Slashdot Mirror


New York Mayor Says Amazon Headquarters Debacle Was 'an Abuse of Corporate Power' (cnn.com)

New York Mayor Bill de Blasio is still upset that Amazon isn't coming to New York. De Blasio attacked the company Sunday for canceling plans to build a second headquarters in Queens last week. From a report: "This is an example of an abuse of corporate power," de Blasio told NBC's Chuck Todd on "Meet the Press." "Amazon just took their ball and went home. And what they did was confirm people's worst fears about corporate America." He made similar comments in a New York Times op-ed Saturday. Amazon canceled the deal just months after announcing plans to split its new, second headquarters between New York and Virginia. The Seattle-based company, which is trying to grow its footprint at home and abroad, spent a year reviewing hundreds of "HQ2" proposals from all over North America before settling on the two regions.

[...] On Sunday, de Blasio, a Democrat, said New York offered Amazon a "fair deal," and blamed the company for making what he called an "arbitrary" decision to leave after some people objected. "They said they wanted a partnership, but the minute there were criticisms, they walked away," he added. "What does that say to working people that a company would leave them high and dry simply because some people raised criticisms?"

24 of 411 comments (clear)

  1. Tax is for the little people by youngone · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Amazon don't want to pay tax. They want to profit from doing business in a developed country. They just don't feel the need to help pay to maintain one:
    $11.2 billion in profits means you pay -0.1% federal tax. Nice.

    1. Re: Tax is for the little people by illiac_1962 · · Score: 3

      The problem is that you expect them to pay tax. Just embrace the reality that they should not and you will be better equipped to deal with this. All the taxes get passed on to workers and customers anyway. Do we want to tax corporation or people? You can't do both! It's like trying to get more energy from a circuit by changing where to connect the wires. Silly, it's all coming from the same battery.

    2. Re:Tax is for the little people by cruff · · Score: 5, Informative

      The notion that corporations pass income taxes on to consumers is not supported by any data whatsoever.

      Really? Any sanely run corporation must pass on all costs to the customers or eventually go out of business.

    3. Re: Tax is for the little people by Darinbob · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The part where the profits are increased because government taxes went and paid for infrastructure that they depend upon. Ie, water and sewage for their workers, roads so that workers can arrive at the plants, railroads and bridges so that their goods can be shipped out, a court system so that they can make use of a legal system when they have disputes, police and military to protect their real estate and workers, etc.

      Companies do not make money in a vacuum, governments are a vital part of doing business. When a large corporation pays 0% in taxes then they are essentially free-loading off of everyone who does pay tax. Even the most staunch capital-L Libertarian will agree that this is unfair.

      And don't say "comrade" as if paying taxes were synonymous with communism, that just makes any argument you had look stupid.

    4. Re: Tax is for the little people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you utilize the services that those taxes pay for (roads, planes, electricity, etc etc etc) then it is both immoral AND unethical to not pay your taxes.

    5. Re:Tax is for the little people by sjames · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Personal income taxes just end up being paid by hard working corporations. If I have to pay taxes out of my income, I buy less stuff and corporate profits go down.

      So do the right thing and abolish personal income tax. Do the right thing and let the corporations pay their taxes out of their profits.

    6. Re: Tax is for the little people by kenh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Amazon entered into a 10 year deal with the City and State of New York, and over those ten years they would have paid an estimated $30 BN in various taxes and fees. Instead, NY City and State agreed to 90 cents on the dollar, AKA $27 BN over the next ten years to lure Amazon to Queens. So AOC & Friends didn't "save" NY city and state $3 BN, she cost them $27 BN in new tax revenue.

      25,000 new jobs for a 10% discount on taxes, seems like an OK deal to me, but then again, I'm not an economics major like AOC is.

      --
      Ken
    7. Re: Tax is for the little people by kenh · · Score: 3

      In New York City, the top 1% pay about 46% of all income taxes collected in New York State - that's per Gov. Cuomo. After recent tax changes, the rich are leaving New York State, and already the state is running a $23BN tax shortfall, about a 3% deficit so far this tax year.

