[DannyTN]

Well here is what Toyota said about it...

"The shift, announced Monday, is part of a strategy to consolidate corporate management on one campus near the company's Southern manufacturing hubs. It marks the second high-profile move of a major automaker from Southern California. Nissan moved its U.S. headquarters from Gardena to a Nashville suburb in 2006.
Some observers and California officials seized on the announcement to criticize what they said is California's business climate for high taxes and onerous regulations. But Toyota officials said the move to a Dallas suburb had nothing to do with cost-cutting and everything to do with fostering efficiency and collaboration.

So they moved the headquarters closer to their manufacturing. A lesson that should be paid attention to everyone who thinks we can off-shore manufacturing and keep the headquarters and design elements in the U.S..

[okie01]

But Toyota officials said the move to a Dallas suburb had nothing to do with cost-cutting and everything to do with fostering efficiency and collaboration.

"A lesson that should be paid attention to everyone who thinks we can off-shore manufacturing and keep the headquarters and design elements in the U.S."

Hate to burst your bubble, but every company that changes location will claim that cutting costs had nothing to do with it.

The reason is simple: If a union is involved, they are leaving themselves open to all kinds of punitive lawsuits. Under labor relations law, a less expensive operating environment is NOT a valid reason to change locations.