North Carolina To Kick $845.8M of Apple Employees' State Taxes Back To Apple (newsobserver.com) 162
Long-time Slashdot reader theodp writes:
The announcement Monday that Apple Inc. would locate its new high-tech campus in Research Triangle Park," reports The News&Observer's Tyler Dukes, "was heralded as a coup for the state, which has pursued the company and the promise of its high-paying jobs for at least three years. But that victory comes at a cost. State and local incentives for the deal could be worth nearly $1 billion to the company over the next four decades. That award, by far the largest in the state's history, will mostly come from new Apple employees' state income tax payments — the vast majority of which will flow right back to Apple....
"The JDIG award approved by the state's Economic Investment Committee Monday morning would mean $845.8 million in payments to Apple through 2061 — provided the company meets its hiring, worker-retention and investment targets. These payments are recouped from the income taxes Apple's new employees would normally pay to the state. Starting in 2023, the state will start issuing payments to Apple worth a little more than half of those employees' annual tax payments. In 2032, if all goes as planned, that percentage increases to 90%."
Apple, whose market cap on Monday was $2.26 trillion, isn't exactly hurting for money...
"The JDIG award approved by the state's Economic Investment Committee Monday morning would mean $845.8 million in payments to Apple through 2061 — provided the company meets its hiring, worker-retention and investment targets. These payments are recouped from the income taxes Apple's new employees would normally pay to the state. Starting in 2023, the state will start issuing payments to Apple worth a little more than half of those employees' annual tax payments. In 2032, if all goes as planned, that percentage increases to 90%."
Apple, whose market cap on Monday was $2.26 trillion, isn't exactly hurting for money...
Races to the bottom ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Races to the bottom never end well.
Except in this case, for Apple.
Re:Races to the bottom ... (Score:5, Insightful)
That may be true, but the logic of TFA is silly.
The taxes paid by the employees is "new money" only if you assume that these highly skilled people would be otherwise unemployed if Apple didn't come along to pay them $150k salaries so they would no longer need to sleep under bridges.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Races to the bottom ... (Score:2)
These are new positions, many of which will be filled by workers from out of state, others from in-state workers, some of which were employed, leaving their old position open.
This will result in a large number of new jobs on top of existing jobs in NC.
The ONLY way Apple gets the incentive payment returned to them is keep workers employed in NC, and the only way it collects all the money is to meet all the agreed upon goals for the next FOURTY YEARS.
Media whitewash of race to bottom. (Score:5, Informative)
This is true. The tax break is promising not to collect $2b (1B from Apple, and $845m from their employees). Instead they will only collect the 845m from the employees. This article is rage mongering and click bait.
Companies like Apple cause disproportionate costs to the state - their packaging litters the world and has to be cleaned up. The employees they bring into an area drive their cars and need road repairs. The high price of their products encourages theft and requires more policing. The large sums of money they keep in banks requires governments to invest in banking regulation and computing security. Their practices of moving work to low cost countries sponsors anti-democratic governments and fuels war and the need for military spending. The production of their goods causes pollution which others have to clean up. The employees they bring in will have been educated somewhere and moving them away from that place means they won't get a return on that.
The taxes that Apple was to pay should have been covering part of these expenses. Instead, they get a discount and someone else has to pay. Apple benefits from the secure environment others create from them and then refuses to contribute. The taxes should have been creating services, like decent schools for the children of the employees who were paying those taxes, instead Apple is stealing that money. Frankly the article is a whitewash.
Re: (Score:2)
1. Their packaging would be there regardless of if the company had a campus there or not. Apple products happen to be popular, and nobody is saying "You know, I would have gotten a Samsung phone, but Apple opened up shop down the way so I'm 'buying local' !". And their packaging is like 99% paper, so even if North Carolinians are just tossing it out the window carelessly (they aren't), it will biodegrade in a matter of months.
2. The employees are already driving their cars on North Carolina roads that ne
Re: (Score:2)
Companies like Apple cause disproportionate costs to the state - their packaging litters the world and has to be cleaned up.
Your other criticisms are debatable yet this is just ridiculous. Oh poor North Carolina and all the Apple packaging they need to clean up.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple does not just tax avoid in North Carolina - in fact the amount of tax being avoided in NC is nothing compared to the amount that they avoided in the USA by banking in Ireland.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple does not just tax avoid in North Carolina - in fact the amount of tax being avoided in NC is nothing compared to the amount that they avoided in the USA by banking in Ireland.
