Slashdot Mirror


Wisconsin Won't Break Even On Foxconn Plant Deal For Over Two Decades (theverge.com)

Last month, Foxconn announced plans to build a $10 billion factory in southeastern Wisconsin in exchange for $3 billion in tax breaks. While the factory was heralded as a big win for President Trump and Governor Scott Walker, a report issued last week says the plan is looking less and less like a good deal for the state. In the report, Wisconsin's Legislative Fiscal Bureau said that the state wouldn't break even on its investment until 2043 -- and that's in an absolute best-case scenario. The Verge reports: How many workers Foxconn actually hires, and where Foxconn hires them from, would have a significant impact on when the state's investment pays off, the report says. The current analysis assumes that "all of the construction-period and ongoing jobs associated with the project would be filled by Wisconsin residents." But the report says it's likely that some positions would go to Illinois residents, because the factory would be located so close to the border. That would lower tax revenue and delay when the state breaks even. And that's still assuming that Foxconn actually creates the 13,000 jobs it claimed it might create, at the average wage -- just shy of $54,000 -- it promised to create them at. In fact, the plant is only expected to start with 3,000 jobs; the 13,000 figure is the maximum potential positions it could eventually offer. If the factory offers closer to 3,000 positions, the report notes, "the breakeven point would be well past 2044-45."

6 of 309 comments (clear)

  1. Will it even be built, though? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In previous years, Foxconn has promised to build other large plants in other US states - but never actually built them.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  2. Re:Politics.. by arth1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Foxconn is not a Chinese company.

    That depends on what you mean by Chinese. It's founded and headquartered in the Republic of China (Taiwan), which the US won't formally recognize as a sovereign country to avoid pissing off the People's Republic of China (China), who considers Taiwan part of China ("One China" doctrine). So there's a charade, where the US pretends it's dealing with a Chinese company, and Taiwan doesn't correct them, to keep everybody happy.

  3. Re:Politics.. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If they don't have the factory, they never get any tax revenue of course.

    Many economists would disagree. If a labor pool is available, it is likely that someone else would invest or start a business there instead. So this factory may just be replacing one set of jobs with another. The difference is that the alternative jobs wouldn't get any tax breaks, so the people of Wisconsin might have been better off if they had declined Foxconn's offer.

  4. Re:It's called Alt-Right conservativsim by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From what I read, Foxconn only gets an annual credit IF they employ a certain amount of people in the first place. So when they automate - they stop getitng credits. They don't get bilions up front, they get it paid out over years. Years in which they have to employ so many people to get the credit in the first place.

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  5. Re:Politics.. by DRJlaw · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you look at the overall gain in secondary business and employment the break even is way sooner than two decades.

    Ah, the secondary business scam -- the one where businesses claim large multiplier effects on secondary revenue and employment that mysteriously do not apply to other employers in the area since, if true for all, small business owners would be swimming in gold plated swimming pools and unemployment would be -50%.

  6. Re:Politics.. by Dan+East · · Score: 4, Interesting

    None the less, these tax breaks are really just a prisoner's dilemma. State offer them because other states offer them, but they would all be better off if no one offered them, and factories were optimally placed based on other factors.

    No no no no.... This is a global market. The option of placing this factory in the USA anywhere is dependent upon these tax breaks, as the amount of taxes, fees, regulations, etc, to create this factory in some other country is vastly lower. Think about this for a moment... the state is not GIVING them $3 billion dollars. The state is simply NOT TAKING AWAY $3 billion dollars in the form of taxes for some amount of time up-front. You think if this plant was in China there would be a $3 billion dollars in taxes collected from a plant like this? LOL on the contrary, the government would probably be footing or subsidizing the cost of building the plant in the first place.

    We would likely all be better off if there was a federal law to ban this nonsense.

    And on a totally different note, the federal government needs to keep its grimy hands off of state business. The States have the right to certain modes of tax, or not to tax as they see fit. I'm sick to death of people advocating the loss of States' rights just because it happens to result in a ruling that aligns with their personal philosophy. New Hampshire has no sales tax, instead they raise their taxes through real estate taxes. Other states have high sales taxes and low real estate taxes. Diversity and many different personalities and tax structures among the states is a very good thing.

    --
    Better known as 318230.