Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on May 03, 2018, 11:11:15 AM
-
Interesting story I saw yesterday. Seattle is apparently either looking at, or already implementing a "head tax" on big businesses in the city (I forget at what gross it kicks in). Essentially charging the businesses 26 cents per man hour worked to help pay for "homelessness" and I suppose other social programs.
This morning I read that Amazon has halted expansion in the city specifically because of the tax. Looks like even the "socially responsible" tech giants (who I expect Seattle was mostly targeting, because deep pockets and all) have an "enough is enough" point.
I'm also curious on how this tax would be implemented. What does a man hour worked "in the city" mean? Is it everyone physically working for the business in the city? Is it all the employees on the payroll of the business in the city? Because those can be two rather divergent numbers, especially in the tech industry. Amazon could easily have 1000 telecommuters "reporting" to the physical address of their facilities in Seattle. If the latter, the first thing I would do if in charge was tell those 1000 employees, "You now work at our facility in Nevada."
-
I’m sure Amazon is eager to get their new Boston location up and running as quickly as possible.
Compared to Seattle, Boston is a conservatve’s Mecca.
-
https://www.seattlemet.com/articles/2018/4/20/council-members-proposed-head-tax-hits-big-businesses-hard-for-housing
http://seattlebusinessmag.com/policy/councilmembers-propose-%E2%80%9Chead-tax%E2%80%9D-about-100-employee-large-seattle-businesses-fund-programs
https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/amazon-halts-seattle-construction-project-ahead-tax-vote-54890133
Approximately 26 cents per hour per employee, estimated at about $ 540 per year per employee. It will be charged to the top ten percent of the highest grossing businesses (with at least $ 20 million in annual gross income) within the city limits. The intended targets of the tax are the dot com businesses.
-
If implemented I would hope that the big players so affected would initiate immediate exit strategies.
-
The avowed socialist speaks!
"At a council committee meeting Wednesday, Councilmember Kshama Sawant said it's critical that "we not accept this extortion."
I think she's the one who called on workers to seize the means of production a few years ago.
But imagine this... Jeff Bezos, champion of the left, leader of the anti-Trump movement with his flagship Washington Post...
Isn't Woke! WTF?
-
I like it, going to make more people not liberal. I read an article with several of the council quoted, it's like Ayn Rand slipped them a screenplay.
Very little thought given to doubling the money spent on homeless being another exercise in you get more of what you subsidize.
-
Very little thought given to doubling the money spent on homeless being another exercise in you get more of what you subsidize.
Say WHAAAT? ???
-
https://www.seattlemet.com/articles/2018/4/20/council-members-proposed-head-tax-hits-big-businesses-hard-for-housing
http://seattlebusinessmag.com/policy/councilmembers-propose-%E2%80%9Chead-tax%E2%80%9D-about-100-employee-large-seattle-businesses-fund-programs
https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/amazon-halts-seattle-construction-project-ahead-tax-vote-54890133
Approximately 26 cents per hour per employee, estimated at about $ 540 per year per employee. It will be charged to the top ten percent of the highest grossing businesses (with at least $ 20 million in annual gross income) within the city limits. The intended targets of the tax are the dot com businesses.
Those stories had widely varying numbers for estimated annual income from the tax. That should be a red flag right there. That's about the same song and dance that's going on with the cost of California's high speed rail to nowhere. Since the 26 cents per hour is basic math, the estimates have to be getting fudged on either just who will be getting taxed, or possibly on just where the money will be going. "For the homeless" might include 50 new city govt jobs "to help the homeless" and new laptops and Aeron chairs for everyone.
I suppose the estimates could also vary on how many businesses each source thinks will stick around vs get out of Dodge. :)
-
As I have complained here many times, Firefox and Google are constantly giving me "recommended based on your preferences" news stories that are composed 99% of viewpoints exactly opposite mine. Sometimes they are interesting in that they give me a good view at "the other side".
Case in point, this Huffpo article on the Seattle head tax and Amazon, claiming Amazon is "holding Seattle hostage." Seriously? So the way it works is that cities tell businesses where they have to build, or what? What's happening is pretty much the opposite: Seattle is holding businesses already in place in the city hostage.
Anyway, sometimes it's enlightening to hear stuff like this straight from the horse's mouth. It was also interesting to see Seattle's long game, which I didn't catch the first time I read about this: They would start with a flat head tax, but in the future would be "progressively charging" the head tax based on the employee's salary.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/amazon-holding-seattle-hostage_us_5af5ba76e4b032b10bfa4285
-
As I have complained here many times, Firefox and Google are constantly giving me "recommended based on your preferences" news stories that are composed 99% of viewpoints exactly opposite mine. Sometimes they are interesting in that they give me a good view at "the other side".
