Foxconn Could Be Getting $3 Billion in Incentives for Wisconsin Factory

nilepez said:
Is that how it works? Unless something has changed, if you commute to NY from NJ to work, you pay NY income tax. But even if they operate like NY, they'd still lose out on sales taxes and property taxes, and that's not insignificant.
Regardless, it sounds like they're building multiple factories and it's undecided where they'll be, so it's possible that most of the jobs will be sufficiently far from IL to negate the issue of out of state workers.
Click to expand...

I live in WI and work in MN; income is MN as is the TAX; then WI credits the TAX I paid in MN for WI income TAX. I still have to pay WI since MN has lower income tax. This is typical crony capitalism; give money/tax breaks and other incentives to large companies.
 
Last edited:
I'm in SE Wisconsin, and I haven't noticed a shortage of jobs. I have noticed a shortage of people not on opiates though so maybe that will work out for Foxconn.
 
Jim Kim said:
What a great deal for Wisconsin and for the thousands of people who will be employed.
Click to expand...

Sure, it sounds good until you're one of us taxpayers that has to fork over $520 of our own money to pay for it. That's what it costs. $520 per person in Wisconsin. Foxconn can go suck a big one as far as I'm concerned. This is nothing more than corporate welfare. When Walker got elected he gave his big tax cuts to big businesses. Then we watched our roads start to crumble beneath us. Some small towns were actually forced to go back to GRAVEL ROADS! Wonder what part of our infrastructure this giveaway is going to cost us.
 
BlueFireIce said:
Nothing is paid back, as the state is not "paying" anything out. They are just not collecting extra money in taxes, that they would never get if the plant is not built anyway. As it is all in the form of tax credits.
Click to expand...

Call it whatever you want. Putting pressure on the infrastructure, services etc. Yet not paying a cent for it is bad business. So yes, they would be better of than having something like this. Result in the end of the day is the city, state whatever is missing 3B$ to pay the bills that was created.

These deals are no more than prestige projects or corporate welfare without any economic merit.
 
BlueFireIce said:
Gotta love bad reporting, or lack of understanding on a topic. They are not paying Foxconn, the potential 3 billion is a 3 billion tax credit, meaning they are just allowing Foxconn to keep the money they made. The tax credit is also tied to jobs, meaning if they do not make the 30,000 jobs claimed, they don't get that $3b in tax credits, the jobs also have to pay $30,000 a year minimal to be counted to that tax credit as well.
Click to expand...

Yeah, what oversight committee is going to make sure of that? There are a lot of unfilled positions in the current government.
The excuse in two years will be "lack of qualified applicants and market conditions" became unfavorable to meet the number. So they'll still get the tax credit.
 
Shintai said:
Call it whatever you want. Putting pressure on the infrastructure, services etc. Yet not paying a cent for it is bad business. So yes, they would be better of than having something like this. Result in the end of the day is the city, state whatever is missing 3B$ to pay the bills that was created.

These deals are no more than prestige projects or corporate welfare without any economic merit.
Click to expand...

It's called being correct, THEY can call it whatever they want, but it does not make them correct, this is why reporting is so poor today. No facts given, only opinions.

So yes, don't collect taxes at all, as the company will never exist, nor will the payroll for the local economy or the income tax from those jobs, or other business creation due to real wages for the area, and lets not forget the welfare that is being paid out to people without jobs that this would fill. I mean if you are going to go so far off center to include the cost of infrastructure that the workers and local population need for transport in improvement and growth as a NEGATIVE. Attracting business and jobs to an area is one of the least negative things government does with tax dollars.

WorldExclusive said:
Yeah, what oversight committee is going to make sure of that? There are a lot of unfilled positions in the current government.
The excuse in two years will be "lack of qualified applicants and market conditions" became unfavorable to meet the number. So they'll still get the tax credit.
Click to expand...

If something happens or something is called into question the government will review it as needed. They can not use any excuses, it's written into the bill, so much so that they have the ability to TAKE BACK previous tax credits from the company if they fail to meet the job numbers or fail to stay in operation for a given amount of time. So no, they will not still get the tax credit, but lets not read the actual facts, lets just make assumptions and hop on the bandwagon.
 
BlueFireIce said:
It's called being correct, THEY can call it whatever they want, but it does not make them correct, this is why reporting is so poor today. No facts given, only opinions.

