Georgia Passes Law Giving $25M In Video Game Tax Breaks

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
It's a wonder more states don't do stuff like this to lure game studios into their area. Then again, after that whole 38 Studios mess, the video game industry is probably thrilled this is even happening at all.

Georgia state governor Nathan Deal signed a bill into law this morning that will provide $25 million in tax credits for video game developers in the region, according to a report published to the website of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
 
Tax credits are NOT the same as what 38 Studios got which were government backed guaranteed loans.

Tax credits are the "hey why don't you set up shop here and we'll make it worth your wild for the company and here's to hoping you do well so you keep those jobs here. What 38 studios got was free money from the locality and here's to hoping you do well so you don't default on your loan leaving us holding the banknote!
 
Sourthern states are absolutely adept at feeding from the government trough so their state legislatures can spend state money on stealing businesses from the states they siphon tax money from.
 
Sourthern states are absolutely adept at feeding from the government trough so their state legislatures can spend state money on stealing businesses from the states they siphon tax money from.

Wait, what?
 
Wait, what?

I believe he's saying the southern states are really good at getting earmarks and what not passed on federal legislation to get money funneled their way, so if they don't collect as much in state taxes it doesn't matter.

I don't have the chart handy of federal dollars returned per tax dollar sent, so I can't refute or defend that statement (I'm a bit taxed out for the next couple weeks)
 
Tax breaks for specific industries are akin to the government picking winners and losers rather than relying on the free market to do what it does best...

Ideally ALL specific industry tax breaks, subsidies, and other benefits should be completely removed, with the exception of industries which have some intrinsic value to society (like for instance, medical research, green energy or electric cars)

Assuming that lower taxes is the best way to drive business growth (which is far from unanimous among economists) instead of lowering taxes significantly for a specific company or industry and picki g winners and losers, government ought to instead lower the taxes a slight amount across the bar and allow the free market to decide which industries blossom and which don't...
 
Zarathustra[H];1040769275 said:
Tax breaks for specific industries are akin to the government picking winners and losers rather than relying on the free market to do what it does best...
Not sure I agree with this, this isn't about selling anything, other than the promise of cheaper tax rates to put a specific industry in a particular location. It's about diversifying the job market in types of jobs so that it attracts different walks of life and any one industry doesn't hold completely control over an area. Otherwise you get things like coaltowns of old, or to go a little more recent Detroit, when major driving force behind the jobs (i.e. the "free market") decides its not profitable to be there anymore, they bankrupt a town.
 
More corporate welfare while the common people have to pay more to pick up the tab. Why don't they just have a press conference where the governor gives the CEO a blow job at a podium to seal the deal?
 
Zarathustra[H];1040769275 said:
Tax breaks for specific industries are akin to the government picking winners and losers rather than relying on the free market to do what it does best...

Ideally ALL specific industry tax breaks, subsidies, and other benefits should be completely removed, with the exception of industries which have some intrinsic value to society (like for instance, medical research, green energy or electric cars)

Assuming that lower taxes is the best way to drive business growth (which is far from unanimous among economists) instead of lowering taxes significantly for a specific company or industry and picki g winners and losers, government ought to instead lower the taxes a slight amount across the bar and allow the free market to decide which industries blossom and which don't...

I think these types of tax breaks aren't really targeted at picking a winner or loser in the market, they are strictly targeted at luring businesses from one state to another. We have 50 States that all have to compete in making themselves attractive for business to locate in their state. Tax breaks for the company (they make their taxes back on the employees if the business booms) are one way to do that. Changes to zoning or labor laws work well in this regard also (most of the South is all "Right to Work" states with employment on demand)
 
I think these types of tax breaks aren't really targeted at picking a winner or loser in the market, they are strictly targeted at luring businesses from one state to another. We have 50 States that all have to compete in making themselves attractive for business to locate in their state. Tax breaks for the company (they make their taxes back on the employees if the business booms) are one way to do that. Changes to zoning or labor laws work well in this regard also (most of the South is all "Right to Work" states with employment on demand)

I agree. They aren't targeted at picking winners and losers, but the intent isn't really what matters. Regardless of the intent,by making the expenses of one industry lower than those of another, government is picking that industry to succeed, at the expense of other industries who have to pay a higher rate.

Furthermore letting companies and industries play individual states and municipalities against each other is really a bad idea...
 
It's an effort, as long as the state makes it's money back. Yeah, what a concept!

I think the crown still belongs to the quebec government in Canada in terms of just giving out tons of money away to game studios in Montreal though.
 
Back
Top