1. United States
2. Utah
3. Letter

Pass legislation banning employers from discriminating against remote workers based solely on the state where they live and work. When a worker is fully remote and performs the same job as a colleague in another state, their home address should not be grounds for exclusion from employment or unequal treatment. Employers increasingly cite multi-state tax filings and varying compliance costs as justification for restricting where remote employees can live. Those are business logistics, not reasons to shut workers out of jobs. A company's preference to simplify its payroll operations should not translate into a worker in one state being categorically ineligible for a position that requires no physical presence anywhere specific. Remote work has expanded opportunity for workers in rural areas, workers with disabilities, and caregivers who cannot relocate. Allowing employers to draw arbitrary geographic lines around fully remote roles undermines that promise entirely. A clear prohibition on state-based exclusions for genuinely location-independent jobs would protect workers without preventing employers from managing legitimate compliance obligations.