So yes, don't collect taxes at all, as the company will never exist, nor will the payroll for the local economy or the income tax from those jobs, or other business creation due to real wages for the area, and lets not forget the welfare that is being paid out to people without jobs that this would fill. I mean if you are going to go so far off center to include the cost of infrastructure that the workers and local population need for transport in improvement and growth as a NEGATIVE. Attracting business and jobs to an area is one of the least negative things government does with tax dollars.
Click to expand...

You could just as well give everyone in the state 520$. That would be better for business and the economy. But then you cant claim you "created" jobs.

This is nothing but corporate welfare to fuel a prestige project that will never pay itself back. And its done so to an industry with rapid changes and high automation levels. It simply couldn´t be worse. In 15-20 years it will be en empty shell with 0 jobs left.

And for 3B$ you could have 3000 people picking their nose for 50K$ for 20 years.
 
tikiman2012 said:
Sure, it sounds good until you're one of us taxpayers that has to fork over $520 of our own money to pay for it. That's what it costs. $520 per person in Wisconsin. Foxconn can go suck a big one as far as I'm concerned. This is nothing more than corporate welfare. When Walker got elected he gave his big tax cuts to big businesses. Then we watched our roads start to crumble beneath us. Some small towns were actually forced to go back to GRAVEL ROADS! Wonder what part of our infrastructure this giveaway is going to cost us.
Click to expand...

Wiscsonsin actually is a working state except for Milwaukee freeloader cesspool.

What I can't understand is how NYC survives it's like Japan with no jobs though.
 
Hrm .... just looking at just the facts from the article:

$3 billion in cash incentives (over 15 years) to build a $10 billion (20 million square foot factory) plant in 2020 over 1,000 acres with 3,000 employees and possibly up to 13,000 employees in the future. Also would result in 22,000 ancillary jobs (I'm assuming from supply chain and other nearby / related jobs) and 10,000 for the factory construction itself.

Also the Foxconn factory is an Apple supplier so future stability is implied relative to a no-name company asking for the same benefits.

According to the analyst referenced in the article (who may or may not be biased one way or the other) it would take 25 years for the state to recoup it's $3 billion. But what is not mentioned is how the analyst calculated this. From new corporate / employee income taxes? New real estate / property taxes? Too much isn't listed to conclusively say yes or no IMO.
 
Even under the most optimistic senarios, the plant is not projected to break even for the state until after 25 years! This is assuming that the plant ends up employing 13,000 Wisconsin workers. If the initial staffing number holds (~3,000 workers) the state of WI will basically never make their money back.

If I had to bet, I would guess that this type of work will be taken over by robots within a quarter of a century and that WI will never make their money back. Plus the plants are designed to build LCD flat panels for TV's sold by Sharp. I for one hope that we are not still stuck with LCD TV's even after 2042... would be nice to move over to newer tech like OLED or other display tech.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/09/wis...n-plant-incentives-for-25-years-analysis.html
 
nilepez said:
I'm not sure what you're driving at, but from a percent increase of the debt, Reagan went from 998 Billion on 9/30/1981 to 2.86 Trillion (so it increased 2.865x over 8 years). We don't have the final numbers for Obama till the fall, but it will be less than double.

If you go with debt to GDP, Obama and Reagan are about the same (but I think Reagan has a narrow edge...but again, we don't have final numbers till the fall, so it could get worse for Obama or it could flip...but either way they'll be very similar).
Click to expand...

Try again. What they both had in common is a Democrat congress. Spending is controlled by congress. the president can only make suggestions.

Besides, if you really want to compare, you need to look at the debt as a percentage of GDP.
If I have 1 million in debt, but have an income of 2 million a year, then it's not a problem. But if I only have an income of $50,000 then I'm really in trouble.
 
If Foxconn does not build a factory, then the state receives no tax money from Foxconn.
If Foxconn does build a factory, the state still receives no, or nearly no, money from Foxconn. It does however, both, take on the financial burdens of the local infrastructure needed to support the plant, and receives tax monies from employee wages, as well as any additional revenue generated by ancillary businesses.

Do I have this right, or am I off base here?
 
nutzo said:
Try again. What they both had in common is a Democrat congress. Spending is controlled by congress. the president can only make suggestions.
Click to expand...
Didn't we have a whole lot of debt increased when Republicans controlled congress under George W. Bush also? I mean we went to WAR under him, I'm sure that didn't increase spending at all...

