Posted on 12/01/2016 1:09:50 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Indiana agreed to give United Technologies $7 million in financial incentives over a decade to persuade the industrial giant to keep roughly 1,000 Carrier jobs in the state, Carrier said Thursday.
Carrier, United Technologies' heating and air conditioning unit, had planned to close a furnace plant in the state and move it to Mexico. Carrier will invest about $16 million in Indiana to keep operations there, a source told NBC News.
In a statement Thursday, Carrier said the financial incentives are "contingent upon factors including employment, job retention and capital investment."
The company said Wednesday that state "incentives" were "an important consideration" for keeping the positions in Indiana. Carrier is still moving 600 jobs from the plant to Mexico, and closing another plant in Indiana that would move 700 jobs, according to the The Wall Street Journal, which first reported the tax breaks on Thursday.
The incoming administration of President-elect Donald Trump, who repeatedly attacked Carrier and other companies for moving jobs out of the United States, negotiated the deal with United Technologies. Vice president-elect Mike Pence is the state's governor.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
Good. as it should be.
That's the problem - they aren't additional jobs.
This is Indiana adding $7M in expenses without any additional revenue.
It's all on the backs of the other citizens.
I lower taxes and businesses stay in my state. I raise taxes and businesses ____________________?
Exactly
Tax relief is a good way to keep business.
No, the government can lower it’s spending.
>
Letting Carrier KEEP THEIR OWN MONEY, rather then have the State of IN tax it away from them is a VERY Conservative position.
Face it, this is just more of the usual #Never Trumper whining butt hurt.
>
TY, Kingu. Shame it took 8 posts before someone zeroed in on the questions that should be asked/answered.
Butt hurt?? Crony Capitalism at its finest. How ‘bout the other thousands/millions of biz owners\etc. still under the onerous, oppressive tax burden??
The position to take, hold and enforce SHOULD be to reduce the cost/size of govt so that *ALL* benefit. If this is the ‘conservative’ position, you can keep it....just more ‘nibbling around the edges’ ‘til the masses lose interest again.
Trump can probably give Carrier MUCH MORE than $700k per year, just by GETTING THE GOVERNMENT OFF THEIR BACKS. I suspect that had much more to do with them staying.
There is a HUGE amount of room for Trump, starting with refrigerant and efficiency standards, and God knows what else...what he can do is virtually endless.
Here’s my abbreviated math:
1,000 jobs x $50k (say average wages) = $50 million.
$50 million x 7 (average economic “turnover factor” of a dollar) = $350 million annual impact to the economy.
Not chump change...but Trump change...he’s not yet even in office.
POINT ON!
That’s what I say too.
No you foolish children. In our system, the State is granted revenues by the people as a collective good. It is their property granted TO the Government not vice versa. It is up to the voters in IN to render the judgment on their Representatives at the voting booth if this was a wise move or a foolish move for the collective to reduce tax burdens on Carrier in exchange for the collective good of keeping the 1100 jobs.
Your basing your argument on a fraudulent Marxist premise that the State is the owner, not the recipient, of all economic output and thus any reduction of taxes must be “made up” elsewhere. NO the people, via the avenue of their elected Representatives, can simply choose to give the state less of THEIR revenue.
So quit trying to manufacture a false premise and learn the facts that refute your knee jerk dogmatic ignorance.
Next year’s revenues are based on the number of jobs in the state next year, not last year. It’s 1000 more jobs than if the jobs move to Mexico.
So, if you calculate the total revenue in the tax years when the $7M in tax credits are given, what is the total difference?
Also, the $7M is only a “government expense” if you think all private profit belongs to the government. In that case they are paying what we get to keep out of government funds and it’s an expense. If you think profit belongs to the company and government collects taxes from profit/income, then this may be “less revenue” rather than an expense.
Let them keep their own money.
$7million is hardly the cost of one 0bama family Hawaiian vacation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.