But what we really want to know is more about how burdensome Apple's packaging is to the state.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Media whitewash of race to bottom. (Score:5, Insightful)
Is this a struggling business in need of assisting, or is it one of the most successful businesses worldwide?
I'd suggest keeping it down to the understandable and comparable competitiveness. Somebody, list other 9 businesses in this state that are to be granted similar favors. Or you are not to keep level ground anymore, really?!
Re: (Score:2)
It's stupid to bribe companies to the point where the local benefit to the taxpayers vanishes. And yet so many states and municipalities fall into this trap. Maybe more interest in short term reelection slogans rather than long term economic development. Apple isn't the one to build the roads and the sewers, Apple isn't going to take care of the locals who lose their jobs or become disabled, Apple isn't paying for the police, fire, or ambulance services. This is like trickle down thinking again, give a be
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is it too much for you to have globally often-leading state, layers of its protection and nurturing in the form of army, navy, air force, space forces, FBI, CIA, NASA, police, firefighters, medical care, education, science, libraries, museums, and other what nots, which, reasonably, is much more your spending, than that of the government.
Re: Media whitewash of race to bottom. (Score:4, Interesting)
Apple generates a great deal of economic activity when it moves 6000 employees into any region.
Apple also generates a great deal of economic burden when it moves into a region as it ups the property prices and results in people who lived there no longer being able to afford to so they have to move away. That means reduced incomes for many of the businesses those people used to use such as a 7-11 that no Apple employee would be seen dead going to which results in even less tax revenue from those businesses too. Then add the additional cost of wear to roads as the displaced people travel into work plus the environmental cost of all of that then combine it with all the sweetners, brown envelopes and tax breaks Apple get and that economic activity it brings doesn't quite seem so good.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple is a fiefdom, and simply existing is not a reason to subsidize them. Corporate subsidies are BS. How many Apple employees, like Amazon, Walmart, etc., will be on the public dole because they don't pay wages? We think of programmers, executives, etc but not the people cleaning the buildings, powering the warehouses and distributions, being part of production processes when we calculate this stuff.
Your citation of "Governments already spends over 50% of our gross income" is a statistic fabricated from w
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
They ARE staying in California. They are expanding is all. Probably want some cheaper workers and a big lump of corporate welfare. And that research triangle area is already somewhat liberal, as is true of most richer US urban areas.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple is at this point by far the largest tax payer in the world.
Fundamentally irrelevant to the point being made.
Apple products are packaged with 100% recycled materials, and are themselves recyclable. So, arguably the packaging has already reduced their mass in waste.
Most recyclables aren't recycled, it's not cost-effective.
road repairs are paid for by taxes paid at the pump and imbedded in a gallon of fuel, so those employees driving cars are compensating the state for their use of roads.
Maybe. Road damage is done mostly by weather and trucks, not by cars. Let's call this one good though, because it's complicated.
The income the state will gain from the Apple employees who would otherwise not be there, plus the income from the ancillary economic activity that generates from Apples presence is a huge win for the state.
Maybe. Or maybe those people are expensive to serve. No data.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with it, but even if they reached 50% recyclable content, Apple's deliberate policy of having products with a short lifetime, easily broken, impossible to repair, is an immense generator of trash. This is a recreation of the 50s era mass consumption.
Re: (Score:3)
road repairs are paid for by taxes paid at the pump and imbedded in a gallon of fuel
This is a common myth. Nationally, fuel taxes pay for less than half the costs associated with road construction and maintenance. Most of the funding comes from general taxes that are not correlated with miles driven, and some not correlated with driving at all.
North Carolina does pretty well among the states in that about 62% of its road budgets are funded by fuel tax.
Re: Media whitewash of race to bottom. (Score:4, Informative)
First off, Apple is at this point by far the largest tax payer in the world. https://www.apple.com/newsroom... [slashdot.org]>Citation.
