Pre-Tax Dollars for Bicycle Expenses

[estilley]

Received an email from the League of American Bicyclists today asking me to petition congress for support of this bill.

Please ask Congress to suport Physical FItness by Co-sponsoring the PHIT Act

The Personal Health Investment Today (PHIT) Act would make it easier for Americans to be physically active. Specificaly it would allow individuals or families to use pre-tax dollars for physical fitness activites and equipment such as bicycles, confident cycling and other classes as well as school sports fees and gym memberships with dollars from pre-tax accounts like flexible spending accounts (FSAs) and Health Savings Accounts (HSAs).

Currently Americans redominately use pre-tax health accounts to pay for prescription drugs, doctor visit co-pays, etc. The PHIT Act would allow consumers to set aside up to $1000 per individual or $2000 per family from their HSA and FSA accounts. This helps families that put money into the HSA and then don't need it for health care - now they can use it for preventative care like fitness.

PHIT will help reverse the sedentary/obesity trend by providing an economic incentive to invest in physical activity and help reduce overall health costs. Financial incentives have been used effectively to encourage home ownership, retirement savings and higher education; PHIT would do the same for investment in health via physical activity.

Please ask your Representative and Senators to support the PHIT Act today!

http://bikeleague.org/TakeAction?vvsrc=%2fCampaigns%2f45340%2fRespond%3f vvcgUT%3dOPO30BaRHNccFiw62cjl5w%26unregistered%3dO PO30BaRHNccFiw62cjl5w%26vvcgRD%3dBb4PqbJAf67FQrzE% 26vvsbr%3dzg4xIMfVqjAeAhMFVI-27A

Now this is something I could get behind!

Bill was drafted back in 2006 but was just introduced to the House in early March 2016.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1218

[fa63]

I believe they have something like this in the UK already. I tried looking for papers looking at the effectiveness of the program but didn't see anything at a first glance. Would be interesting to see what their experience has been from a policy analysis perspective.

[MattTuck]

As much as I might benefit from something like this, I'm opposed to special interest tax expenditures.

The bike lobby is all powerful though, so we'll probably see this soon.

[stien]

I believe they have something like this in the UK already. I tried looking for papers looking at the effectiveness of the program but didn't see anything at a first glance. Would be interesting to see what their experience has been from a policy analysis perspective.

If used for work. I see it advertised on Ribble all the time.

[ANAO]

Signed and shared.

Thanks for sharing. I heard talk of claiming bike fees on 1099 form if the owner uses his bike to meet with clients, while they're on their bike, or if the owner uses the bike as mode of transport. :bike:

[ColonelJLloyd]

As much as I might benefit from something like this, I'm opposed to special interest tax expenditures.

The bike lobby is all powerful though, so we'll probably see this soon.

It could be a good way to encourage bicycle commuting, but the potential for abuse is too great.

We already have something like this, though. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employer_transportation_benefits_in_the_United_Sta tes) You can ride to work and employers can reimburse you for bicycle related expenses IN LIEU OF other transportation expenses (trains, metro, etc). Not many employers participate in this outside of large companies in dense urban environments, however, I suspect.

[EPIC! Stratton]

It could be a good way to encourage bicycle commuting, but the potential for abuse is too great.

We already have something like this, though. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employer_transportation_benefits_in_the_United_Sta tes) You can ride to work and employers can reimburse you for bicycle related expenses IN LIEU OF other transportation expenses (trains, metro, etc). Not many employers participate in this outside of large companies in dense urban environments, however, I suspect.

Even in that case many don't, or don't make it easy to do. I work for a large University in Boston and they don't do this, despite my pushing HR on it numerous times.

[rugbysecondrow]

Middle class welfare.

I agree with Matt, time to move away from some of this.

[MattTuck]

It could be a good way to encourage bicycle commuting, but the potential for abuse is too great.

We already have something like this, though. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employer_transportation_benefits_in_the_United_Sta tes) You can ride to work and employers can reimburse you for bicycle related expenses IN LIEU OF other transportation expenses (trains, metro, etc). Not many employers participate in this outside of large companies in dense urban environments, however, I suspect.

