It's a moot point anyway since large business would be taxed a 1.5% income levy to fund PPL but at the same time have their tax rate reduced by 1.5%.
Net impact nil.
And for the company that did provide employer based PPL it's even a saving since they will most likely cut their own scheme.
Any other con PPL?
Wish people would try and obtain some basic facts before saying that something that would benefit working women shouldn't happen.
I have lost track of the thousands of pages on this thread and nope I'm not going to go back and read every page.
So either clarify the confusion or zip it and move on!-
To be fair I can't work out how they are funding this either and I have read this thread.
Big business is going to get a 1.5% tax cut. I believe that is happening regardless. They will then be taxed the 1.5% PPL levy so, sadly for them, they will be out of pocket the same amount.
To a certain degree it's semantics I agree though. It's still tax dollars so comes from the general pool. But if they weren't charged the levy then the country's purse would still get less corporate tax than it currently does.
There is no such thing as free money. But that money wouldn't go to health and education if not to PPL (which is often the public sentiment).
Pregnant for the first-time?
Not sure where to start? We can help!