are ill. It is not just about paying better benefits to attract/retain staff. When you think about it that way, and consider it is expensive to provide, it makes sense to target this on key employees only - those whose absence could seriously damage the business.
Kermit power said:
Are there not significant (negative) changes to the way in which BIK is going to be calculated for health insurance amongst other benefits next year? Might be worth checking if it's still a benefit that people consider worth having?
Mad if they do, it a benefit that the governemnt should be pushing companies to give. Employees feel valued, and it reduces the burden on the NHS (so even benefits people not in company schemes).I wasn't aware of plans to do so but even if the cost increases for employees private health will remain an attractive benefit as the cost of BIK will be less than buying the benefit independently and employers will normally be able to negotiate a lower per person cost and have less pre-existing conditions constraints than individual policies.
Edited by HappySilver on Friday 30th December 13:38
As far as I know, there are no fundamental changes to the taxation of Medical Benefits. As they are taxed in full right now, it is hard to see what else they might do to tax them worse - except perhaps start charging NI on them.
One major change in taxation of Benefits in Kind that is on the way is the abolition of the annual P11D Benefit in Kind form and its replacing by the "payrolling" of the benefit.
What this means is that a person will pay the tax on the benefit in the actual tax year they are receiving the benefit. Under the current P11D system, they tend to be taxed on this year's benefit in the following tax year.
The one exception was Motor Cars, which has had a system for a number of years which is supposed to ensure that a person is taxed correctly in the tax year for the car they actually had in that tax year.
In reality, the taxation of Benefits in Kind has been rather messy over the years. The new "payrolling" system should, in theory, remove a lot of this messiness. However, we are talking about the HMRC here, so I fully expect this new way of doing things to be just as inaccurate as the old system.
One major change in taxation of Benefits in Kind that is on the way is the abolition of the annual P11D Benefit in Kind form and its replacing by the "payrolling" of the benefit.
What this means is that a person will pay the tax on the benefit in the actual tax year they are receiving the benefit. Under the current P11D system, they tend to be taxed on this year's benefit in the following tax year.
The one exception was Motor Cars, which has had a system for a number of years which is supposed to ensure that a person is taxed correctly in the tax year for the car they actually had in that tax year.
In reality, the taxation of Benefits in Kind has been rather messy over the years. The new "payrolling" system should, in theory, remove a lot of this messiness. However, we are talking about the HMRC here, so I fully expect this new way of doing things to be just as inaccurate as the old system.
Confirm no problem offering it to some and not others.
In fact, the most recent PMI quote I did was for just the husband and wife directors, including their kids, and just one of their employees. He's been there the whole time they've been trading, others have come and gone, so I guess it makes sense to them to reward just the one guy at this stage.
In fact, the most recent PMI quote I did was for just the husband and wife directors, including their kids, and just one of their employees. He's been there the whole time they've been trading, others have come and gone, so I guess it makes sense to them to reward just the one guy at this stage.
Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff