Quote:
Originally Posted by Qubert
No, because you can't have a tax break on money that doesn't exist. The 3B in tax breaks is off an anticipated 30B in taxes paid.
HQ2:
30B
-3B
=27B to NYS/NYC
AOC:
30B
-"Fudge Off"
=0 to NYS/NYC
|
At a micro level, city by city, it makes sense to offer incentives in this way. As long as there's incremental value, offer as many tax breaks as you can.
There is definitely an argument to be made that a country as a whole is better off moving in a unified manner towards rejecting massive corporate welfare packages. If everyone had given the middle finger to Bezos it's not like he's going to cancel all expansion plans, he would just do so at smaller margins.
Problem is it requires everyone to be on the same page, and it would be pretty tempting for one city or politician to break from the group and screw everyone else over.