Reducing Employee Benefits Inequity: Why Salary Sacrifice Charging Reaches Further
Source: Shutterstock
Salary sacrifice EV car schemes have a well-documented limitation. Savings scale with income, meaning higher-rate taxpayers save more, but affordability thresholds can exclude lower earners from participating. For HR and reward teams, this creates a tension around fair employee benefits.
Salary sacrifice charging offers the same mechanism applied to a benefit with no affordability barrier and a distributional effect that tilts toward lower earners rather than away from them.
For any employee already driving a company-provided electric car, The Charge Scheme covers charging costs through a gross salary deduction, saving 20 to 50% on every kWh. Lower earners are more likely to lack a home driveway, which means they spend more on public charging than colleagues who can charge overnight at home. That gap is where salary sacrifice charging changes the picture.
Where Does Benefit Inequity Show Up in Salary Sacrifice Schemes?
Salary sacrifice isn’t a neutral mechanism. This is because the savings available are calculated as a percentage of the amount sacrificed; employees in higher tax bands always save more. A higher-rate taxpayer saves around 42% on a sacrificed amount. A basic-rate taxpayer saves around 28%. The same benefit, the same monthly deduction, a 14 percentage point difference in real-world value.
For car schemes, that gap is material. On a £400 per month lease, the higher-rate taxpayer saves around £168 per month. The basic-rate taxpayer saves around £112. Over a three-year term, that is a difference of over £2,000 in take-home savings on the same vehicle.
There’s also an access problem. Because salary sacrifice reduces gross pay, employers must make sure post-sacrifice earnings stay above the National Living Wage. For lower earners, this can make participation impossible regardless of how much they want the benefit. The result is a benefits accessibility gap that sits at the heart of most salary sacrifice car schemes.
Offering used EVs through salary sacrifice helps reduce costs and makes this option more accessible - therefore, it’s worth offering. But this doesn’t resolve the structural issue for employees already driving a company-provided electric car and paying for every charge from their post-tax income.
Key Takeaways
Higher-rate taxpayers save around 42% through salary sacrifice; basic-rate taxpayers save around 28%
On a £400 per month lease, that gap compounds to over £2,000 across a three-year term
NLW thresholds can exclude lower earners from car schemes entirely
Used EV access helps, but doesn’t resolve the gap for existing company car drivers
Why Do Car Schemes Deliver More Value to Higher Earners?
The tax mechanics explain part of the skew, but not all of it. There are softer factors that push car scheme uptake further toward higher earners, and reward teams benefit from understanding both.
Higher earners tend to have more budget flexibility to absorb a fixed monthly commitment over a two or three-year term. They’re more likely to have encountered salary sacrifice before and feel confident in how it works. A lot of car scheme communications often lead with headline savings figures calculated at the higher-rate band, which can signal to lower earners that the benefit wasn’t designed with them in mind.
This pattern isn’t unique to EV salary sacrifice schemes. The most financially complex employee benefits, including pension salary sacrifice and share save schemes, consistently see higher uptake among better-paid employees. Salary sacrifice fairness is a known challenge across the benefits industry, not just in fleet and EV.
For employers with a reward strategy inclusion goal, the answer is not to redesign the car scheme. Instead, they should pair it with benefits that deliver proportionally more value to employees in lower tax bands. This is the structural case for salary sacrifice charging, and it is straightforward to make to senior leadership and DEI stakeholders.
Key Takeaways
Budget flexibility and prior experience of salary sacrifice both skew uptake toward higher earners
Communications leading with higher-rate savings figures can inadvertently exclude lower earners
Skewed uptake across complex benefits is an industry-wide pattern, not unique to EV schemes
Pairing car schemes with complementary benefits is the practical route to reward strategy inclusion
How Salary Sacrifice Charging Reaches a Wider Workforce
Salary sacrifice charging works the same way as a car scheme, but the employee profile it serves is different in two important ways.
No affordability barrier
There is no vehicle lease commitment and no threshold tied to the National Living Wage. Any employee driving a company-provided electric car is eligible, regardless of tax band or whether they have a home driveway.
The monthly deduction is the cost of the electricity they use, which, for most employees, is a fraction of a car lease payment. That lower barrier is the first reason salary sacrifice charging reaches further down the income distribution than a car scheme alone.
