It is simple: if your Lagos, Port Harcourt or Kano company has approved remote work (yes, work from home, WFH), you may need to be considering a very nice community in Nigeria. It has broadband internet. It has good security. It offers 24/7 electricity. There are good primary and secondary schools nearby. And it has NO traffic. But the location is also “remote”!
Yes, if this WFH takes off, I do expect some progressive cities to offer some deals to Lagos, Kano and PHC residents to relocate. I do think if the Federal Government puts a tax muscle to it, we can solve our traffic congestion in Nigeria.
The tax model will reward the employers by encouraging companies to have WFH and get some incentives on PAYE and employee-related taxes: the more the workers are on WFH, the more progressive the tax benefits would be. The tax model must be weighted by looking at population density.
Covid-19 might have given Nigeria a roadmap to deal with its traffic congestion. Can we explore a new paradigm that deviates from building more roads to using tax policy to shape employer-employee decision making, at least temporarily, since we do not have the resources to fund the road networks? Add the largely unattainable situation of building new train stations and waterways in a time the nation does not have the resources, you will agree that WFH could offer value.
Some U.S. cities are getting creative.
As tech giants adapt and embrace working remotely, smaller U.S. cities are offering cash incentives for workers to move there. One program called Tulsa Remote offers a $10,000 grant and co-working space to remote workers interested in moving to Oklahoma. Another, Savannah Economic Development Authority, provides $2,000 grants to cover tech workers’ moving expenses to Georgia. Similar programs are available in Vermont, northwestern Alabama, and Topeka, Kansas, offering $5,000 to $15,000