Yearly performance evaluations just might be heading out the door, according to a recent WorkHuman Analytics & Research Institute Survey. Findings reveal that these appraisals are less than effective and used less often. Based on select findings, 55 percent of employees responded that yearly evaluations don’t help them become better in their role. Almost as many, 53 percent, indicated that annual reviews recognize an employee’s complete workload. The survey also found that only 54 percent of businesses used annual reviews in 2019, compared to 82 percent of workers saying their employer used annual reviews in 2016.
According to Gallup, only 14 percent of workers responded positively that performance reviews motivated them to get better at their skill set. It also found that among businesses with 10,000 workers, time taken for performance evaluations reduced employee productivity by at least $2.4 million and up to $35 million. It also found that one-third of workers’ output and quality declined.
When it comes to traditional performance reviews, many employees believe they are run by managers with little regard to any employee input whatsoever. However, there are other ways to evaluate an employee: the worker can evaluate themselves; their co-workers can appraise them; or a combination of a self-, peer- and manager-focused assessment.
As Harvard Business Review explains, since traditional performance reviews are mutually stressful for managers and their subordinates, there are a few recommendations to attempt to make it a more productive experience.
The first recommendation is to set initial, mutual expectations for manager and employee. When the year begins, the business’ performance requirements should be detailed for the employee so that expectations are clear. By setting performance objectives with the employee, the manager and business will ensure that employees are answerable for their performance.
The second step is to prepare for the in-person evaluation as it gets closer to the meeting. Two weeks before the in-person evaluation, HBR recommends that workers and managers review their past accomplishments – good, bad, etc. Managers could also ask for objective co-workers’ assessments of the employee’s work to garner different perspectives on their performance.
Before a face-to-face meeting, give the employee the assessment to let them internalize it and let their emotions settle before the discussion. From there, the atmosphere should be established by the manager. When it comes to competent, high performers, managers should keep the reviews on the workers’ accomplishments and progression at the company, along with concerns they might have in their role. For poor performers, putting the focus on accountability and improved results is the recommended route.
Asking employees what’s working and what’s not working can be helpful for both manager and employee. It’s also recommended to point out what specific actions, not generalities, employees should take to keep improving.
Based on the evolution of how and where work is being conducted, it seems that the annual performance review needs to be re-evaluated and updated. Only time will tell how it will change, but based on what’s not working, it will evolve as the workplace moves deeper into the 21st century.
What’s the Future for Measuring Employee Performance?
February 1, 2022 · Blog, General Business News
⏱ 3 min read
Yearly performance evaluations just might be heading out the door, according to a recent WorkHuman Analytics & Research Institute Survey. Findings reveal that these appraisals are less than effective and used less often. Based on select findings, 55 percent of employees responded that yearly evaluations don’t help them become better in their role. Almost as many, 53 percent, indicated that annual reviews recognize an employee’s complete workload. The survey also found that only 54 percent of businesses used annual reviews in 2019, compared to 82 percent of workers saying their employer used annual reviews in 2016.
According to Gallup, only 14 percent of workers responded positively that performance reviews motivated them to get better at their skill set. It also found that among businesses with 10,000 workers, time taken for performance evaluations reduced employee productivity by at least $2.4 million and up to $35 million. It also found that one-third of workers’ output and quality declined.
When it comes to traditional performance reviews, many employees believe they are run by managers with little regard to any employee input whatsoever. However, there are other ways to evaluate an employee: the worker can evaluate themselves; their co-workers can appraise them; or a combination of a self-, peer- and manager-focused assessment.
As Harvard Business Review explains, since traditional performance reviews are mutually stressful for managers and their subordinates, there are a few recommendations to attempt to make it a more productive experience.
The first recommendation is to set initial, mutual expectations for manager and employee. When the year begins, the business’ performance requirements should be detailed for the employee so that expectations are clear. By setting performance objectives with the employee, the manager and business will ensure that employees are answerable for their performance.
The second step is to prepare for the in-person evaluation as it gets closer to the meeting. Two weeks before the in-person evaluation, HBR recommends that workers and managers review their past accomplishments – good, bad, etc. Managers could also ask for objective co-workers’ assessments of the employee’s work to garner different perspectives on their performance.