Here I was thinking both parties are going to sell you out either way. They just do whatever their donors want, which basically means tax cuts and more spending on whoever's donating.
 
BlueFireIce said:
It's called being correct, THEY can call it whatever they want, but it does not make them correct, this is why reporting is so poor today. No facts given, only opinions.
Click to expand...

Well, yes and no. It is a huge giveaway, because that tax money would go into developing the infrastructure and services necessary to support the facility at a local (and state) level. Let's look at this logically for a moment, or a slightly granular level. The first is that employing 3,000 people, close to the border, will likely have many employees who are not Wisconsin residents. Incidentally, that extra 10,000 employees is likely a cynical bullshiat number to try and get the deal they want. That puts more pressure on the I-41 and local roads. Now some of these people will buy petrol in Wisconsin, but the governor (despite taking money from the transportation fund early on to fund a tax cut) will not raise revenue from petrol taxes (refuses to raise the tax) or licensing fees and thus the department is underfunded for it's current liabilities. So adding more liabilities, without an appropriate increase in revenue is like that neighbor who can't stop buying on credit despite not being able to pay the bill they currently owe.

Then there are the ancillary services/infrastructure: bridges, police, fire, and so on that they aren't paying for and that the gamble is that those jobs really materialize. Not only that, but the state can't spend money it doesn't have, even if those jobs are over $50k/yr and absolutely everyone employed lives in Wisconsin, it's not enough to make up for the other lost revenues

Next, if we look at the other giveaways, cursory review (at best) of environmental impact, the ability to do pretty much whatever the heck they want, et al., is going to add long-term costs to the state. Some of these are direct, cleaning costs and lost water well productivity (important in a state that has a lot of agriculture) and some are indirect like future lost tourism if there's any negative environmental impact. Anyone who has more than two brain cells knows that any manufacturing plant has an environmental impact in the best light,. Now take away the safeguards, and the possibilities become less pleasant.

So yes, don't collect taxes at all, as the company will never exist, nor will the payroll for the local economy or the income tax from those jobs, or other business creation due to real wages for the area, and lets not forget the welfare that is being paid out to people without jobs that this would fill. I mean if you are going to go so far off center to include the cost of infrastructure that the workers and local population need for transport in improvement and growth as a NEGATIVE. Attracting business and jobs to an area is one of the least negative things government does with tax dollars.
Click to expand...

We have plenty of corporate welfare already. Just look at WEDC and the Kestrel fiasco, among many others. My cousin lives in Appleton, and someone is building a convention center there, after receiving a bunch of "help" from the city and leveling at least part of a park. This will raise taxes in town until the bond is paid off, and to be honest it's a complete waste of money. My favorite method of countering this is: If it really was going to make money, last for more than a short time, the people in charge would be doing it without blackmailing someone for money. Anytime I see this blackmail, I know they'll pull up and move stakes (if they even get off the ground) at the drop of a hat. Hell, it's LCD's, so the equipment is going to be outdated in a few years anyway.

Foxconn (and I speak as someone who bought products from them wholesale, and as a lay observer) has a history of broken promises when it comes to this kind of stuff. If there is the slightest loophole, they will take advantage of it, and have an army of attorneys to find those loopholes. Add in the Republicans in Wisconsin are about as competent at business as my friend's 4yo, and it will not be anywhere near the numbers they're promising on employment. 10,000 in due course? Yeah, sure, just like they tell their customers that X will be available soon. Maybe it's not that Republicans are incompetent, maybe it's that they're too used to feting businesses by groveling, bowing, and scraping.

Finally, the way this deal is structured, that infrastructure can be considered a negative for all the reasons listed above. Who is going to be on the hook paying for it? Foxconn? Nope. The workers? Depending on how many are from Wisconsin, they will contribute to it. The local municipality will have to absorb the costs of many workers coming in from further away without the ability to tax the property the factory sits on, and it isn't like they're guaranteed to get a cut of anything to cover it. Then there's the state itself, with an already broken transportation fund that can't afford it's current liabilities.

If something happens or something is called into question the government will review it as needed. They can not use any excuses, it's written into the bill, so much so that they have the ability to TAKE BACK previous tax credits from the company if they fail to meet the job numbers or fail to stay in operation for a given amount of time. So no, they will not still get the tax credit, but lets not read the actual facts, lets just make assumptions and hop on the bandwagon.
Click to expand...