      Yea! Tax the rich! What are they gonna do, leave? Well, yeah, they will.

      BTW, we tax INCOME, not WEALTH.

      --
      Ken
    8. Re:Tax is for the little people by youngone · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nobody is arguing Amazon are breaking the law.
      The argument is that the law ought to be different.

    9. Re: Tax is for the little people by srichard25 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They might not be doing anything illegal, but I disagree what they are doing is ethical. Ethical is a higher bar than legal. One of the definitions of ethical is: avoiding activities or organizations that do harm to people or the environment. So they found a loophole that allows them to avoid all federal taxes. They could chose to not use that type of loophole and pay a reasonable amount of tax to the country that allows them to make billions in profit.

    10. Re: Tax is for the little people by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seriously, nobody's fool enough to let the government be the power company.

      There are plenty of places in America with government run municipal power.

      Municipal electric utilities in the United States

      They generally work well. Electrical power is a natural monopoly, so free market competition isn't really an alternative anyway.

    11. Re:Tax is for the little people by dryeo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Higher corporate taxes results in lower wages and distribution and thus lower individual spending.

      Actually higher corporate taxes results in more spending on wages, infrastructure etc as the corporation would prefer to spend their money, expand their business and write it off then give it to the government. Unlike wage earners, who basically get taxed on income, corporations get taxed on profits, or the amount left over after paying the bills including wages.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    12. Re: Tax is for the little people by Ichijo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How can ordinary citizens like you and I get the same negative tax deal as Amazon?

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    13. Re: Tax is for the little people by stoborrobots · · Score: 3

      Sure, but what percentage of the income do they make? If they're taking home 80% of the income and paying 46% of the income tax, that seems to be underpaying.

      Also, per your link, that statistic is not from the Cuomo, but is stated editorialising by investors.com after his quote.

  2. What is good for the goose by markdavis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >"New York Mayor...' 'This is an example of an abuse of corporate power,' de Blasio told NBC"

    I suppose all these major "incentives", bonuses, express permitting, promises, tax cuts, state-funded infrastructure for private benedit, and other such things are not "an example of an abuse of government power"?

  3. Player, Referee, Player by Tokolosh · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you are both a player and the referee, you can't complain when your opponent leaves with the ball.

    --
    Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
  4. You spin me right round baby, right round... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    NYC makes offer to Amazon, Amazon negotiates, NYC gets ready to make loads of concessions to entice them into contract, people scream bloody murder, NYC cancels contract, Amazon walks away, NYC -> *pikachu surprised meme*

    This is your fault NYC government. Not Amazon's. Yours. And while yes, you put way too much on the table in the first place, that too is your fault, not Amazon's. You could have walked away first, could have turned them down... oh wait, you actually did, but now you wanna be butthurt because Amazon accepted your rejection instead of begging you to take them back.

    This is purely your fault for making terrible deals in the past to "bring jobs" to NYC. This is purely the fault of every city that has done this and created this ridiculous reality where corporations can shop around for the best deals... you are a government, not a retail business! STOP SELLING US OUT! Jobs are NOT worth it if they do not help the economy in your city/county/state. When you drop all corporate taxes for X years you are hurting your state, every time. They have no incentive to stay, so when the tax breaks are over, hey, time open a new HQ an reduce workforce to skeleton or less in the last place! And you can't stop it. So, stop doing that. Stop corporate welfare. Stop tax break incentives that last for years. You want an Amazon HQ, give them 1 year. ONE. A year of no taxes while you set up and get going, then business as usual - pay your taxes or walk on, son. Do that for everyone else. Heck, do that for NEW businesses as well! Attract that start-up! Incentivise small business growth! Anything but giving giant corporations that already pay almost no taxes yet another tax break.

    An yes, i'd go so far as to charging additional tax on these massive businesses wanting to move into an area. The amount of public resources is way out of balance with the taxes they'd pay even without any tax breaks.

  5. You get the idiot you voted for by WCMI92 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That is the bottom line.

