Google to Add Pay to Cover a Tax for Same-Sex Benefits

nytimes.com/2010/07/01/your-money/01benefits.html?_r=1&src=twt&twt=nytimesbusiness

Will add summary of article in 3 hours when I am back home. All I know is that I’m sorely disappointed in Google. I liked them as a company before this.

Google is not paying Gay employees more.

Rather…

"On Thursday, Google is going to begin covering a cost that gay and lesbian employees must pay when their partners receive domestic partner health benefits, largely to compensate them for an extra tax that heterosexual married couples do not pay. The increase will be retroactive to the beginning of the year. "

"On average, employees with domestic partners will pay about $1,069 more a year in taxes than a married employee with the same coverage, according to a 2007 report by M. V. Lee Badgett, director of the Williams Institute, a research group that studies sexual orientation policy issues. "

That simply means that they are paid more as the OP described.

You won’t like IMB or Moragn Stanley either…look at this:
IBM and Google- voted the most gay friendly companies in the world by The International Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce (IGLCC)
eurout.org/2010/06/10/ibm-picked-most-gay-friendly-company-world

Take a look at the last page of the Macy’s thread, there are literally hundreds of companies that are more than just “gay friendly” From most airlines to oil companies to banks to car makers

[quote="Cristiano, post:3, topic:203952"]
That simply means that they are paid more as the OP described.

[/quote]

No. This is not correct.

Google is only offsetting the cost of a tax that only couples in domestic partnerships pay.

What are you talking about? Payroll also called compensation is independent from taxes. If someone has in increase of gross pay that means that he is paid more. Compensation is a company thing, taxes are a government thing. The two are separate items.

Did you read the article?

Google is ensuring that the take home income of Gay couples in Domestic Partnerships is the exact same as heterosexual married couples.

That is all.

[quote="jjdrury81, post:7, topic:203952"]
Did you read the article?

Google is ensuring that the take home income of Gay couples in Domestic Partnerships is the exact same as heterosexual married couples.

That is all.

[/quote]

And since childless couples have less take home pay than couples with children, are they going to reimburse childless couples for the loss of income from the dependant deduction as well?

To insure that they too get the same take home pay?

Don't worry - this is a temporary measure until Obama can repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. Then gay couples will be able to file jointly, and there won't be any tax differences between heterosexual and homosexual couples.

[quote="Cristiano, post:6, topic:203952"]

I think the two of you are talking past one another.

Yes, the gross pay will be higher, but no, the net pay will not be higher.

Google is offsetting a tax which has been unfairly levied on gay couples, but has not been levied on straight couples. Its unfortunate that such tax discrimination against homosexuals is occurring. I think Google is to be commended for its commitment to justice.

[quote="Brendan, post:8, topic:203952"]
And since childless couples have less take home pay than couples with children, are they going to reimburse childless couples for the loss of income from the dependant deduction as well?

To insure that they too get the same take home pay?

[/quote]

I don't think that comparison is accurate, since the tax deduction for having children is to partially offset the cost of raising children. However, its not more expensive to be a straight couple, as opposed to being a gay couple.

You are still refusing to acknowledge that taxes and compensation are separate. Take home income is defined by so many different factors. Google simply pays a category of people more than another one.

Using your logic, if I were to pay less taxes (because I donate to charity) than a gay man that has disregard toward the Catholic Church. He should get higher compensation because he pays more taxes than I do given the same gross income.

Following the same logic I should get paid more by my company because I am not deducting a mortgage while a lot of other people with my same gross income do.

Following the same logic it makes sense that CEO’s of companies have different form of compensation to avoid different kinds of taxation.

Higher gross compensation is simply higher pay and it is defined by the company. Taxes and exemptions are not defined by the company but by the government.

[quote="Brendan, post:8, topic:203952"]
And since childless couples have less take home pay than couples with children, are they going to reimburse childless couples for the loss of income from the dependant deduction as well?

To insure that they too get the same take home pay?

[/quote]

Not all gay and lesbian couples in legal dometic partnerships are childless.

Net pay is defined by tax laws and exemptions. Why is the tax unfair? Any man can marry a woman if he wants to avoid taxes, I do not see a law forbidding it.

For the same reason that a tax on Catholics, but not on Baptists would be unfair. Anyone could be a Baptist and avoid the tax, but that doesn’t make it fair.

How does this relate to the previous topic? It appears to me to be a non sequitur.

What about the other cases that I mentioned. Does Google account for those? Are you telling me that Google’s bonus structure is a flat percentage of the the net pay and that it is not related to gross pay and grade level? Google is just using a political stunt to please a customer base, there is nothing about fairness. Just look at the political flip flops in Asia.