Only a moron would use Apple as a source of proof they're the largest tax payer in the world. Assuming that's true that still doesn't mean they're paying their fair share. Just because you pay the most tax overall if your tax burden per dollar is lower than that of other businesses then you're not paying your fair share. For example whilst all other businesses in Ireland were paying a corporation tax rate of 12.5% on profits Apple were being charged just 2%. Apple were getting an unfair preferential rate that other businesses weren't able to get just because they were a large company. That is not right nor fair.
Re: (Score:2)
It would be even for everyone, obviously.
Re: Races to the bottom ... (Score:5, Informative)
The part you're missing is that Apple will still be withholding those $845m in taxes from their employees' paychecks, they just won't have to turn that money over to the state.
Those are taxes that other businesses and citizens in North Carolina will have to make up. When one company gets one of these sweetheart deals, it's the government picking winners and losers.
Re: (Score:2)
This is entirely true. People often crow about competition, but competition is most often hurt by this weird usage of taxes going to provide benefit to one group--either through offshoring profits or these sort of sweetheart deals.
It's entirely the antithesis of competition.
Tell me again (Score:5, Insightful)
Who are the makers and who are the takers? Doubly so given how many trillions Apple (and every other U.S. corporation) receives in the form of government subsidies.
RTFA (Score:4, Informative)
State officials said the 3,000 jobs are expected to create $1.97 billion in new tax revenues to the state over the grant period.
The iPhone maker said it would also establish a $100 million fund to support schools in the Raleigh-Durham area of North Carolina and throughout the state, as well as contribute $110 million to help build infrastructure such as broadband internet, roads, bridges and public schools in 80 North Carolina counties.
Bottom line is that Apple's new campus will be a huge win for North Carolina. The increased tax revenue and Apple's spending on infrastructure far outweighs the roughly $20M per year tax reimbursements.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: RTFA (Score:2)
Their parents will make a ton of money selling their homes, some of it will trickle down and they can get a house somewhere else.
Re: RTFA (Score:2)
What's the point of giving schools EXTRA funding when they only piss it away even faster than their regular budget?
See Zuckerberg and his $100M donation to the Newark School System:
https://www.npr.org/2015/09/21... [npr.org]
Re: (Score:2)
After reading the article the numbers don't actually look all that impressive.
The model also projects that, minus incentive payouts, the state should expect to see a total of $1.97 billion in extra revenue from the Apple project through 2061.
https://www.newsobserver.com/n... [newsobserver.com]
So this is only generating ~$50 million a year. On an annual budget of ~$60 billion for NC that doesn't sound like it is bringing in all that much extra money. I guess $50 million is better than nothing but since no one has bothered to do a study of what other businesses would crop up over the next 40 years and what kind of tax revenue they would generate it is hard to say if the $50 million is a
Re: (Score:2)
Competitive enough? (Score:5, Insightful)
Not competitive at all, therefore unjust practice. This craze of favors for the behemoths must stop, lawfully. As for me, I am canceling of buying Apple products at this very point. Goes nowhere good. Consumers, your wallets make your vote.
Re:Competitive enough? (Score:5, Insightful)
This craze of favors for the behemoths must stop, lawfully.
These tax incentives are a Prisoner's Dilemma [wikipedia.org]. Each state feels compelled to offer the tax breaks because the other states offer them, yet they would all be better off if none offered them and companies made their location decisions on purely business factors.
Congress should use the Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution to ban these sweetheart deals. Preventing this sort of self-destructive race to the bottom is exactly why that clause was included in the Constitution by ol' Jim Madison.
I am canceling of buying Apple products at this very point.
Really?? This was your tipping point?
Re:Competitive enough? (Score:5, Funny)
Each state feels compelled to offer the tax breaks because the other states offer them, yet they would all be better off if none offered them and companies made their location decisions on purely business factors.
It's almost as if the states should form a union. Oh, wait ...
Re: (Score:2)
If the U.S. actually charged its tax rates, they would be among the highest taxes in the world (maybe Japan has higher now?) and a lot more American dollars would be circulating offshore instead of onshore.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Competitive enough? (Score:3, Interesting)
The issue here is that NC like every red state except 2, is a "taker" state. NC takes more money in federal subsidies than they pay in federal taxes.