Yes, I understand the inclination to encourage bicycle commuting, but I think a federal law (and the associated regulations and administration of said law) is not a good use of a limited lobbying budget at the federal level.

I'd rather see lobbying focused on two main areas. 1) cycling infrastructure and 2) cycling safety (specifically aimed at eliminating distracted driving).

I have not yet met the person who says to me, "You know, I'd really like to get a bike and ride it work, the only thing holding me back is a federal tax deduction."

[ColonelJLloyd]

To be clear, I am not advocating the proposed bill. Not sure how that was construed.

I agree that lobbying efforts by the cycling industry are better directed at infrastructure and safety. You ever ridden on new ashpalt? It's fantastic!

[MattTuck]

To be clear, I am not advocating the proposed bill. Not sure how that was construed.

I agree that lobbying efforts by the cycling industry are better directed at infrastructure and safety. You ever ridden on new ashpalt? It's fantastic!

10-4. I read your previous comment as supporting the bill. I see now that you were just saying it is one (of many) way to encourage commuting. May not be the best one.

[OldCrank]

Many employers help with gym memberships-

via "health" "insurance" programs, the $$$ trail is unexplained.

So it's OK to help pay for bicycles, as long as they're stationary.

(insert rimshot. or sad trombone)

[bikemoore]

I'm not a fan of tax exemption. I would rather that my tax money be put to good use, like bike lanes / bike infrastructure. It's not reducing the tax burden that counts, its what we DO with the money.

[Ralph]

We already don't pay fuel taxes on our bicycle miles, don't have to have registration and expensive tag (in my state), and are exempted from need to carry auto type insurance. We need more?

[gemship]

Am I reading this right? One could claim their bicycle expense as a deduction since it is a form of fitness equipment? I would say that's awesome but promotes abuse.

I think the only legitimate deduction maybe something like a selfemployed,independent in other words rickshaw operator or someone with a bicycle towing food stand...just saying.

[cat6]

Hard for me as a cyclist to understand how here on a cycling forum the members don't understand the benefit of cycling vs driving and/or the health benefits associated with riding a bike. Those two at a high level may seem self serving, commuting by bike and being healthy, but there are tons of public benefits from each.

It's a terrific idea and as someone that contributes to a FSA and almost always has a surplus at the end of the year it would be a welcome benefit.

[Dead Man]

Sometimes you guys just way overthink ····.

[flydhest]

Hard for me as a cyclist to understand how here on a cycling forum the members don't understand the benefit of cycling vs driving and/or the health benefits associated with riding a bike. Those two at a high level may seem self serving, commuting by bike and being healthy, but there are tons of public benefits from each.



It's a terrific idea and as someone that contributes to a FSA and almost always has a surplus at the end of the year it would be a welcome benefit.


I don't think anyone questions that bikes are good. It is the question of using a tax break that is being debated.

Legitimate place to have different views.

I personally think the complexity of FSAs including the annoyance you mention are relevant aspects of the debate. More generally, though, the complexity of the tax code could be debated along with the desirability of adding (albeit marginally) to that complexity.

[smontanaro]

[QUOTE=ColonelJLloyd;1938217We already have something like this, though. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employer_transportation_benefits_in_the_United_Sta tes) You can ride to work and employers can reimburse you for bicycle related expenses IN LIEU OF other transportation expenses (trains, metro, etc). Not many employers participate in this outside of large companies in dense urban environments, however, I suspect.[/QUOTE]

My not very large employer does. I get three $20 "commuter checks" each quarter which I can spend at my LBS. As I'm into vintage bikes, there's not a ton I need, but chains, tubes, lights, bearings, etc are all good.

The part that frustrates me about the current system is that not only might employees use the bike benefit or the public transit benefit (one or the other, not both), but people who drive also get to take advantage of the benefit to defray parking expenses. If we are going to use tax breaks to nudge people, we should be nudging them in the right direction, not encouraging them to continue to drive and add to our already congested, polluted cities.