The distributional effect
Drivers without a home driveway rely on the public charging network, which carries a structural cost premium. VAT on public charging is levied at 20%, compared to 5% on home electricity. EVA England research found that 60% of petrol and diesel drivers without off-street parking cite cost as a central barrier to switching to an EV.
Because The Charge Scheme saves a percentage of actual charging spend, employees with higher public charging bills realise a larger absolute saving. A basic-rate taxpayer spending £90 per month on public charging saves around £25 per month, or £300 per year, recovered from costs previously paid entirely from post-tax income.
For HR teams building an equitable benefits package, this is the structural argument for adding charging to a car scheme.
Key Takeaways
No NLW affordability threshold means salary sacrifice charging is open to more employees
Public charging VAT is levied at 20% versus 5% for home electricity, creating a real cost gap
A basic-rate taxpayer spending £90 per month on public charging saves around £300 per year
Salary sacrifice charging rebalances those who benefit most from the overall salary sacrifice programme
Worked Example: How the Savings Compare Across the Workforce
The table below places two employees side by side. Same employer, same car scheme, same tax mechanism. The difference is in income level and charging behaviour.
| Employee A | Employee B | |
|---|---|---|
| Role | Senior Manager | Customer Service Manager |
| Salary | £65,000 | £28,000 |
| Tax band | Higher rate (40%) | Basic rate (20%) |
| Home driveway | Yes | No |
| Monthly charging spend | £30 (home) | £90 (public) |
| Monthly saving via TCS | ~£12.60 | ~£25.20 |
| Annual saving via TCS | ~£151 | ~£302 |
Employee A's primary financial benefit sits in the car scheme, where her higher tax rate delivers the largest saving. Employee B's car scheme saving is more modest, but salary sacrifice charging delivers more than double the annual saving in cash terms, applied to a cost that was previously absorbed entirely from post-tax income on a lower salary.
This is what an inclusive employee benefits strategy looks like in practice. The same mechanism, available to both employees, produces an outcome that’s weighted toward the employee who needs it most.
For reward and DEI leads, this table is a strong proof point that the benefits package was designed with the whole workforce in mind.
Key Takeaways
A basic-rate taxpayer on public charging saves around double that of a higher earner charging at home
The larger savings land with the employee for whom the cost was most material
The same tax mechanism produces a more equitable outcome than the car scheme alone
This outcome is easy to evidence in DEI and reward strategy reporting
How Salary Sacrifice Car and Charging Schemes Work Together
The car scheme and salary sacrifice charging are not in competition; instead, they’re designed to work together. This produces a more equitable benefits package than either benefit delivers alone.
The Charge Scheme bolts directly onto an existing EV car arrangement. This means no separate contract, no new payroll integration, no disruption to how the car scheme currently runs. For finance and payroll teams, the only operational addition is a monthly mileage submission from employees, which takes around 10 seconds.
Employees in the car scheme continue to receive their vehicle savings as before. Those who also enrol in The Charge Scheme save on their charging costs on top of that. And because the charging benefit carries no vehicle cost commitment, it improves the overall equity of the benefits package without reducing the value of the car scheme for anyone already in it.
The commercial case is also straightforward. Salary sacrifice reduces gross pay, so the employer's National Insurance contributions fall alongside the employee's savings. The Charge Scheme is cost-neutral for employers, funded through those NI savings within the scheme structure, with no setup or running costs for the business.
For organisations with Net Zero commitments, the combination carries an evidential advantage. Supporting employees to run their electric vehicles affordably across home, workplace, and public charging is a practical, measurable contribution to Scope 3 emissions reduction.
Key takeaways
The Charge Scheme bolts onto existing car arrangements with no new payroll integration needed
Employees keep their car scheme savings; charging savings stack on top for eligible drivers
Employer NI savings fund The Charge Scheme, making it cost-neutral to implement
The combination supports measurable progress toward Scope 3 emissions targets
How to Communicate This Benefit Fairly to Employees
Without clear communication, salary sacrifice charging risks being perceived as more of the same: another perk for drivers. The message isn't "we've added a charging benefit." It's "we've extended the salary sacrifice tax saving to employees who couldn't fully access it before."
Lead With Who Benefits Most
Employees who charge on the public network save more in absolute terms than drivers charging cheaply at home. Making this visible in communications addresses the perception of inequity directly.
Be Honest About Eligibility
Salary sacrifice charging requires an employer-provided or salary-sacrificed EV. Stating this clearly, alongside a pointer to used EV options, avoids confusion and shows the organisation is working toward broader access rather than obscuring limitations.