I'm fine with them doing this, as long as they can't continue to make up for it with money from "donor" states like CA, NY, MA, CT, and NJ that actually pay at least as much money as they take
Re: Competitive enough? (Score:2)
Maybe they cannot tell them how to structure their taxes, but they could prevent the write off of those taxes from your federal return. One of the positive items in the 2017 tax law was the cap on SALT deduction. Under SALT, a state knows they can raise your state taxes, but with the deduction, your total taxes doesn't Raju go up. They just pulled money from the feds.
Re: (Score:2)
What?
I am in a state with state income taxes. What I paid in for state taxes only counted as a tax deduction, not a tax credit.
Tax deduc
Re: (Score:2)
You solve it between states, then you'll have to solve it between cities, then between countries, and then there is shell corporations and holding companies, then there is just plain old corruption. Corporate taxes are not a Prisoner's Dilemma, they are dumb unworkable idea. The solution is bring the corporate tax rate to zero and make up the difference by raising taxes that can actually be enforced.
Re: (Score:2)
The solution is bring the corporate tax rate to zero and make up the difference by raising taxes that can actually be enforced.
Yep, raise the workers taxes, that way the new company has to pay more to their employees, which they can't easily afford and can't write it off, while the established company can afford to pay more to their employees.
Result, new company won't be a threat to established profitable company.
Re: (Score:3)
Wrong, the only purpose to the interstate commerce laws was to prevent individual States from creating barriers to entry for businesses, so the exact opposite of what you are proposing.
Surely giving one specific business within a state a competitive advantage, by means of reduced costs, is creating a barrier to every other business within that state, no?
Re: Competitive enough? (Score:2)
It wasn't really high taxes as much as paying excessive taxes to fund British adventurism in India. Local rule was what they wanted, not low taxes.
Re: Competitive enough? (Score:2)
By tying the incentive to actual on-the-job workers, and having no upfront incentive (Apple is front-loading the effort with $110 million in infrastructure investments to suit their needs snd a nearly matching gift of $100 million to NC schools from Apple as well.
So, before worker 1 starts working in NC for Apple, Apple will spend $210 million, then, once the offices are up and running, a portion of employee state income taxes the workers pay will be returned to Apple, at no time does NC risk a dime, it onl
Re: (Score:2)
Ken, you miss the point: why, on earth, investor like this succeeds dropping taxes?
Take any small and medium business and check if it, being distantly less capable, can offload them.
I am small one-man professional services' business. Every single time not qualified for favors.
We can't go on in this world, making only most rich ever more such. This is plain wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, your post qualifies as stupid, since you have no slightest idea of what Apple products I am using and why, yet go miles, busting my behavior to shame.
Your sensitivity to allergies, you have developed, as well as of those, who are negating personal stance trough poor moderation habits, is at the fundamental clash with the contemporary values of freedom, as that of free speech. You do not moderate somebody else's story, position taken. You just show what crap of moderator or buster you are.
I have told w
Re: Competitive enough? (Score:2)
Don't be foolish -Apple still will pay:
100% of matching FICA taxes for every worker
100% of property taxes
100% of owed income taxes
They get a small return on employee state withholding, based on the actual number of workers in the state over the next 40 years.
NC predicts a net GAIN of nearly $2BN in tax receipts over the next 40 years, compared to a net gain of $0 over the next 40 years if Apple located out of state, in Texas, for example.
Better than the usual. (Score:2)
As far as corporate tax abatements go, on the surface this doesn't sound so bad. I mean, think about the Wisconsin/Foxconn deal. All those incentives for no jobs in the end. This deal is tied to the income taxes of the employees. No jobs means no money coming back. It actually seems to have accountability built into its design.
Re:Better than the usual. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's straight up anticompetitive, does the state offer the same deal to other companies 1/10th of the size? Or 1/100th of the size?
Apple already has every advantage, this one shouldn't be legal and possibly isn't. If the gov't wants to look at anti-competitive behaviour then the should look at deals like this. A deterrent would be to get the companies to pay all the tax and to pay the same again as a fine.
Re: (Score:3)
Such disparate tax treatment should have been made illegal in the constitution, but I suspect that the framers never thought that states would be so stupid as to do something like this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Better than the usual. (Score:5, Interesting)
The framers didn't intent on the federal government getting as large as it did over time with the extra amendments and wide interpretations of interstate commerce.
