Live data from Hacker News

Iowa's handout to Apple illustrates the folly of corporate welfare deals

latimes.com

11–20 of 242 posts

Re: Iowa's handout to Apple illustrates the folly of corporate welfare deals

#11
>Apple’s deal with Iowa, which includes about $20 million in a state investment tax credit and a 20-year tax abatement from the city of Waukee worth nearly $190 million, underscores all these elements.

Dumb question: how do these deals not violate the Equal Protection Clause?

Other businesses in Waukee obviously aren't privy to the same state tax credits from Iowa and the same tax abatement from the city of Waukee. Doesn't that mean that the tax code is effectively discriminating against all these non-Apple businesses?

Re: Iowa's handout to Apple illustrates the folly of corporate welfare deals

#12
post #6

> We were highly skeptical of this deal when it was announced Aug. 24. In the fullness of time, we’ve subjected it to closer scrutiny. And now it looks even worse. Oh great, so you carefully gathered data and put it into some sort of spreadsheet or something? Where's the spreadsheet? Where's the decision tree that shows this is a bad deal for Iowa? Oh, you don't have any of that actual diligence? You started with a c…

> You started with a conclusion and then wrote a bunch of B.S. with cherry picking and misleading statements throughout? This is why I flagged it.

Can you expand on this and point to some of the misleading statements and why you think they're misleading?

Re: Iowa's handout to Apple illustrates the folly of corporate welfare deals

#13
post #4

So $208M for 50 jobs. Wouldn't they be better off just giving those 50 lucky folks $4M each? Or giving 800 people $250K ? At least those 800 people would likely spend the money locally and stimulate the state economy.

They aren’t handing Apple $208m. They are giving them tax breaks. If Apple didn’t build a data center in Iowa they would also collect $0 in taxes from them. The cost/benefit calculation is no where as simple as this article or comments make it out to be. It could still be a bad deal, but there is not really an honest attempt to figure that out here.

Exactly - states competing on incentives obviously doesn't increase gross tax collection on a national level, but the article makes much bolder claims that it doesn't help anywhere.

Specifically this claim: "There is virtually no association between economic development incentives and any measure of economic performance."

The article states that the 1.3 billion dollar data center will get $39 million tax break up front on hardware, and another $190 million abatement over 20 years from the city. They will invest at a minimum $20 million into Waukee, a city of 20k people, and expect 50 permanent employees + ancillary services.

Waukee will see a construction boom, higher employment, and more tax revenue. The state will see a reduction in the data center decline + additional tax revenue.

Unless they were sure Apple had no other option but Iowa for this project, the state and community were better off making a deal than not.

Re: Iowa's handout to Apple illustrates the folly of corporate welfare deals

#14
post #11

>Apple’s deal with Iowa, which includes about $20 million in a state investment tax credit and a 20-year tax abatement from the city of Waukee worth nearly $190 million, underscores all these elements. Dumb question: how do these deals not violate the Equal Protection Clause? Other businesses in Waukee obviously aren't privy to the same state tax credits from Iowa and the same tax abatement from the city of Waukee. D…

> Other businesses in Waukee obviously aren't privy to the same state tax credits from Iowa and the same tax abatement from the city of Waukee.

Sure they are - they can request it, just like Apple does, and be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. It's no more an equal protection violation than city government hiring one person over another is.

Re: Iowa's handout to Apple illustrates the folly of corporate welfare deals

#15
Maybe they're working on the "your first one is free" hook.

The 50 jobs at the data center will attract a McDonalds across the street and then Waukee can hit those McGuys with a Burger Tax.

Let's see. $208M at 5 cents per burger is only, uh, ...

Well, the company slogan is "Billions and Billions Served."

Re: Iowa's handout to Apple illustrates the folly of corporate welfare deals

#16
post #12
post #6

> We were highly skeptical of this deal when it was announced Aug. 24. In the fullness of time, we’ve subjected it to closer scrutiny. And now it looks even worse. Oh great, so you carefully gathered data and put it into some sort of spreadsheet or something? Where's the spreadsheet? Where's the decision tree that shows this is a bad deal for Iowa? Oh, you don't have any of that actual diligence? You started with a c…

> You started with a conclusion and then wrote a bunch of B.S. with cherry picking and misleading statements throughout? This is why I flagged it. Can you expand on this and point to some of the misleading statements and why you think they're misleading?

I think it is misleading to say everything was in return for only 50 jobs. Data centers require huge investments in development, connectivity, energy supply. All of these things take people to make happen.

Re: Iowa's handout to Apple illustrates the folly of corporate welfare deals

#17
Just for all the inevitable comments about "the government should have just given X people Y dollars instead..."

Iowa isn't "giving money." It does not have the additional revenue before Apple arrives, thus, it can't give anyone those revenues. All it can do is tell Apple you have to give us, Iowa, less than the state next door... now whether this is a good economic plan I disagree. I'd rather have a thousand small businesses be guaranteed no regulatory or other fees for the first five years than a corporate overlord be granted no requirement to pass on the enormous amount of wealth they extract from the land and environment but that's another discussion...

Re: Iowa's handout to Apple illustrates the folly of corporate welfare deals

#18
Saw this happen a few times. One instance was when NCR (National Cash Register) headquartered in Dayton, OH decided to move to Georgia because it had gotten $60M worth (in 2009 dollars) of tax breaks and other incentives there.

It followed the incentives sure, so from that point can't blame it, but it had cost Dayton, an already struggling city, even more pain.

Another motive behind forced moves is to shed experienced (and thus expensive) / senior people who had been there longer. They are more likely to have families, kids in schools, homes, etc and so might not move.

Re: Iowa's handout to Apple illustrates the folly of corporate welfare deals

#19
post #2

Luckily Wisconsin figured out the solution to this problem... Make the corporate welfare deals an order of magnitude larger and give 3 billion to Foxconn instead of a piddly tenth of that. Even in the best case for "jobs created" (10,000) pushed by our politicians the state might as well just give 10,000 people $30,000 a year for 10 years. Realistic estimates are saying the new jobs might be more in the range of 3,00…

Nobody is giving anyone money, they are just not charging them tax. It's an important distinction I don't understand how people keep glossing over it.

If it creates 10,000 local jobs, those 10,000 jobs are still going to get taxed. So the locale is going to get money, just not from the corporate tax.

So it's not a great deal but it's not a horrible deal. I'd prefer nobody made them but once on place does they all have to in order to compete. But if they built overseas they'd get no corporate tax either... so some slice of the pie is better than none.

Re: Iowa's handout to Apple illustrates the folly of corporate welfare deals

#20
post #4

So $208M for 50 jobs. Wouldn't they be better off just giving those 50 lucky folks $4M each? Or giving 800 people $250K ? At least those 800 people would likely spend the money locally and stimulate the state economy.

That "$208M" is how much more would have been earned in taxes had Apple built the data center there with no tax breaks. However, it seems like the reality is that without those deductions, there would be no Apple there, and therefore not only no "$208M", but no jobs, no $20 million donation, and no whatever taxes they are paying (if any?). On the other hand, the article claims that according to research not offering incentives has no negative economic impact, so maybe they should've just not offered and Apple would have come anyway. Hard to discern what actually is in the states' and counties' best interest without reviewing the research, as this article isn't very convincing.
Post reply on HN