Before a face-to-face meeting, give the employee the assessment to let them internalize it and let their emotions settle before the discussion. From there, the atmosphere should be established by the manager. When it comes to competent, high performers, managers should keep the reviews on the workers’ accomplishments and progression at the company, along with concerns they might have in their role. For poor performers, putting the focus on accountability and improved results is the recommended route.
Asking employees what’s working and what’s not working can be helpful for both manager and employee. It’s also recommended to point out what specific actions, not generalities, employees should take to keep improving.
Based on the evolution of how and where work is being conducted, it seems that the annual performance review needs to be re-evaluated and updated. Only time will tell how it will change, but based on what’s not working, it will evolve as the workplace moves deeper into the 21st century.
These articles are intended to provide general resources for the tax and accounting needs of small businesses and individuals. Service2Client LLC is the author, but is not engaged in rendering specific legal, accounting, financial or professional advice. Service2Client LLC makes no representation that the recommendations of Service2Client LLC will achieve any result. The NSAD has not reviewed any of the Service2Client LLC content. Readers are encouraged to contact a professional regarding the topics in these articles. The images linked to these articles are protected by copyright and should not be copied for any reason.
No one knows for sure what 2022 will bring in the form of tax legislation, but there is certain to be some action. Top tax analysts think there are several topics that are likely to come up in 2022. Most predict that a lot of potential changes that were discussed but never made much traction in 2021 will be revisited.
Rolling Back Corporate Tax Rates
Back in 2017, then-President Trump’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Acts (TCJA) reduced corporate tax rates. While a bid raise them again failed in 2021, many believe there is a good chance that Democrats will try again in 2022. Most believe a 2022 proposal would try to raise the current 21 percent corporate tax bracket up to between 25 percent and 28 percent, but opinions vary. While most analysts see a push to raise rates, no one predicts a push to go back to pre-2017 rates, which were as high as 35 percent. Republican opposition to any such measure is expected to be strong.
The Billionaire Tax
New spending proposals in 2021 saw the backing of a billionaire tax as a method to help finance them. While no such tax made its way into law during 2021, many analysts believe that a billionaire tax is likely to resurface once again in 2022.
The name is a bit of a misnomer, as the most recent proposals applied to more than just billionaires; they were set to impact taxpayers with more than $1 billion in assets as well as those with over $100 million of income for three years in a row. Under these thresholds, the tax would only impact approximately 700 to 800 people in the United States.
Proposals from 2021 included a controversial provision that is a major deviation from current tax law: taxing unrealized gains. Currently, with few exceptions for professional traders who can elect to mark-to-market for example, tradable assets such as stocks are taxed only on realized gains once the asset is sold. Iterations of the billionaire tax proposed to change this and require such assets to be valued annually and taxed according to the unrealized portion as well. The rationale is that the ultra-wealthy can take loans against their assets and avoid ever selling or realizing the gains – and therefore avoid taxes as well.
Finally, it’s important to note that this particular form of billionaire tax is not the same as a wealth tax. This tax focuses on unrealized gains only and not the taxpayer’s total wealth.
A True Wealth Tax
Another tax law that made its way into the national spotlight during 2021 and is likely to get another try in 2022 is some form of a wealth tax.
Typically, a wealth tax is a flat tax percentage placed on a taxpayer’s total net worth annually; say one percent, for example. Unlike essentially all forms of taxation in the United States, a wealth tax would see someone owing money year-after-year even if they never made any more money.
One of the biggest non-political problems with a wealth tax is logistics. Taxing net worth means that every asset a taxpayer owns needs to be valued annually, including real estate, cash, investments, business ownership and other assets. This creates a huge administrative burden and leaves a lot of room for interpretation between valuation professionals as well.
No analyst foresees any wealth tax proposals applying broadly. Instead, most see it being targeted at the ultra-wealthy – those with a net worth over $50 million. This makes it politically palatable as the vast majority of taxpayers are exempt; however, there are many who oppose any such tax either due to ideological reasons or because they feel it represents a slippery slope to eventually capture more and more taxpayers with lower net worth thresholds.