The bigger issue is that only about 8 states actually pay at least as much money in federal taxes as they take in federal benefits. All but 2 are deep blue and the 2 to 3 red ones are the smallest and only due to federal land with resources, the state's that pay for everything are CA,NY,NJ,CT,MA, and then those 3 red states
NC is a "taker" state or "welfare" state. The reason they can have both low taxes AND live like an American, is because daddy blue states is there with his checkbook subsidising literally everything. Fuel, food, roads, police, medicine, social security and Medicare.
I'm fine with a state giving tax breaks, but only if they can't make up for them with federal money, and the residents having to live with the consequences.
Re: Better than the usual. (Score:2)
Those states don't receive federal funds to cover generic expenses. They are earmarked and come with requirements. The states are being paid to behave a certain way. As long as they are behaving correctly, they get paid. How that affects their wider budget is up to them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The framers did indeed intend that the government change over time to adapt to new situations. And who gives a shit what the framers actually intended anyway? The same framers that were either highly supportive of an economy based on slavery or who were dependent enough on that economy to look the other way. I am baffled that people still continue to worship those framers as the font of all wisdom, when the only really smart thing they did was allow for amendments.
Re: (Score:2)
except...everyone's leaving california.
Re: (Score:2)
It is still a net gain for the State. Tax revenue will go up, even before accounting for the knock-on effects.
As for competitiveness, I'm sure Samsung would be welcome to do the same.
You should try readin
Re: (Score:2)
Completely besides the point these big companies are using their size for anticompetitive purposes and more importantly turning over trillions and avoiding tax. Here's an idea I'm sure you'll love, if companies don't want to pay tax then they can hand over half the shares over to governments and govts can fund themselves that way instead.
Re: (Score:2)
This was my thinking. I don't think states should give away giant incentives, but at least this one has the built-in failsafe that without employees who would be required to pay state income tax, Apple gets no benefit. This makes it difficult for Apple to quietly use existing personnel in other locations, third-party contractors or other loopholes while still getting the incentive.
I don't know how they modeled this deal, but I can definitely see that a large increase in higher wage employees being located
Re: Better than the usual. (Score:2)
Liar. Foxconn didn't get the incentives because they didn't uphold their end of the deal. The jobs they promised didn't materialize.
How much do you wanna bet (Score:5, Insightful)
How much do you wanna bet that this was passed by "small government" types? who are horrified by state-supported industries and social welfare in other countries, because "socialism" ? Damn hypocrites have destroyed the concept of irony.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
How much do you wanna bet that this was passed by "small government" types?
I don't know about this deal, but the sweetheart deal that NYC offered to Amazon was opposed by Righties (who saw it as interference in the free market) and Lefties (who saw it as a handout to corporations), but mostly supported by the Middle.
Re: How much do you wanna bet (Score:2)
Yeah, corporate bailouts are the American political center. It's the whole reason the left and right are drifting apart, to find the extremists who don't want to pay for corporate welfare.
Re: (Score:3)
How much do you wanna bet that this was passed by "small government" types? who are horrified by state-supported industries and social welfare in other countries, because "socialism" ? Damn hypocrites have destroyed the concept of irony.
I'd take that bet. I did 10 minutes of Googling. This is awarded by the "Job Development Investment Program" [ncleg.gov] which is administered by the "Economic Investment Committee" [justia.com]. And three of the five members are appointees by the Governor, who is a Democrat. The other two are recommended by each chamber of the legislature, both of which are Republican controlled.
Further, according to this resource [votesmart.org] it was his official position to both "Provide low interest loans and tax credits for expanding, start-up, or relocati
Re: (Score:2)
But you just go right ahead and make all the bad assumptions you want, and have fun basing your arguments and conclusions upon them. You'll never understand the world around you, and will probably drown in disappointment
~22m/year over 40 years (Score:3, Interesting)
The payments equate to ~22 million in tax breaks per year for 40 years. Apple's promised ~210 million in funds for schooling and infrastructure, which, whilst they should be the responsibility of the government, help offset that first ten years.
If north carolina's state income tax is 5.25%, then they require ~2,800 employees at 150k/yr to break even. The facility is costing them 1 billion USD, so presumably keeping 2,800 people employed in the short term won't be an issue (~420mil/year).
