Apple To Build $1.3 Billion Iowa Data Center, Get $208 Million In Incentives (cnbc.com) 54
CEO Tim Cook said on Thursday that Apple will invest at least $1.3 billion in the first phase of an Iowa data center project. The data center will be built near Waukee, Iowa, creating 50 permanent jobs with more than 550 jobs supported by construction, Apple said in a statement. CNBC reports: "Apple is going to continue to invest in that future, for Waukee, for Iowa and for America," Cook said. It will get $208 million in state and local tax benefits, according to The Associated Press. "Apple has been searching for the perfect location and I am so proud to say that they found it right here in Iowa," Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds said, noting the state's educated workforce, stable climate and low-cost, renewable energy. "Iowa workers give companies a leg up at the start.... it is just a blessing to be in the heartland of America." The 400,000-square-foot data center will "strengthen the relationships" in Iowa, where 30 Apple suppliers, including 3M and Qorvo, already operate, Cook said.
Dear Iowa... (Score:3)
I'll be happy to create one job if you give me $26 million. I will be sitting at home awaiting the check arrival so I can start. Thanks.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Because their families own the construction companies who will get the short term benefit - which is vastly less than $1.3 billion.
Most of the cost of a data center goes to the equipment manufactured elsewhere, in this case largely overseas.
Re: (Score:2)
What keeps Apple around when the tax
Re: (Score:3)
What is in it for IA, campaign donations for the next election as a percentage of the tax cheating. Now I understand under law, all are meant to be treated equal, so why do some fuckers get taxed less upon an individual discriminatory basis whilst all the rest of the citizens pay taxes, gees I seem to remember something in the US constitution, how individualised laws were illegal and all must be treated equally but obviously campaign donations over rule that pesky little law when it comes to cheating on tax
Re: (Score:2)
Dear stupid person (Score:1)
Apple doesn't get a dime from the state. Zero. Zilch. Nor do Iowa tax payers lose or spend a dime on this deal. What the state promises is to temporarily not take as much money from Apple as they ordinarily would.
Having said that, I think these special tax deals should be made illegal. They are utterly corrupt and unfair. Businesses in a state should be taxed uniformly, period. If Apple isn't willing to move to Iowa at Iowa's regular tax rates, then Iowa either needs to live with that, or it needs to lower
Tim Cook vs. Mark Zuckerberg 2020 (Score:2)
in the Dem primaries!
You heard it here first.
Re: (Score:1)
Zuckerberg will run R /This is why we have bozo for president, smart people stay away
Cook is way to smart to run at all.
Re: (Score:2)
I tend to agree. Zuckerburg will basically run as a Schwarzenegger-style Republican.
Re: (Score:2)
Does the right, or is it just a pack of whining alt right snowflakes? You and your I'll are going to find out how little you actually matter as swing voters begin to put pressure on the GOP.
Re: Tim Cook vs. Mark Zuckerberg 2020 (Score:2)
What is an 'alt-right snowflake'? If you are going to try to appropriate political namecalls, at least have an idea going into it what you might mean.
Re: (Score:2)
Whining little brats who blame everyone else for their inadequacies.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Zuckerberg will run R
Then he's got no shot. Republicans hate him.
Re: (Score:2)
There won't be any primary on the (R) side - Republicans - even Never Trumpers - will be too scared to run. Last year too, they were scared of him when they were already in the race, and only hit out at him when it was clear that his nomination was inevitable.
Even on the (D) side, they will have trouble finding candidates - aside from the Resistance people. Problems is that mainstream Dems will have the same trouble that the Republicans had against Bill Clinton in 1996 - running against a president when
Re: (Score:1)
Great slogan: "Vote for Cook/Zuckerberg: all the personality and ineptitude of Trump, combined with all the lousy policies of Hillary Clinton!"
How could that not be a winning ticket?
Re: (Score:3)
$4m per job (Score:1)
And this is why the US can't have nice things any more.
Re: (Score:2)
Electrolytes. We will have them make and buy electrolytes.
Re: (Score:2)
Buying jobs (Score:1)
The state will spend $208M to get 50 "permanent" and 550 temporary jobs. Let's say the "permanent" jobs last for 10 years before Apple decides to pull the plug and the temporary jobs last 1 year. Instead of giving Apple $208M, if the state just gave each "worker" US$198,000 per year, they would break even. The temporary workers would get 198K and the permanent workers 1.98M. All for the same price they are paying Apple for jobs that probably earn workers only US$45K-50K instead.