Tougher Regulations on Cryptocurrency
One of the most unclear areas for potential 2022 tax law proposals involve cryptocurrencies. The reality is that most of Congress simply doesn’t understand the market and the IRS itself is mired in technical rules on how to treat various sectors of the emerging financial arena.
While some analysts predict there will be proposals to differentiate the tax treatment from more traditional assets, others believe the moves will be largely regulatory and focus on compliance and minimizing tax avoidance within the asset class.
Conclusion
Many of the above tax provisions are highly partisan in nature. As a result, it is likely that congressional gridlock will ensue and little if anything will get passed through legislative channels. This leaves many analysts predicting that tax changes, to the extent possible under our system, may see more executive actions than usual. Regardless, with the current economic uncertainty, high inflation and geopolitical instability, the topics above may or may not come up this year. One thing is certain however, taxes won’t be going away or getting any simpler.
2022 U.S. Tax Legislation Forecast
February 1, 2022 · Blog, Tax and Financial News
⏱ 4 min read
No one knows for sure what 2022 will bring in the form of tax legislation, but there is certain to be some action. Top tax analysts think there are several topics that are likely to come up in 2022. Most predict that a lot of potential changes that were discussed but never made much traction in 2021 will be revisited.
Rolling Back Corporate Tax Rates
Back in 2017, then-President Trump’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Acts (TCJA) reduced corporate tax rates. While a bid raise them again failed in 2021, many believe there is a good chance that Democrats will try again in 2022. Most believe a 2022 proposal would try to raise the current 21 percent corporate tax bracket up to between 25 percent and 28 percent, but opinions vary. While most analysts see a push to raise rates, no one predicts a push to go back to pre-2017 rates, which were as high as 35 percent. Republican opposition to any such measure is expected to be strong.
The Billionaire Tax
New spending proposals in 2021 saw the backing of a billionaire tax as a method to help finance them. While no such tax made its way into law during 2021, many analysts believe that a billionaire tax is likely to resurface once again in 2022.
The name is a bit of a misnomer, as the most recent proposals applied to more than just billionaires; they were set to impact taxpayers with more than $1 billion in assets as well as those with over $100 million of income for three years in a row. Under these thresholds, the tax would only impact approximately 700 to 800 people in the United States.
Proposals from 2021 included a controversial provision that is a major deviation from current tax law: taxing unrealized gains. Currently, with few exceptions for professional traders who can elect to mark-to-market for example, tradable assets such as stocks are taxed only on realized gains once the asset is sold. Iterations of the billionaire tax proposed to change this and require such assets to be valued annually and taxed according to the unrealized portion as well. The rationale is that the ultra-wealthy can take loans against their assets and avoid ever selling or realizing the gains – and therefore avoid taxes as well.
Finally, it’s important to note that this particular form of billionaire tax is not the same as a wealth tax. This tax focuses on unrealized gains only and not the taxpayer’s total wealth.
A True Wealth Tax
Another tax law that made its way into the national spotlight during 2021 and is likely to get another try in 2022 is some form of a wealth tax.
Typically, a wealth tax is a flat tax percentage placed on a taxpayer’s total net worth annually; say one percent, for example. Unlike essentially all forms of taxation in the United States, a wealth tax would see someone owing money year-after-year even if they never made any more money.
One of the biggest non-political problems with a wealth tax is logistics. Taxing net worth means that every asset a taxpayer owns needs to be valued annually, including real estate, cash, investments, business ownership and other assets. This creates a huge administrative burden and leaves a lot of room for interpretation between valuation professionals as well.
No analyst foresees any wealth tax proposals applying broadly. Instead, most see it being targeted at the ultra-wealthy – those with a net worth over $50 million. This makes it politically palatable as the vast majority of taxpayers are exempt; however, there are many who oppose any such tax either due to ideological reasons or because they feel it represents a slippery slope to eventually capture more and more taxpayers with lower net worth thresholds.
Tougher Regulations on Cryptocurrency
One of the most unclear areas for potential 2022 tax law proposals involve cryptocurrencies. The reality is that most of Congress simply doesn’t understand the market and the IRS itself is mired in technical rules on how to treat various sectors of the emerging financial arena.
