Some WFH employees now live in another country
Abroad often means exploiting cost of living arbitrage. Working in a US company with a US salary and living let&#x27;s say in Portugal or Turkey or Thailand, means that suddenly your compensation for the work you do becomes multiple times more potent. If you remove the money as intermediary, it essentially means that for the JavaScript button you created maybe you could have a meal but now you secure your weekly food.<p>This is great but most people can&#x27;t simply move because countries for some reason decided that only capital moves, people stay put and work and if they really really want to move they need to go though months long of bureaucracy and it&#x27;s not even available for most people.<p>This imparity between people breaks the natural tendency of equalisation and the arbitrage remains and creates political tensions because suddenly some services see unnatural demand, especially housing is particularly badly hit.<p>Effectively some people get particularly good compensation thanks to the arbitrage when other people who might be working just as hard and could be jast as important for the function of the society get screwed if they can&#x27;t work from home and miss out on the arbitrage and can&#x27;t move to the higher paying places because they are only(!) human capital.<p>So my argument is, I guess, this should be prevented from happening or the WFH from abroad people should be treated as local workers and pay taxes to to the host country. Ideally, anyone should be free to work and live wherever they like but since we are in a deglobalisation trend I have no hopes for it. So yes, WFH from abroad should be actually international workers and taxed accordingly.