Is a computer an advantage? – Trends on PC

For the tax authorities and the ONSS, an employer who supplies the worker with a desktop or laptop computer is required, in principle, to declare a benefit in kind of 72 euros per year, to be added to 60 euros per year if an Internet connection is available.
…

For the tax authorities and the ONSS, an employer who supplies a worker with a desktop or laptop computer is required, in principle, to declare a benefit of 72 euros per year, which is added to 60 euros per year if an Internet connection is available. But what about when the employer prohibits use for private purposes, or tolerates such use but is subject to compliance with certain conditions? Or if the company implements security measures so that it greatly restricts this use? The declaration of a benefit in kind requires, by definition, the existence of a benefit on the part of the worker. In the absence of private use, can we talk about such a feature? Especially since many workers already have a family computer at home… Jurisprudence tends to hold that there can be no advantage if there is no private use. This will be particularly the case when an employer expressly prohibits private use of a computer in its labor regulations or under its computer use policy. Does the same apply in the case of intermittent use for private purposes? A relatively recent ruling by the Brussels Labor Court of 9 July 2019 (RG 245.111) deserves our attention on this point. The court concluded that there was no in-kind benefit for the worker. In this case, the provisions of the ICT policy and labor regulations have largely limited the use for private purposes. This has been tolerated only in emergency situations as long as it does not disrupt professional activity, and any use of private, leisure or entertainment activities (listening to music, chatting, e-mail pranks, etc.) is still prohibited. For the court, the evidence has not been established that the company computer is available for domestic purposes and the worker, who is therefore not able to carry out all his private activities via this equipment, the company laptop must have his own computer. Therefore, he does not receive any benefit in kind and is not entitled to any contribution to social security. However, not everyone shares this position, as case law concludes only that there is no benefit in kind in the case of a complete ban on personal use. So caution is still in order. The declaration of a benefit in kind presupposes the existence of this benefit by definition. If we follow the above case law of the labor court, the existence of an advantage in kind presupposes that the use for private purposes authorized by the employer can provide for the worker the purchase of a private computer when he is at home. On the other hand, if the authorized private use does not allow such savings, then there can be (according to the court) there can be no question of interest in kind.