That's a legal process and will take a great deal of time. Last I heard they hadn't gotten any money back from Kestrel and that was a literal loan, not even a tax credit. WEDC cost the state US$128m already, on smaller projects, and I have no doubt the Republicans will manage to screw this up just as badly as the US$22m spent on Kestrel. Heck, this isn't the first time FoxConn has taken a state for a proverbial ride.
 
Comixbooks said:
Wiscsonsin actually is a working state except for Milwaukee freeloader cesspool.

What I can't understand is how NYC survives it's like Japan with no jobs though.
Click to expand...

I'll agree with the cesspool portion, I wouldn't want to live there either.

For the true freeloaders though you need to go to the rural areas where (as but on example) those farking entitled hypocrites expect my cousin (who paid good money, to live in a good neighborhood, with good schools nearby) to kickback money so they can bus the kids to school everyday. If they don't want to pull up using their bootstraps, they need get off their backsides and drive the kids, or they should close some districts until they can afford the busing into a larger district. Why should my cousin have to pay to subsidize the rural lifestyle of those leeches?
 
Gorankar said:
If Foxconn does not build a factory, then the state receives no tax money from Foxconn.
If Foxconn does build a factory, the state still receives no, or nearly no, money from Foxconn. It does however, both, take on the financial burdens of the local infrastructure needed to support the plant, and receives tax monies from employee wages, as well as any additional revenue generated by ancillary businesses.

Do I have this right, or am I off base here?
Click to expand...

The problem is the money Foxconn gets is so great that you could have 3000 people unemployed but still getting 50K$ a year for 20 years without draining the labour pool.

And the dynamic effect for local businesses for a plant like this is pretty much 0 after the plant is constructed because there is nothing in the local area it needs as such. Also the plant is a short lived one by nature.

There are much better ways to create jobs than trying to buy already existing jobs.
 
Shintai said:
You could just as well give everyone in the state 520$. That would be better for business and the economy. But then you cant claim you "created" jobs.

This is nothing but corporate welfare to fuel a prestige project that will never pay itself back. And its done so to an industry with rapid changes and high automation levels. It simply couldn´t be worse. In 15-20 years it will be en empty shell with 0 jobs left.

And for 3B$ you could have 3000 people picking their nose for 50K$ for 20 years.
Click to expand...

Yet again, you don't seem to understand that this is Tax credits and not a grant or loan. This only allows the company to keep money they earned by being productive. So giving people money who did nothing to earn it and created nothing of value, such as with that $520, is just fine, but allowing a productive company bringing in jobs to keep the money it earns by creating value is welfare....Ok...

If you were to give out $3B to people to pick their noise, they are not generating any value, they are consuming only and would require actually paying out money, you again don't seem to understand nothing is being paid out, rather up to $3B in taxes will not be taken away.

You seem to view this much like the RIAA claiming losses of millions, but it never had anything physically stolen, rather counting losses based on what "might" have happened. In this case you are mad about not collecting taxes on a company that you would never collect taxes on in the first place, because without the bill they would never build there. However in one case you get jobs, remove people from welfare, get extra income taxes (they have a state income tax) on at minimum 8.8billion payroll, along with other corporate taxes after the tax credits are used. Not to mention the extra jobs, services and goods consumed by having 30,000 short term jobs and 13,000 long term jobs.

As for automation, you didn't seem to read my whole post, as they have built into the bill a job count, minimum yearly payroll for a job to even count to that, and operation time limits. So if they do not meet those, they will not get the tax credits and can even have past tax credits taken away, leaving them in a huge tax liability.

Gorankar said:
If Foxconn does not build a factory, then the state receives no tax money from Foxconn.
If Foxconn does build a factory, the state still receives no, or nearly no, money from Foxconn. It does however, both, take on the financial burdens of the local infrastructure needed to support the plant, and receives tax monies from employee wages, as well as any additional revenue generated by ancillary businesses.

Do I have this right, or am I off base here?
Click to expand...

More or less correct. The state however will only not receive taxes up to that $3B point, after that they will pay taxes. Government is also always responsible for infrastructure support, for every new business that comes up. However most road costs are covered by sales taxes, income taxes and gas taxes. However those costs were talked about in pdf linked before at a cost of $252M, assuming absolute minimal income tax for the new jobs, they would collect over double that.