While some analysts predict there will be proposals to differentiate the tax treatment from more traditional assets, others believe the moves will be largely regulatory and focus on compliance and minimizing tax avoidance within the asset class.
Conclusion
Many of the above tax provisions are highly partisan in nature. As a result, it is likely that congressional gridlock will ensue and little if anything will get passed through legislative channels. This leaves many analysts predicting that tax changes, to the extent possible under our system, may see more executive actions than usual. Regardless, with the current economic uncertainty, high inflation and geopolitical instability, the topics above may or may not come up this year. One thing is certain however, taxes won’t be going away or getting any simpler.
Disclaimer
These articles are intended to provide general resources for the tax and accounting needs of small businesses and individuals. Service2Client LLC is the author, but is not engaged in rendering specific legal, accounting, financial or professional advice. Service2Client LLC makes no representation that the recommendations of Service2Client LLC will achieve any result. The NSAD has not reviewed any of the Service2Client LLC content. Readers are encouraged to contact a professional regarding the topics in these articles. The images linked to these articles are protected by copyright and should not be copied for any reason.
If you pay $250 a month for cable and premium channels, that’s $3,000 a year. Over a 30-year period, the total cost would be $90,000. We don’t tend to think about how much we pay in regular expenses over the long term.
However, that’s how various industry analysts report the cost of healthcare during retirement. Recent estimates for a retiring 65-year-old couple fall between $300,000 and $400,000 to cover healthcare expenses in retirement. At first glance, that’s an intimidating number and implies that pre-retirees need to have this much saved by the time they retire.
Fortunately, when you break down the numbers, that’s not the case. First of all, that estimate includes premiums for Medicare with prescription drug coverage, which are typically deducted from Social Security benefits before they ever hit your bank account. According to T. Rowe Price, Medicare premiums account for 76 percent to 82 percent of most retiree’s healthcare expenses, so a large portion of these costs are paid for outside of your household budget.
The true cost of retiree healthcare expenditures is based on how healthy you remain during retirement. And actually, that’s not necessarily related to savings – it’s more a combination of genetics and peoples’ penchant for healthy living before and during retirement. However, it’s always best to prepare for the worst, so the more money you save and earmark for healthcare expenses, the better off you’ll be.
One way to control your monthly premiums in retirement is to shop and compare Medicare plans each year during open enrollment. It helps to keep a running tab of your out-of-pocket expenses each year so that you can increase your Medicare coverage if your costs start trending higher. Higher coverage might mean higher premiums, but that will lower out-of-pocket costs each year.
The following guide was developed by T. Rowe Price. It estimates how much retirees spend based on different types of Medicare plans using 2021 premiums and data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS). Among retirees who enroll in either (1) Medicare Parts A, B and D; (2) Medicare Advantage HMO and Drug Plan; or (3) Medicare Parts A, B, D and Medigap:
25 percent will pay less than $500/year in out-of-pocket expenses
50 percent will pay less than $1,200/year in out-of-pocket expenses
25 percent will pay more than $1,900/year in out-of-pocket expenses
25 percent will pay more than $3,900/year in out-of-pocket expenses
As for paying those out-of-pocket expenses, remember that you pay them over time, so it’s not as if you’re paying a large lump sum all at once. One strategy is to fund a savings account with enough money to pay out-of-pocket expenses for the year, based on your prior year’s spending. Then replenish this account each year from other funding sources, such as an annual required minimum distribution (RMD) from a retirement account.
If you have access through your current health plan, pre-retirees can save for healthcare expenses with a health savings account (HSA). Contributions are tax deductible and, over time, you can invest your savings for earnings accumulation. These funds, including investment gains, are never taxed as long as they are used to pay eligible healthcare expenses. The account is particularly useful if you don’t tap it until retirement, when the money can be used to pay for things like dental and vision care, hearing aids, long term care insurance premiums and nursing home costs.
Despite those alarming projections about how much healthcare will cost you in retirement, remember that it can be manageable because it is paid out over time.
Create a Healthcare Plan for Retirement
February 1, 2022 · Blog, Financial Planning
⏱ 4 min read
If you pay $250 a month for cable and premium channels, that’s $3,000 a year. Over a 30-year period, the total cost would be $90,000. We don’t tend to think about how much we pay in regular expenses over the long term.