Case in point, this Huffpo article on the Seattle head tax and Amazon, claiming Amazon is "holding Seattle hostage." Seriously? So the way it works is that cities tell businesses where they have to build, or what? What's happening is pretty much the opposite: Seattle is holding businesses already in place in the city hostage.
Anyway, sometimes it's enlightening to hear stuff like this straight from the horse's mouth. It was also interesting to see Seattle's long game, which I didn't catch the first time I read about this: They would start with a flat head tax, but in the future would be "progressively charging" the head tax based on the employee's salary.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/amazon-holding-seattle-hostage_us_5af5ba76e4b032b10bfa4285
And thinking about that long game, why would any business move to or start up in Seattle? Why would any business stay there knowing the tax is just going to get ramped up more and more? At the very least, businesses are going to head out to the suburbs to escape the city.
-
As I have complained here many times, Firefox and Google are constantly giving me "recommended based on your preferences" news stories that are composed 99% of viewpoints exactly opposite mine. Sometimes they are interesting in that they give me a good view at "the other side".
Case in point, this Huffpo article on the Seattle head tax and Amazon, claiming Amazon is "holding Seattle hostage." Seriously? So the way it works is that cities tell businesses where they have to build, or what? What's happening is pretty much the opposite: Seattle is holding businesses already in place in the city hostage.
Anyway, sometimes it's enlightening to hear stuff like this straight from the horse's mouth. It was also interesting to see Seattle's long game, which I didn't catch the first time I read about this: They would start with a flat head tax, but in the future would be "progressively charging" the head tax based on the employee's salary.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/amazon-holding-seattle-hostage_us_5af5ba76e4b032b10bfa4285
They've been trying for a while to get an income tax through. But the state constitution I think prohibits localities from enacting such taxes. So basically this is a sneaky backdoor attempt at an end run around that restriction on their ability to do so.
-
Same old, same old.
Give lefty-commies a centimeter and they'll take a parsec sooner or later.
-
Seattle meet Detroit....
-
The Seattle City Council passed the head tax; albeit at a lower rate of $ 275 per employee per year: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/seattle-city-council-votes-9-0-for-scaled-down-head-tax-on-large-employers/
-
Wonder if it will survive the inevitable court challenge. I don't know if violates the prohibition on income tax or not since it's not based on income per se but is still based on employment.
-
One thing I'm not clear on...
Is that on employees working only in Seattle, or is that on ALL employees working for companies that are headquartered in Seattle?
Can't see how it would be the first case, but I wouldn't put it past those aholes to try.
For years Seattle, San Francisco, etc. have gone out of their way to lure large companies (often with tax payer funded incentives) to their cities to bolster employment, city prestige, tax coffers, but now that they're reaping the inevitable outcome -- traffic, jumps in housing prices, crime, homelessness, etc., -- they're screaming bloody murder.
Well what the *expletive deleted*ck did these idiots thing would happen?
-
"Some proponents of the measure used the slogan “tax Amazon,” arguing the e-commerce behemoth owed Seattle help with its affordability problem."
Wow. Just wow.
Were I in control of Amazon, I'd use turn the search for a second headquarters into the search for THE headquarters.
But but but... you can't leave Seattle!
Actually, we can. We're helping solve the affordability problem by taking our jobs and going elsewhere."
Of course, that communist Jeff Bezos would never do that. Funny, though, to see such a woke company pushed into indecision when what it wants for everyone else bit it in the ass.
-
Nice.
In a biting statement, a Starbucks spokesman accused city leaders of failing to spend effectively on homelessness and ignoring children sleeping outside.
“If they cannot provide a warm meal and safe bed to a five-year-old child, no one believes they will be able to make housing affordable or address opiate addiction,” said John Kelly, the company’s top public-affairs executive."
Of course, we know that ones administration, overhead, associated fees, management, statistical tracking, accounting, and others at the city's pig trough finish feeding there will be what, about $500 left over to actually do something for the homeless.
-
One thing I'm not clear on...
Is that on employees working only in Seattle, or is that on ALL employees working for companies that are headquartered in Seattle?
Can't see how it would be the first case, but I wouldn't put it past those aholes to try.
It applies only to employees working within the city limits of Seattle, and would not include telecommuters. The Council had to add an amendment exempting certain non-profit businesses, such as the large hospitals downtown, with 4000 employees.
-
"The Council had to add an amendment exempting certain non-profit businesses, such as the large hospitals downtown, with 4000 employees."
Why how very woke of them!