These jobs are in addition to existing jobs in the state, so will have flow-on effects to other taxable items. Competing to get companies in your state seems a bit silly at the surface, but if there's no rules against it then it makes sense.
Re:~22m/year over 40 years (Score:5, Insightful)
No, you should not tweak it the way some businesses are responsible for schooling and infrastructure, but get nearly billion of taxes back. Because this course you will have hard time to unclutter responsibilities, assure fair competition. There is only a certain degree of fruitful flexibility before it collapses as a harming mess, if progressed. Overgrown business should not define things like this, as it enters responsibilities of the state.
Re:~22m/year over 40 years (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, doesn't anyone think that an elected politician giving a tax break to a single company for 40 f-ing years is acting well beyond their brief? Tax breaks as part of a fiscal policy are fine, since tax rates can be changed later if the people choose to elect differently minded politicians. But I bet that any politician seeking to change this tax deal a few years down the line, will open up the state to massive lawsuits by Apple for breaking a deal.
Re: (Score:3)
This. And the very assumption, business unit is going to exist 40 f-ing years down the line. It's an enterprise. Entrepreneur's chance of a deal.
Re: (Score:2)
While I'm not supportive of plans like this, it seems like if the facility is shut down or sold before the end of 40 years, the deal would provide less than the full amount. It's not a payment up-front, and the major value doesn't kick in until a decade from now.
Considering the insane deals cut for new stadiums and especially for the Foxconn fiasco in Wisconsin, this is almost peanuts.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don' worry (Score:3)
It's the huawei's 5g you should worry about. And european aluminium.
needs to stop. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: needs to stop. (Score:2)
How is that different from neo-liberal globalist policies implemented by every president since Bush I? Companies are already shopping around for the cheapest nations. At least this way the American third world can try to compete with the global rising economies of Asia and Latin America.
Re: (Score:2)
At least this way the American third world can try to compete with the global rising economies of Asia and Latin America.
What a great competition to enter. We should remove all regulations on public water quality to be even more competitive! Apple can already set up shop in Latin America if they wanted. They don't want to. Higher taxes might push them in that direction, but at least we get something in return before they finally make the move to Indonesia or wherever else. Also, if we started actually collecting these taxes we could probably reduce the tax rate overall and still end up with more revenue on top of a more level
Re: needs to stop. (Score:2)
It's not. But if you live in a shithole state, that's what you voted for. Clinton told us when he signed NAFTA: get educated, get a desk job, or get forgotten. Then instead of getting educated and getting a desk job, huge swathes of the country instead blamed immigrants. Fuck 'em. They'll figure it out eventually and we will welcome them into the 21st century global economy.
Employees defunding their own state? (Score:5, Insightful)
These payments are recouped from the income taxes Apple's new employees would normally pay to the state.
So... the state taxes NC employees pay will be returned to Apple instead of being used to fund NC? The employees are defunding their own state, reducing money available for their own infrastructure and support services in favor of company profits. Seems like shooting yourself in the foot. Hope they like contributing to the their own decline.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
States have their own tax agencies that income tax handle collection (and sometimes disbursement to counties or even cities that have their own income taxes). Individual counties also have tax collection agencies, usually for property taxes but occasionally handling other taxes, too.
Re: Employees defunding their own state? (Score:2)
NC will collect property taxes from Apple, and property and sales taxes from apples employees. This is a huge net win for NC with all incentives being a fraction of the jobs IN NC, not just jobs promised.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
p>The employees are defunding their own state, reducing money available for their own infrastructure and support services in favor of company profits. Seems like shooting yourself in the foot.
These are high-paid workers. Aside from a terrible commute they'll be fine. Infrastructure used mostly by the poor will be defunded (public schools etc).
Genius move NC (Score:2)
Re: Genius move NC (Score:2)
Lol! You think Apple employees making $150k/year are going to send their kids to NC public schools? Yeah, right...
Re: (Score:2)
SALT for the wound (Score:4, Interesting)
This is another good reason to eliminate or limit the deduction of State And Local Taxes on your federal income tax return.
Under this scheme, the employees will still be able to deduct the state income taxes they supposedly paid to the state, but that instead will go to Apple.
The taxes from the rest of the United States will be used to make up for this diversion. Thus, we all pay for one state's choice to use this method to lure a business to move there.