    --
    Corporatism != Free Market
  6. Blaming the wrong party by MikeRT · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What does that say to working people that a company would leave them high and dry simply because some people raised criticisms

    Why don't you go ask Ms. Occasional-Cortex why she and her peers lead a rage mob at them when Amazon was willing to move into a community that has an average income of $15k and create jobs there? None of the "criticisms" were sober and civilly expressed. It was typical Twitter culture rage mob with over-the-top rhetoric, vilification, etc.

    And then you wonder why Amazon politely says "no, you can fuck right off and die" and leaves? Truth is, if AOC and co had been civil and demanded that the benefits package be cut in half, then had been otherwise welcoming, Amazon would very likely still be moving in. This is real life, not Twitter. You don't have Jack Dorsey and his biased admins padding your safe space every night while you sleep. There are consequences.

    1. Re:Blaming the wrong party by doubledown00 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Realistically, NYC was going to get their jobs, but they were also going to all the ballooning housing prices and other issues that are plagueing places like San Francisco, Seattle, and all the other tech boom towns. That's what the root of the protests were about; sticking up for the current residents who were probably going to end up being priced out of their own neighbourhoods and trying to provide them with some safeguards.

      At $15,000 average income this sounds like a shitty economically blighted neighborhood. So in order to improve said neighborhood there has to be an economic driver. Any economic driver capable of making that kind of impact, be it Amazon or a Walmart Distribution Center, or anything else of like size will cause some disruption and displacement. More money chasing housing means rent will go up. Values will increase which will also increase property taxes.

      All that is by design part of economic development. You can't take a shitty neighborhood, add opportunity, make it somewhat less shitty, and avoid pricing out the prior occupants of the formerly more shitty neighborhood.

      Either way you try to make that omelette's, some eggs are going to break. If there is a job center in the area then at least there might be an option to subsidize some housing. Without that job center, it's just another shitty broke neighborhood into which money is poured.

  7. Re:DNC platform by Darinbob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The number of jobs that companies promise in exchange for tax breaks has always been a lie. The actual jobs are always a small fraction of what was originally claimed, and the promised increase in revenue to the cities never actually shows up.

    If a municipality or state makes an agreement here to get new business relocated, then they should be putting in hard requirements into the deals. Ie, reduce the taxes only if the promises are kept, increasing them proportionate to how far apart the promises and reality actually are.

    Politicians weasel out of this though. When the jobs don't show up the politicians never takes the blame, but just passes it along to the company ("how was I to know they didn't consider a handshake to be binding?") or to an opposing party ("they undermined me at every turn!").

  8. Re:Amazon saw the writing on the wall. by rotorbudd · · Score: 3, Informative

    New York ranks No. 1 in losing residents to other states

    https://www.bizjournals.com/ne...
    They are leaving. I quote:
      Looking at New York City specifically, the area with the largest percentage of residents lost to other states came from the zip code 10075, in the Upper East Side, which faced a 9.3 percent decrease in its population from 2015 to 2016

    --
    A bullet may have your name on it, but artillery is addressed to " Whom It May concern"
  9. Who ran the numbers first? by King_TJ · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It seems to me like a LOT of people involved with or impacted by this Amazon HQ being in, vs. leaving New York are just running off emotions and assumptions?

    To determine if this was a "good deal" for NY taxpayers, you have to look at many factors and crunch all the numbers. I'm confident the likes of Cortex didn't do so, but I question if DeBlasio did either?

    I mean, you have to calculate impact of the extra traffic it generates .... the extra demand on public utilities like electric power, sewer and water. You obviously have to look at how much you gave Amazon in tax breaks and benefits, vs. how much they'll really benefit the public with new jobs. (How much will you collect in taxes from the people they hire?) And if the deal wasn't struck with a clause in it that required Amazon STAY there for a number of years -- you have to try to take an educated guess about the long-term future. Many times, companies take advantage of these deals to put a business in a state, only to pull back out as soon as the perks expire.

    I don't know if the HQ was a good deal of Queens or it wasn't .... but the people making the decision should sure know, and I'm not confident any of them do?

  10. Or in other words by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You wanted them to come and be your live in whipping boy, and when you bragged to your usual audiences about how badly you were going to whip them, they reconsidered for some mysterious reason.