31–40 of 242 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This hits home as a Wisconsin resident. Best case scenario, we're looking at 2042 to turn a profit[1]. [1] http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/misc/lfb/bill_summaries/2017...
What year would Wisconsin turn a profit off of Foxconn if it didn’t build a factory there at all?
What if nobody was willing to pander to foxconn at all? How much tax would they be paying then?
Basically it's, would you like to have $0 in taxes paid by Apple (by assuming they won't come to Iowa if they aren't given a discount), or would you like $76 million in taxes and $100 million in public improvement funds that will mainly benefit Apple? But it proves the asymmetric negotiation power Apple has compared to constituents. Apple is in a position to say, take it or leave it. And the constituents can't really…
Its a race to the bottom.
$208M is around 27 years of salary for 50 employees on $150k.
These are property tax abatements. I don't see the big deal. Apple has to pay the property tax equal to the farmland for the next 20 years instead of the much higher tax on the datacenter property. Who cares? Unless someone is arguing the datacenter is going to use a lot of tax funded city services (police? fire? ... ?), Waukee isn't giving Apple anything. On top of that Apple is pledging to give them $100M for vario…
These are property tax abatements. I don't see the big deal. Apple has to pay the property tax equal to the farmland for the next 20 years instead of the much higher tax on the datacenter property. Who cares? Unless someone is arguing the datacenter is going to use a lot of tax funded city services (police? fire? ... ?), Waukee isn't giving Apple anything. On top of that Apple is pledging to give them $100M for vario…
Isn't the Delawarw thing for resolution of legal disputes? I don't think it affects taxes AFAIK.
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 hav…
edited, spelling.
>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.
I'm a programmer. Every time I go home to Iowa, people try to tell me that Iowa is now a booming tech hub, with Microsoft, Facebook and Apple "offices", and that I should get a job there. I try to explain why I probably won't end up there, but the point is that they are extremely proud of all of these data centers.
Basically it's, would you like to have $0 in taxes paid by Apple (by assuming they won't come to Iowa if they aren't given a discount), or would you like $76 million in taxes and $100 million in public improvement funds that will mainly benefit Apple? But it proves the asymmetric negotiation power Apple has compared to constituents. Apple is in a position to say, take it or leave it. And the constituents can't really…
If nobody cut deals like this, apple would be forced to pay taxes somewhere, so no matter what _somewhere_ is losing a huge amount of tax. Its a race to the bottom.
I'm a programmer. Every time I go home to Iowa, people try to tell me that Iowa is now a booming tech hub, with Microsoft, Facebook and Apple "offices", and that I should get a job there. I try to explain why I probably won't end up there, but the point is that they are extremely proud of all of these data centers.