Posted by Lewis on October 19, 2007
In Reply to: Re: Benefit-in-kind posted by Bob on October 11, 2007
: : : : Benefit-in-kind. I arrived here hoping to find support for my assertion that it is really benefit-in-kine because kine is the old plural for cow. i.e. benefit in goods (live stock). Do I have any supporters and more important proof references?
: : : That's a nice idea, but I can't find anything that supports it. 'Payment in kind' dates back to at least 1730, when it was referred to in the English Law of Tithes:
: : : "Honey falls under the Rule of a Perfonal Tithe, and yet it is usually paid in Kind."
: : : ...
: : : "She thought fit to transubstantiate their Nature from Personal to a Predial Tithe, and accordingly claim'd their Payment in Kind."
: : I's an ellipsis for "in the very kind of thing in question" - that is, in actual goods rather than money to the value of the goods. (VSD)
: Kind, not kine. Think of cattle as very large denomination bills. Most debts would run one to two chickens at most. Got change for a goat?
BIK are a long-established phenomena in tax circles - income tax is charged against what a person is rewarded for performing their job - crafty folk would often disguise part of the pay package by some of it being 'in kind' - as in 'some other kind of reward' compared to cash. eventually, the inland revenue closed this loop-hole and taxed all emoluments, which include 'benefits in kind'. it appears on numerous forms and from recollection Statutory Instruments.
a cow is a big unit of barter currency, chickens etc would have been better as an example - I am strongly convinced that 'kind' is the origin and normal use.