-
Nice.
In a biting statement, a Starbucks spokesman accused city leaders of failing to spend effectively on homelessness and ignoring children sleeping outside.
“If they cannot provide a warm meal and safe bed to a five-year-old child, no one believes they will be able to make housing affordable or address opiate addiction,” said John Kelly, the company’s top public-affairs executive."
Of course, we know that ones administration, overhead, associated fees, management, statistical tracking, accounting, and others at the city's pig trough finish feeding there will be what, about $500 left over to actually do something for the homeless.
What does that say for the city govt and others there that they aren't doing something for the children out of their current budget? The media never asks such questions.
-
Well, according to any number of the people in a chat group I'm in on Facebook (Real Talk Club), the city of Seattle is a shining example of a crusader for the rights of the individual who has been crushed -- body and soul -- by the greed of corporations.
I suspect these are the same people who think Venezuela is a *expletive deleted*ing wonderful place because it's a socialist paradise. Everyone knows that.
-
Well maybe they can take a visit. I hear Venezuelan BBQ is pretty good these days.
(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/HekAAOSwTM5YtMlK/s-l1600.jpg)
-
Sam Elliot voice:"Long pig, it's what's for dinner."
-
Nice.
In a biting statement, a Starbucks spokesman accused city leaders of failing to spend effectively on homelessness and ignoring children sleeping outside.
“If they cannot provide a warm meal and safe bed to a five-year-old child, no one believes they will be able to make housing affordable or address opiate addiction,” said John Kelly, the company’s top public-affairs executive."
Of course, we know that ones administration, overhead, associated fees, management, statistical tracking, accounting, and others at the city's pig trough finish feeding there will be what, about $500 left over to actually do something for the homeless.
No, they'll be about a million in the hole and need another round of Someone Else's Moneytm to Do Somethingtm
-
Cupertino California (location of Apple's HQ) is also contemplating a head tax:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/cupertino-mulls-head-tax-on-apple-other-local-businesses
That should go over like a fart in church.
-
I've heard that Apple has been contemplating new digs....outside of CA....
https://www.curbed.com/2018/1/17/16902190/apple-new-campus-headquarters-jobs
-
Well, this was a fast turnaround (or the beginnings of one):
https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/seattle-may-pull-head-tax-after-amazon-starbucks-cry-foul
In some ways it's sad that it took two 800lb gorillas to do it, because without them, this reversal likely wouldn't be happening.
-
Why how very horribly bullying of them!
They need to pay their fair share! FAIRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR SHAREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
-
Well, this was a fast turnaround (or the beginnings of one):
https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/seattle-may-pull-head-tax-after-amazon-starbucks-cry-foul
In some ways it's sad that it took two 800lb gorillas to do it, because without them, this reversal likely wouldn't be happening.
I think the city read the tea leaves on the upcoming referendum vote this fall and were worried about it being shut down on someone else's terms. I suspect that if there were a vote on it and it went overwhelmingly against the head tax, then they'd lose the ability to try to restart this at some later date with yet another version of it.
-
Perhaps their cushy do-nothing jobs also ??
-
Well, this was a fast turnaround (or the beginnings of one):
https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/seattle-may-pull-head-tax-after-amazon-starbucks-cry-foul
In some ways it's sad that it took two 800lb gorillas to do it, because without them, this reversal likely wouldn't be happening.
Wasn't the tax pretty much targeted at them only? I think it was aimed at companies with a minimum number of employees or income. I forget which. For all we know they promised extra charitable donations to get the tax killed.
They will come up with something else. Politicians never run out of things to spend money on.
-
Wasn't the tax pretty much targeted at them only? I think it was aimed at companies with a minimum number of employees or income. I forget which. For all we know they promised extra charitable donations to get the tax killed.
They will come up with something else. Politicians never run out of things to spend other people's money on.
FTFY
-
Wasn't the tax pretty much targeted at them only? I think it was aimed at companies with a minimum number of employees or income. I forget which. For all we know they promised extra charitable donations to get the tax killed.
They will come up with something else. Politicians never run out of things to spend money on.
IIRC, yeah, unofficially they were looking at the deep pockets of them and Apple, but also IIRC, it would have affected "smaller" big business in the area as well - those who might not be able to shrug off the tax as easily as Amazon. Plus the usual trickle down of redefining what a "wealthy" business is so that pretty soon, they're charging a head tax to everyone with more than 50 employees, because they can.
Or way, way less. Again, IIRC, it's currently greater than $20mil GROSS. I think it's possible, depending on what they sell or provide, for mid-sized businesses to potentially meet that gross, while having a much, much smaller net income.