They are probably referring to the fact that 1/2 the payroll tax is paid by the employer. The employee does not pay this tax, and it is directly paid by the employer for every employee.
Well it is tax money that is sent to the government and that is taken from the total amount of money that the company receives for the products it provides. If we are talking about some moral side of the issue (as the articles tries to, if I'm not mistaken), then why wouldn't we count it?
I'm not saying that the company shouldn't pay a direct tax on their profit, but that I want to know the real number counting everything. Focusing on some fraction of that number can be misleading, especially when the editors try to distill it into a short title, with possible agendas no less.
That is true that in some countries the employee income is taxed at source, but it doesn't mean that the tax is not paid by the employee just because the company sends it on his or hers behalf.
It is happening this way because governments don't trust people that they would send that money each month.
What employees pay should be a completely separated equation, as this is what employee makes with their own hard work, not the corporation.