Inglix_the_Mad said:
Well, yes and no. It is a huge giveaway, because that tax money would go into developing the infrastructure and services necessary to support the facility at a local (and state) level. Let's look at this logically for a moment, or a slightly granular level. The first is that employing 3,000 people, close to the border, will likely have many employees who are not Wisconsin residents. Incidentally, that extra 10,000 employees is likely a cynical bullshiat number to try and get the deal they want. That puts more pressure on the I-41 and local roads. Now some of these people will buy petrol in Wisconsin, but the governor (despite taking money from the transportation fund early on to fund a tax cut) will not raise revenue from petrol taxes (refuses to raise the tax) or licensing fees and thus the department is underfunded for it's current liabilities. So adding more liabilities, without an appropriate increase in revenue is like that neighbor who can't stop buying on credit despite not being able to pay the bill they currently owe.
Click to expand...

The jobs are tied to the tax credits, I am not sure why everyone does not understand this. If they do not hire all the people claimed, they do not get all of the tax credit, which will be spread over a 20 year term with a limit of $2M a year tax credit.

Inglix_the_Mad said:
Then there are the ancillary services/infrastructure: bridges, police, fire, and so on that they aren't paying for and that the gamble is that those jobs really materialize. Not only that, but the state can't spend money it doesn't have, even if those jobs are over $50k/yr and absolutely everyone employed lives in Wisconsin, it's not enough to make up for the other lost revenues
Click to expand...

Those services are only needed for people moving to the state, outside of that, people already live there, so the load on those services would be the same. The people from out of state you seem so sure will eat up all the jobs would help this even more, as they do not live there and as such would not need to be covered by those services but still pay income taxes in the state of employment, as they would have to file nonresident income taxes in Wisconsin, their pay roll is not tax free, but for some reason a number of people in here seem to think so, including yourself, but that is just not the case. Wisconsin will still get it's tax money from those workers.

Inglix_the_Mad said:
Next, if we look at the other giveaways, cursory review (at best) of environmental impact, the ability to do pretty much whatever the heck they want, et al., is going to add long-term costs to the state. Some of these are direct, cleaning costs and lost water well productivity (important in a state that has a lot of agriculture) and some are indirect like future lost tourism if there's any negative environmental impact. Anyone who has more than two brain cells knows that any manufacturing plant has an environmental impact in the best light,. Now take away the safeguards, and the possibilities become less pleasant.
Click to expand...

No, they can not do whatever they want, please stop with the hysteria and keep to facts. There are no safe guards being removed, the "environmental" rules they are allowing them a ONE TIME pass on relates to wetlands, as one of the sites they are looking at would require filling in part of a wet land, however they have not set on a location yet as far as I know, there are 3 locations they are still looking at, those are also the only democrats that voted for the bill, that being those who are from the districts they are looking at placing the factory. Also, if they do pick the site with the wet land, they have to create two new wet lands of size to replace it.

"The substitute amendment requires any adverse impacts to functional values of federal or nonfederal wetlands in an electronics and information technology manufacturing zone to be compensated at a ratio of two acres per each acre impacted"

But hey, who cares about facts? Lets just have a knee jerk reaction.


Inglix_the_Mad said:
We have plenty of corporate welfare already. Just look at WEDC and the Kestrel fiasco, among many others. My cousin lives in Appleton, and someone is building a convention center there, after receiving a bunch of "help" from the city and leveling at least part of a park. This will raise taxes in town until the bond is paid off, and to be honest it's a complete waste of money. My favorite method of countering this is: If it really was going to make money, last for more than a short time, the people in charge would be doing it without blackmailing someone for money. Anytime I see this blackmail, I know they'll pull up and move stakes (if they even get off the ground) at the drop of a hat. Hell, it's LCD's, so the equipment is going to be outdated in a few years anyway.
Click to expand...

The Appleton convention center is owned by the city, so I am not sure what you are going on about, the city spent that money on it's self, it is just like any other public building or park. So looks like you might want to do some more reading on the topic before you start touting it as "corporate welfare". It will also be paid for by higher hotel room taxes across 10 municipalities.

Inglix_the_Mad said:
Foxconn (and I speak as someone who bought products from them wholesale, and as a lay observer) has a history of broken promises when it comes to this kind of stuff. If there is the slightest loophole, they will take advantage of it, and have an army of attorneys to find those loopholes. Add in the Republicans in Wisconsin are about as competent at business as my friend's 4yo, and it will not be anywhere near the numbers they're promising on employment. 10,000 in due course? Yeah, sure, just like they tell their customers that X will be available soon. Maybe it's not that Republicans are incompetent, maybe it's that they're too used to feting businesses by groveling, bowing, and scraping.

