Reader opinion The rules of the game for social cycling should be changed

Opinion|Reader’s opinion

I am partly due to my work, I followed the development of occupational cycling in Finland for about a year. Originally, the goal was to create a tax-free, environmentally friendly, and exercise-friendly way to influence future commuting. Providing the benefit was practically free of charge for the employer, it was a tax-free benefit for the employee.

Over the past year, however, there have been changes in the benefit that have made it a reward for the employer to provide a bike benefit. In addition, a closer look at the prices of bicycle packages raises the legitimate question of whether this is ultimately a very advantageous advantage for the employee: fixed and binding monthly payments do not appear to be a good purchase compared to a normal bicycle shop or service station, or not.

In short, financial and leasing services will benefit most from providing the benefit under the current model, which was hardly the original purpose of providing the benefit.

If the state wants to be involved in promoting the development of business travel, more sensible options would also be available. I suggest that the state subsidize companies that provide a bicycle advantage in their taxation, while the company subsidizes the employee for the kilometers trampled into work. An employee may purchase a bike in any way they choose, at any cost, or use a bike they already own. In this way, an environmentally friendly and great idea would be clearer, more affordable and for the benefit of us all.

Mikael Penttilä

Beautiful

The reader’s opinions are the speeches written by HS’s readers, selected and delivered by HS’s editorial staff. You can leave a comment or read the principles of writing at www.hs.fi/kirjtamielipidekirjoitus/.