Comments on: Goldman’s gym tax

By: dWj

dWj — Mon, 16 Aug 2010 03:32:30 +0000

The unfit and those who belong to other gyms or prefer to work out outside. It doesn’t seem unreasonable for this not to be free.

There’s also the standard behavioral reason, that asking someone to pay for something will make them more likely to actually use it than if they don’t. Not that Goldman traders are anything but hyperrational.

By: derp

derp — Fri, 13 Aug 2010 13:30:50 +0000

Wait wait, what’s the problem? In keeping with the times….the progressive gym fees are designed to charge people who make more, well, more.

Also, what’s with the assumption that if you work at Goldman and don’t use THEIR gym you are therefore unhealthy?

Strawman anyone?

By: TurtleBay

TurtleBay — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 22:11:51 +0000

I think it has a lot to do with perception. I was at J.P. Morgan when Bear Stearns happened. I recall that the Bear gym was closed because it looked bad. The building was pretty much empty but the gym was gone because a free employee gym looks extravagant. Goldman can tell investors and clients that the gym is not free – it is priced similarly to other Manhattan gyms. So it is not client money (or fed bailout money when applicable) paying for the gym.

By: gringcorp

gringcorp — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 19:10:20 +0000

Yeah, my guess is it’s priced just about low enough not be a taxable benefit. The delightful cafeteria there also charges, though not excessively. Bloomberg, last I checked, was giving away its snacks for free..

By: GregHao

GregHao — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 18:31:58 +0000

Maybe it’s to get around the fringe benefit tax that might otherwise be levied onto GS? 54,000 sq ft, while quite large, I don’t think is that large (not sure how many GS employees are at the Manhattan HQ) but just as an example, my gym is 130,000 sq ft but around 6-8am and 4-6pm, it’s packed to the gills. Now granted, a lot of that space is taken up by locker rooms, cafeteria, basketball courts, etc, but the space gets used up very quickly…