My apologies. With the title I mean that Google is now paying more than they were previously to Gays living together in a "Domestic Partnership." I should have stuck with the original: "Google to Add Pay to Cover a Tax for Same-Sex Benefits." If a moderator would change that for me (since I don't see an edit button for that anywhere), I would be grateful.

Like some people have stated, there really isn't much difference between paying for this and paying for various other things for people who choose to live a certain way. To compensate people who prefer a lifestyle centered around a "popular" sexual fetish... There's just nothing right about that.

My opinion of Google is lowered now. I loved them as a company and was considering a Nexus One or Droid and maybe switching to gmail from yahoo. I was also excited about Google Wave. Now I don't know wether I should even be supporting their "free" stuff since most of their money comes from advertising. How can a consumer boycott advertisements (other than blocking everything google related like google-analytics and such).

[quote="Yomic, post:16, topic:203952"]

My opinion of Google is lowered now. I loved them as a company and was considering a Nexus One or Droid and maybe switching to gmail from yahoo. I was also excited about Google Wave. Now I don't know wether I should even be supporting their "free" stuff since most of their money comes from advertising. How can a consumer boycott advertisements (other than blocking everything google related like google-analytics and such).

[/quote]

Oh now better think again, according to the Human Rights Campaign Yahoo! scored a perfect 100 on its gay friendliness. * Yahoo!, declared its pride at being part of a "pioneering group that has stepped up to create a more inclusive work environment for today's diverse employee groups."

Cammie Dunaway, chief marketing officer and executive sponsor of the LGBT employee group at Yahoo!, also said the company values its "tens of millions of LGBT consumers around the world and are always looking for ways to further connect them to the information, passions, and communities that matter most to them, on our Yahoo! LGBT Pride site and across our network." *

wnd.com/?pageId=43568

Droid is owned by Motorola which is in the top 50 most gay friendly companies in the world
Look here at that list: borngay.procon.org/view.additional-resource.php?resourceID=000032

There a lot of companies to boycott on this list:
1. American Express Co.
2. Walt Disney Co.
3. Microsoft Corp.
4. Lucent Technologies Inc.
5. Xerox
6. International Business Machines
7. Hewlett-Packard Co.
8. Apple Computer Inc.
9. AMR Corp.
10. Citigroup Inc.
11. Gap Inc.
12. Verizon Communications
13. AT&T Corp.
14. AOL-Time Warner Inc.
15. JP Morgan Chase & Co.
16. Intel Corp.
17. SBC Communications
18. Ford Motor Co.
19. Compaq Computer Corp.
20. New York Times Co.
21. Oracle Corp.
22. Coca-Cola Co.
23. Sun Microsystems
24. Texas Instruments
25. Aetna Inc.
26. FleetBoston Financial
27. Bank of America Corp.
28. US Airways Group Inc.
29. General Motors Corp.
30. Boeing Co.
31. Merrill Lynch & Co.
32. Charles Schwab Corp.
33. General Mills
34. Eastman Kodak Co.
35. Qwest Communications Int.
36. UAL Corp.
37. Chevron Corp.
38. Wells Fargo & Co.
39. Cisco Systems Inc.
40. Motorola Inc.
41. Costco Wholesale Corp.
42. Chubb Corp.
43. Federated Department Stores
44. Enron Corp.
45. Allstate Corp.
46. Gillette Co.
47. Honeywell International
48. Fannie Mae
49. Barnes & Noble Inc.
50. Nordstrom Inc.

[quote="Kuan_Yin, post:17, topic:203952"]
Oh now better think again, according to the Human Rights Campaign Yahoo! scored a perfect 100 on its gay friendliness. * Yahoo!, declared its pride at being part of a "pioneering group that has stepped up to create a more inclusive work environment for today's diverse employee groups."

.*

I work at Yahoo! and can confirm this. It is a truly great company to work for.

[/quote]

[quote="Just_Lurking, post:9, topic:203952"]
Don't worry - this is a temporary measure until Obama can repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. Then gay couples will be able to file jointly, and there won't be any tax differences between heterosexual and homosexual couples.

[/quote]

That would be great and would certainly resolve the issue. But I have seen no willingness from Obama to pursue this path.

[quote="jjdrury81, post:18, topic:203952"]
I work at Yahoo! and can confirm this. It is a truly great company to work for.

[/quote]

My husband's sister works there as well and LOVES it. She has nothing but wonderful things to say about her employer.:)

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.