Separate It From the Car Scheme
The Charge Scheme carries no vehicle commitment, no credit check, and minimal admin. Employees who hesitated to join the car scheme are more likely to engage if the charging benefit is presented on its own terms.
Use Real Numbers
A basic-rate taxpayer saves around 32% on public charging costs. A higher-rate taxpayer saves around 42%. Both groups benefit, and the employee with the highest public charging bill, typically the one without a driveway, sees the largest cash saving.
Key takeaways
Frame the benefit as an extension to employees who lacked access before
Be transparent about eligibility to avoid confusion among ineligible staff
Present salary sacrifice charging separately from the car scheme in all comms
Real savings figures make the equity case concrete and credible for all employees
Frequently Asked Questions
-
Salary sacrifice car schemes deliver proportionally larger savings to higher earners. Salary sacrifice charging works differently: employees without home chargers spend more on public charging, so the cash saving is often largest for lower-earning and renting employees. The same tax mechanism, but a broader beneficiary profile.
-
No. Salary sacrifice charging requires an employer-provided or salary-sacrificed electric vehicle. Employees driving personal petrol or diesel cars aren't eligible. Organisations looking to extend access can point employees toward used EV salary sacrifice options.
-
The mechanism is the same: charging costs are deducted from gross salary before tax and National Insurance are applied. The savings differ by bracket. Basic-rate taxpayers save around 32% per charge; higher-rate taxpayers save around 42%; additional-rate taxpayers save up to 50%.
-
Lead with who benefits most: employees without home chargers, who carry the highest public charging costs. Be transparent about eligibility upfront. Present salary sacrifice charging separately from the car scheme, with its own messaging, since it carries no vehicle commitment and far less complexity.
-
Yes. Employees who avoided the car scheme because EV running costs felt unaffordable are a different audience from those put off by vehicle cost. Salary sacrifice charging removes that barrier directly, reaching employees the car scheme alone cannot.
-
No. The Charge Scheme bolts onto any existing EV salary sacrifice arrangement with no separate contract and no employer cost. Car scheme savings are unchanged; eligible employees add charging savings on top.
Closing the Charging Divide Starts Here
Salary sacrifice car schemes deliver real value. But without a charging benefit alongside them, employees without driveways, those in flats and relying on the public network, are paying more than they need to for every mile they drive. That limits the reach of a benefit designed to support everyone.
The Charge Scheme extends the salary sacrifice tax saving to charging costs, reaches employees the car scheme doesn't fully serve, and costs employers nothing to implement. For reward and benefits teams looking to close the equity gap without adding complexity, it's the most straightforward addition to an existing EV package in 2026.
For employees already in an EV scheme: ask your HR or benefits team whether The Charge Scheme is available and start saving from your first charge.
For HR and reward leads: find out how The Charge Scheme integrates with your existing arrangement.
Last updated: 10/06/2026
Our pricing: is based on data collected from The Charge Scheme Calculator. All final pricing is inclusive of VAT. All deals are subject to credit approval and availability. All deals are subject to excess mileage and damage charges. Prices are calculated based on the following tax saving assumptions; England & Wales, 40% tax rate. The Charge Scheme is a product of The Electric Car Scheme™ – a trusted, trademarked brand dedicated to making electric driving more affordable. All rights reserved. The Electric Car Scheme is the trading style of The Electric Car Scheme Limited (company number 12646157, ICO number ZB030706, VAT number 439430195) and The Electric Car Scheme Holdings Limited (company number 13295877, ICO number ZB252629). Head office & registered address: The Shipping Building, 254 Blyth Road, Hayes, UB3 1HA. The Electric Car Scheme Limited provides services for the administration of salary sacrifice employee benefits. The Electric Car Scheme Holdings Limited is a member of the BVRLA (10608) is authorised and regulated by the FCA under FRN 968270, is an Appointed Representative of Marshall Management Services Ltd under FRN 667174, and is a credit broker and not a lender.
Copyright and Image Usage: All images used on this website are either licensed for commercial use or used with express permission from the copyright holders, in compliance with UK and EU copyright law. We are committed to respecting intellectual property rights and maintaining full compliance with applicable regulations. If you have any questions or concerns regarding image usage or copyright matters, please contact us at marketing@electriccarscheme.com and we will address them promptly.