Could there be a federal law or IRS rule that disallows the deduction if any portion goes to a private company instead of the state's general fund? To make it easier to administer, you could disallow SALT entirely if there is any income tax kickback in a state.
Re: SALT for the wound (Score:2)
You are over-analyzing it. Apple collects the revenue, matches it, and sends it on to the state. The state, rather than giving Apple concessions based on promises, is returning a fraction of employee tax revenues as way to tie the benefit to Apple keeping employees working in NC.
The workers taxes are paid to the state, the formula used to calculate the incentive is based on collected income taxes, from the states treasury.
Re: (Score:2)
Beyond monopoly- wrong .v. not right (Score:3)
Now the corporation that isn’t a monopoly has taken an entire state, its own employees and the citizens it considers neighbors hostage. Employees pay Apple via a graft of insane portions first taxing their labor then confiscating (wage slavery) through state sanctioned scheme in an offset that has to be one that sets a record in outright hubris.
Apple in charge, has captured a government’s cashflow along with its power. No mention whatsoever government burdened Apple with funding education, infrastructure development or housing subsidies that it will take to absorb Apple into the community.
Ask. Are we as a nation in corporate feudalism? Beyond monopoly, Apple art of strip mining fealty to the almighty fruit has laid waste to the United States to proffer it just desserts to monetize society?
SteveJobs would not allow success to so infect his soul to enmesh society wealth as justly deserving of his greatness. Tim Cookowns this nightmare. It shows his reign at the helm of AAPL; he has long overstayed. SteveJobs was an adamant capitalist but he was the most honest man I have known. Steve would tell you to your face Apple deserves to reap the rewards of its efforts in no uncertain terms.
Tim! Its not right. You are not right. Step back. Walk away.
Tim Cook these employee taxes do not belong to you, your efforts or Apple’s power monopoly. You are stealing their future, their contribution to security and depriving the State of its lifeblood and power to secure all citizen treasury they have committed as contributions to society.
Renege this agreement, plant your facility and contribute like every other person equally to society. Resign from your position of leadership that’s driven Apple into such a fealty to fascism. End the monopoly for which your reign will be attributed before it ends as did the reign of another leader who was beyond wrong too - not right!
Re: (Score:2)
And what "fascism"? Do you even know what that word means?
Voters (Score:2)
NC better make sure that they are all in the same congressional district or they will be in for a rude awakening.
At least it's tied to the company delivering... (Score:3)
At least it's all tied to the company delivering the jobs and investments. Most states give huge corporate handouts in return for promises with no enforcement, so when a company takes the money and doesn't invest or create jobs they keep the money. Like the Foxconn plant in Wisconson, for example - they got $400 million and didn't invest or hire. At least in this case the money is tied to creating new jobs and investment, which is good for the state, and if Apple doesn't invest and create jobs, they don't get the money. I'm sure someone did some math and figured out that having many high-paying jobs in NC, even giving up half the state income tax, was a great deal for NC, because those are great jobs, keeping highly trained people in NC, where they'll buy houses, eat, buy cars, etc. And who knows, perhaps the competition will drive up wages in NC more broadly?
So what? (Score:2)
State and local incentives for the deal could be worth nearly $1 billion to the company over the next four decades.
FOUR DECADES?! That's 40 years of mandated employment in North Carolina.
"The JDIG award approved by the state's Economic Investment Committee Monday morning would mean $845.8 million in payments to Apple through 2061 â" provided the company meets its hiring, worker-retention and investment targets. These payments are recouped from the income taxes Apple's new employees would normally pay to the state. Starting in 2023, the state will start issuing payments to Apple worth a little more than half of those employees' annual tax payments. In 2032, if all goes as planned, that percentage increases to 90%."
Rather than build highway off-ramps, tax write-offs, free land, etc. the state is giving Apple back a fraction of employee income taxes collected - take the jobs out of NC, Apple loses the incentive.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's reasonable to assume that in 40 years' time, Apple will exist in some form. I mean, Amdahl still sort-of exists as a subsidiary of Fujitsu?
Re: Flag waving (Score:2)
They should be more like president Biden who, as a private citizen after leaving the Obama Admin, funneled $13M in income thru an s corporation to avoid paying FICA taxes and other advantages.
WSJ: https://www.wsj.com/articles/j... [wsj.com]