Finally, the way this deal is structured, that infrastructure can be considered a negative for all the reasons listed above. Who is going to be on the hook paying for it? Foxconn? Nope. The workers? Depending on how many are from Wisconsin, they will contribute to it. The local municipality will have to absorb the costs of many workers coming in from further away without the ability to tax the property the factory sits on, and it isn't like they're guaranteed to get a cut of anything to cover it. Then there's the state itself, with an already broken transportation fund that can't afford it's current liabilities.



That's a legal process and will take a great deal of time. Last I heard they hadn't gotten any money back from Kestrel and that was a literal loan, not even a tax credit. WEDC cost the state US$128m already, on smaller projects, and I have no doubt the Republicans will manage to screw this up just as badly as the US$22m spent on Kestrel. Heck, this isn't the first time FoxConn has taken a state for a proverbial ride.
Click to expand...

Yet again, if Foxconn does not fill the jobs claimed, they don't get tax cedits, plain and simple, you and a number of others here keep on stating Foxconn will not fill those job numbers and still act like they will be getting $3B in tax credits, which is not the case, as the tax credit is tied to each job, if they only ever hire 3,000 people, they only get the tax credits for that many people, not the full 13,000.

The infrastructure is a negative? Ok, lets get rid of all roads then! Most of the funds do not come from corporate taxes to start with, and Foxconn would not be on the hook for all of it anyway, as the funds come from gas taxes, other road use and property taxes, income taxes and sales taxes. As for impacts, again, Foxconn will be replacing the lands it builds on at a 2:1 ratio. And again, where they live has nothing to do with state income taxes, what matters is where the money is earned, so yes, the workers, no matter where they live will be paying for it.

Shintai said:
The problem is the money Foxconn gets is so great that you could have 3000 people unemployed but still getting 50K$ a year for 20 years without draining the labour pool.

And the dynamic effect for local businesses for a plant like this is pretty much 0 after the plant is constructed because there is nothing in the local area it needs as such. Also the plant is a short lived one by nature.

There are much better ways to create jobs than trying to buy already existing jobs.
Click to expand...

Draining the labor pool? It's called unemployed, they are draining welfare. Part of the bill covers costs for the state workforce training for unemployed. Even if the jobs are moved from one to another, that means they are hiring at a higher pay rate for those moving jobs, which means a GAIN in real wages as others will have to compete. You are also again confusing paying out money with zero productive return over just not collecting taxes that would have never existed to start with, for productive jobs and taxable incomes.

Dynamic effect? What? There are lots of manufacturing jobs local, who will see gains, other business will see gains from more spending power of workers in the area who were a drain on the system before. Corning glass has already stated they will also be building a manufacturing plant near Foxconn, as they are the glass supplier for the panels, a few others have also stated possibly of starting a plant or center in the area who supply Foxconn. The Corning plant will be a $1B plant and require about 400 workers, $200M of that $1B cost will be coming straight from Apple.

How is the plant short lived by nature? The tax credits are over a period of 20 years (there is a per year tax credit limit), even if they hire all 13,000 jobs, if they don't stay that long they still can't get all the tax credits. And risk a clawback, which is written into the bill where the state can take back tax credits already issued, leaving Foxconn with a massive tax bill.
 
Anything pro business or pro jobs creation is bad to some people..
If it is not a payout, and the infrastructure costs are covered by sales and income tax generated by this plant, I don't see an issue.
 
Gorankar said:
Anything pro business or pro jobs creation is bad to some people..
If it is not a payout, and the infrastructure costs are covered by sales and income tax generated by this plant, I don't see an issue.
Click to expand...

Very true.

The costs of infrastructure will be covered two fold by just worker income taxes, assuming absolute minimal rates on those workers as well, it could be far greater. Not including possible new gains in sales taxes, new property taxes etc etc.

I do have some issues with it, but most of that deals with tax rates to start with and how hard it is in the USA to start or build a new business. With that said, it is not that I don't agree with tax breaks, but rather them being given only to a single business, playing favorites, but that is all the government does in the first place so it's not like it is a surprise. Not the best out come, and lots of things could be changed, but over all I see it being a net positive to workers in the area.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top