However, that’s how various industry analysts report the cost of healthcare during retirement. Recent estimates for a retiring 65-year-old couple fall between $300,000 and $400,000 to cover healthcare expenses in retirement. At first glance, that’s an intimidating number and implies that pre-retirees need to have this much saved by the time they retire.
Fortunately, when you break down the numbers, that’s not the case. First of all, that estimate includes premiums for Medicare with prescription drug coverage, which are typically deducted from Social Security benefits before they ever hit your bank account. According to T. Rowe Price, Medicare premiums account for 76 percent to 82 percent of most retiree’s healthcare expenses, so a large portion of these costs are paid for outside of your household budget.
The true cost of retiree healthcare expenditures is based on how healthy you remain during retirement. And actually, that’s not necessarily related to savings – it’s more a combination of genetics and peoples’ penchant for healthy living before and during retirement. However, it’s always best to prepare for the worst, so the more money you save and earmark for healthcare expenses, the better off you’ll be.
One way to control your monthly premiums in retirement is to shop and compare Medicare plans each year during open enrollment. It helps to keep a running tab of your out-of-pocket expenses each year so that you can increase your Medicare coverage if your costs start trending higher. Higher coverage might mean higher premiums, but that will lower out-of-pocket costs each year.
The following guide was developed by T. Rowe Price. It estimates how much retirees spend based on different types of Medicare plans using 2021 premiums and data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS). Among retirees who enroll in either (1) Medicare Parts A, B and D; (2) Medicare Advantage HMO and Drug Plan; or (3) Medicare Parts A, B, D and Medigap:
25 percent will pay less than $500/year in out-of-pocket expenses
50 percent will pay less than $1,200/year in out-of-pocket expenses
25 percent will pay more than $1,900/year in out-of-pocket expenses
25 percent will pay more than $3,900/year in out-of-pocket expenses
As for paying those out-of-pocket expenses, remember that you pay them over time, so it’s not as if you’re paying a large lump sum all at once. One strategy is to fund a savings account with enough money to pay out-of-pocket expenses for the year, based on your prior year’s spending. Then replenish this account each year from other funding sources, such as an annual required minimum distribution (RMD) from a retirement account.
If you have access through your current health plan, pre-retirees can save for healthcare expenses with a health savings account (HSA). Contributions are tax deductible and, over time, you can invest your savings for earnings accumulation. These funds, including investment gains, are never taxed as long as they are used to pay eligible healthcare expenses. The account is particularly useful if you don’t tap it until retirement, when the money can be used to pay for things like dental and vision care, hearing aids, long term care insurance premiums and nursing home costs.
Despite those alarming projections about how much healthcare will cost you in retirement, remember that it can be manageable because it is paid out over time.
Disclaimer
These articles are intended to provide general resources for the tax and accounting needs of small businesses and individuals. Service2Client LLC is the author, but is not engaged in rendering specific legal, accounting, financial or professional advice. Service2Client LLC makes no representation that the recommendations of Service2Client LLC will achieve any result. The NSAD has not reviewed any of the Service2Client LLC content. Readers are encouraged to contact a professional regarding the topics in these articles. The images linked to these articles are protected by copyright and should not be copied for any reason.
Yearly performance evaluations just might be heading out the door, according to a recent WorkHuman Analytics & Research Institute Survey. Findings reveal that these appraisals are less than effective and used less often. Based on select findings, 55 percent of employees responded that yearly evaluations don’t help them become better in their role. Almost as many, 53 percent, indicated that annual reviews recognize an employee’s complete workload. The survey also found that only 54 percent of businesses used annual reviews in 2019, compared to 82 percent of workers saying their employer used annual reviews in 2016.
No one knows for sure what 2022 will bring in the form of tax legislation, but there is certain to be some action. Top tax analysts think there are several topics that are likely to come up in 2022. Most predict that a lot of potential changes that were discussed but never made much traction in 2021 will be revisited.
If you pay $250 a month for cable and premium channels, that’s $3,000 a year. Over a 30-year period, the total cost would be $90,000. We don’t tend to think about how much we pay in regular expenses over the long term.