Hey, give 5200 people a "bas
Re: (Score:2)
The other benefits are the state not collecting some part or all property taxes from the land Apple will be building on. They really only spend the difference between what they collect now and what they'll get from Apple, and may still come out ahead if Apple ends up paying at a reduced rate (what land is zon
Re: (Score:2)
Your argument appears to be that the state would not otherwise collect property tax from the employee houses.
Those houses may not exist yet. Even if you assume Apple hires 50 people from Iowa, it isn't as though the companies at which those employees used to work suddenly have no need of their labor, which means you're pulling in some number of new people to the state. Assuming 20 new homes are built in the area, that's another $2,756 per home (based on info from this website [smartasset.com]). Those employees are also going to spend money in the state which results in sales tax being collected. At some point if you bring in enoug
Let's see how this spins (Score:1)
Eventually...just two jobs... (Score:5, Funny)
2. A dog
The guy is there to feed the dog. The dog is there to make sure the guy doesn't touch the servers.
More jobs would make this a good deal (Score:5, Interesting)
It's good for those 50 people, who I assume are going to be reduced to 10 or 15 over time as data center tasks get even more routine. You basically need security guards, 1 or 2 admins and a bunch of hardware guys to run around and replace disks, rack equipment, etc. And with vendors producing Open Compute-style pods-in-a-box that just have cables, water lines and ductwork coming out, this job gets even easier and more automated. Disks are so cheap now that they could probably just let them die and do a once-a-year purge of all the dead drives, meaning you wouldn't even have to have the full time guys for that job.
Data centers are not a good investment for EDAs...the tax forgiveness and free electricity they're getting will never be offset by 50 jobs over the long term. Government officials think "cyber" when they hear about these projects and think they're master negotiators for bringing this big Silicon Valley titan into their jurisdiction. The details come out later...and Apple may not even decide to stick around.
I think it's growing more and more obvious that full-time, lifelong employment is going away, but the need to keep the consumption cycle running isn't. You're not just going to replace the whole "money is the only store of value" thing overnight. Since no one will ever agree to a basic income until people are killing each other over food scraps, I propose blatant make-work projects. Seriously, if employers won't hire the vast majority of people, how can you run a society where most people can't participate in the economy, _and_ not make those who can feel that those who can't are "lazy drug using welfare queens" or similar?
capitali$m doesn't add up (Score:3, Informative)
Companies shouldn't get handouts from governments.
It goes against all the rules of capitalism and the free market.
If they can't make a go of it without corporate welfare they should shut shop.
Re: (Score:3)
A major corporation like Apple can build a data center almost anywhere. It's not a question of whether Apple can make a go of it without corporate welfare. The fact is, they can demand it and get it, so why wouldn't they?
Apple is building one data center. Multiple states would love to have the resulting tax revenue. Limited demand and more customers leads to the customers bidding on the product. Sometimes the bidding gets carried away and the customer spends far more on the product than it's worth (whic
Richest company on the planet (Score:1)
And they still get government subsidies.
UBI case (Score:3)
208 million to get 50 jobs is quite expensive. At that price we can give 50 huge universal basic income for more than a lifespan.
I agree technological leadership is more than 50 jobs, but please stop telling us such tax breaks are for employment.
Re: (Score:3)
Breakdown (Score:2)
Let's set a few things straight (Score:4, Insightful)
1. They are being paid 4M per job
No, this assumes that some other company would have built on that land and paid the full tax rate. This is vacant land which is taxed at a far lower level. It seems more likely that Iowa is simply applying the tax rate of what vacant land would cost instead of developed commercial property.
2. Apple can pick up and leave after 10 years
True, they can have another state build a new data center for them but why would they? The labor cost savings would be insignificant and if you have a perfectly good data center what is the point of mothballing it?
I don't like the fact that rich companies like Apple get tax breaks but everybody wants to have high tech jobs. Tech companies are not going to move to sparsely populated states like Iowa without major incentives. Even if they leave later on they will leave behind a built up infrastructure that could be used to lure other companies to the region.
Re: (Score:2)
It's just like reading a science article where the journalist flubs it up. Press releases of this nature are intentionally vague and job creation being en vogue like it is is just a talking point, with the financial benefits being reported in laymans terms with a lot of info left out. There's a lot of follow-on costs that will be taxed in a way to bring revenue to the area. The end result jobs at the data center don't add much at the end of the day - the business sales and use tax, utility revenue, infas
Just a thought. (Score:2)
What if the state gave local entrepreneurs 208 million in incentives to start businesses. Would that create more jobs/revenue than a data center?
$1.3 billion is huge! (Score:1)