Live data from Hacker News

NY state tax break is $48k per Amazon HQ job

fox5ny.com

211–220 of 359 posts

Re: NY state tax break is $48k per Amazon HQ job

#211
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I beg to differ. New York City doesn't have a problem attracting jobs. Like not even a little bit. The idea that this is actually incremental revenue for the city is extremely debatable. New York City is a really big place. Midtown is the largest central business district in the country, and Lower Manhattan is the third largest, after Chicago. There are 1,700,000 jobs in Manhattan alone and 3,900,000 in New York City…

So if the numbers are so small, why does it matter that this tax deal exists then. I think most of the hate is fueled by emotional anger at the rich due to increasing inequality in the USA, even though this investment in NYC is a positive for it when you look at it rationally.

> why does it matter that this tax deal exists then.

He's saying the tax breaks provide create no gain for the city, but he's not disputing they're valuable to Amazon.

They're also not valuable to taxpayers, who are being forced to subsidize one company without the opportunity to voice their opinion a priori.

Finally, there's the incremental point that countless other entrepreneurs are not enjoying these same benefits. Not the biggest issue with it, but an important one nonetheless.

Re: NY state tax break is $48k per Amazon HQ job

#212
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$48,000 is the cost per job, not the cost per resident.

It's not a cost though it's tax break over 10 years and there would be no tax revenue if NYC didn't get the office in the first place.

How do you know other companies wouldn't move in?

Re: NY state tax break is $48k per Amazon HQ job

#213
The article is very disingenuous about this being a "cost" to tax payers. It's a tax break, it's not extra money that's going to be added to NY's tax bill, it's taxes that Amazon theoretically would have had to pay if they decided to build their offices there and didn't have the tax break. There are some other real costs to tax payers in the form of subsidies, but they're much smaller than the 1.5 billion figure quoted here. If you consider the fact that Amazon is going to probably pay much more in taxes over the lifetime of their offices in NY then it seems like a reasonable deal for their government to make.

Re: NY state tax break is $48k per Amazon HQ job

#214
post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally the opposite. The tax gains out number the tax breaks 3 to 1. Each one of these $150k jobs will net NY state $13.8k of income tax per year and (at least) $2500 of sales tax. The tax break per job is $4800 per year (the $48k figure you may have seen is over ten years).

It's still a race to the bottom. Attracting businesses with tax-exempts is a zero-sum game. In the EU we have rules against things like this. As it's considered anti-competitive behavior.

I believe you mean to say prisoner's dilemma, rather than a zero sum game.

Re: NY state tax break is $48k per Amazon HQ job

#215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's plenty of unfulfilled demand for software engineers in NY, what does Amazon offer to add to supply? You wouldn't know that from the pickiness of some companies around here.

I think GP meant good software engineers.

I recently spent half an interview being asked about embedded systems and C for a frontend JavaScript position.

If the question is "do companies, in general, know what software engineer they need for a position?" my answer is almost universally no.

Re: NY state tax break is $48k per Amazon HQ job

#216
post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just another mechanism for wealth transfer from the poor to the rich I'm not sure this type of competition is a great thing for citizens, but is this really a wealth transfer from the poor to the rich? Doesn't most tax revenue in the US come from the rich, meaning they're covering most of the bill? In that case it would be more like wealth transfer from rich people to rich companies with some of that wealth making…

> but is this really a wealth transfer from the poor to the rich? Doesn't most tax revenue in the US come from the rich, meaning they're covering most of the bill? Doesn't matter where tax money came from, that part we are not changing. What changes is where that money goes. It could pay for schools, Medicaid, homeless shelters. Now there is going to be less of that, as we are building a helipad for Bezos with some o…

> It could pay for schools, Medicaid, homeless shelters

Yes, it could, but that doesn't mean it would in the absence of the incentive for Amazon. I didn't see any indication in the article that this would be paid for by reallocating funds from social programs or education. Has NY indicated how they're funding the incentive elsewhere? If this isn't known, how can you confidently say it's a transfer of wealth from poor to rich?

To be clear, I absolutely think there are probably more socially responsible things to do with the money, but there's a difference between opportunity cost and exploiting NY's poor to build Bezos a helipad.

Re: NY state tax break is $48k per Amazon HQ job

#217

The article is very disingenuous about this being a "cost" to tax payers. It's a tax break, it's not extra money that's going to be added to NY's tax bill, it's taxes that Amazon theoretically would have had to pay if they decided to build their offices there and didn't have the tax break. There are some other real costs to tax payers in the form of subsidies, but they're much smaller than the 1.5 billion figure quot…

Ok, we replaced "taxpayers to pay" with "state tax break" above.

Re: NY state tax break is $48k per Amazon HQ job

#218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gains? From more road repair? Higher housing costs (read: more welfare state). Other services? Etc. Etc. Etc. You're making it sound like there's only upside. Regardless, the gov should not be in the job buying biz. My gawd, they struggle to govern, and that's their job. Pockets are being lined - once again - at the expense of the tax payers. "Each one of these $150k jobs..." Pardon me, I know this type of reply is f…

> Regardless, the gov should not be in the job buying biz Says you. I think they do a better job buying that biz than many of the other biz's they buy with public funds. If you want to see pockets being lined, look to things that don't have returns on investment or are poorly managed in real corrupt ways (ala many public pension plans). Not comparing dollar spent to dollar spent of tax money compared to benefits make…

Just because there are other and potentially better/easier ways to graft and siphon money out of the system (such as those you listed) doesn't mean that this person isn't allowed to think this 'lesser' one is just as morally bankrupt and from a business standpoint a foolish decision.

Re: NY state tax break is $48k per Amazon HQ job

#219
post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just another mechanism for wealth transfer from the poor to the rich I'm not sure this type of competition is a great thing for citizens, but is this really a wealth transfer from the poor to the rich? Doesn't most tax revenue in the US come from the rich, meaning they're covering most of the bill? In that case it would be more like wealth transfer from rich people to rich companies with some of that wealth making…

Just go another level deeper - this was tax money that would otherwise go towards city programs that would disproportionately benefit the poor. The end result is a transfer from the poor to Amazon's shareholders (and possibly may result in a net benefit to NYC)

>this was tax money that would otherwise go towards city programs that would disproportionately benefit the poor

Where did NY indicate that they're reallocating money from those programs?

Re: NY state tax break is $48k per Amazon HQ job

#220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's fair, but how much of that will go towards compensating people who will be driven out of north/west Queens and north Brooklyn as a result of rising rents?

Why should they be compensated for this? Why are those individuals living in that place a status quo that ought to be maintained?

Because making people worse off to enrich yourself is called "greed". Greed is something I and many other people frown on.
Post reply on HN