HB 18-33: End Corporate Bidding Act (Failed)

[Esteemed Jimmy]

End Corporate Bidding Act

HOUSE BILL

Be it enacted by the House of Representatives and the Senate of the Republic of Atlasia in Congress assembled,

SECTION I: RECOGNIZING CORPORATE BIDDING

1. The Government of the Republic of Atlasia recognizes:
a) Corporations and cities often engage in "bidding wars" when looking for places to invest in, during which they "bid" for tax breaks and financial grants from local governments.
b) These practices are harmful and have little benefit to anybody but the corporation.

SECTION II: ENDING TAX BREAKS FOR CORPORATE BIDDING

1. Any financial benefit or tax break provided by a regional, state, or municipal government to a company or corporation in order to entice investment in the area shall be defined as "special income".
2. The special income attained from said financial benefits shall be taxed at a 100% rate.

People's House of Representatives
Rejected in the House of Representatives 2-4-2-1

Sponsor: MB
House Designation: HB 18-33

[Esteemed Jimmy]

HB 18-33 is now on the House floor. Debate on this legislation has begun and shall last for no less than 72 hours.

[Mr. Reactionary]

[lfromnj]

I endorse the idea. Corporate bidding creates an unfair prisoners dilemma situation that punishes small businesses. By preventing cities from allowing these unfair advantages or to be specific lack of disadvantages it will allow for a freer market. I would much rather the cities cut tax breaks in general. I would like to ask Mr.Reactionary if the wording of this bill would affect any general tax breaks offered by cities. I would also like a timeline for this to be future tax breaks only and not current ones.

[Mr. Reactionary]

The language I dont like is:

1. Any financial benefit or tax break provided by a regional, state, or municipal government to a company or corporation in order to entice investment in the area shall be defined as "special income".


My municipality is heavily involved in economic development as we have high unemployment. These tax breaks are basically a postponement on real estate and personal property taxes until a business is fully operational. If you are building a factory that takes 4 years to construct, 2 years to staff and train, and another year to run at full operation, a 7 year tax deferment conditioned on guaranteed jobs is perfectly reasonable.

Don't get me wrong, the Amazon hunt was a pathetic and slavish clown show and I am in no way defending the Amazon tactic of basically requesting a list of gifts, but targeted tax incentives are very useful in growing jobs.

I also don't like the idea of treating a release from an intangible local tax liability as "income" considering a locality may not need to impose a tax at all and think if you impose a 100% tax on something that probably means you haven't found a way to legally ban it.

[lfromnj]

The language I dont like is:

1. Any financial benefit or tax break provided by a regional, state, or municipal government to a company or corporation in order to entice investment in the area shall be defined as "special income".


My municipality is heavily involved in economic development as we have high unemployment. These tax breaks are basically a postponement on real estate and personal property taxes until a business is fully operational. If you are building a factory that takes 4 years to construct, 2 years to staff and train, and another year to run at full operation, a 7 year tax deferment conditioned on guaranteed jobs is perfectly reasonable.

Don't get me wrong, the Amazon hunt was a pathetic and slavish clown show and I am in no way defending the Amazon tactic of basically requesting a list of gifts, but targeted tax incentives are very useful in growing jobs.

I also don't like the idea of treating a release from an intangible local tax liability as "income" considering a locality may not need to impose a tax at all and think if you impose a 100% tax on something that probably means you haven't found a way to legally ban it.

Thank you for that. It is true that generic tax breaks should be allowed as long as ALL companies would get that tax break. But company specific tax breaks are a very unfair system of tax breaks.

[Mr. Reactionary]

The language I dont like is:

1. Any financial benefit or tax break provided by a regional, state, or municipal government to a company or corporation in order to entice investment in the area shall be defined as "special income".


My municipality is heavily involved in economic development as we have high unemployment. These tax breaks are basically a postponement on real estate and personal property taxes until a business is fully operational. If you are building a factory that takes 4 years to construct, 2 years to staff and train, and another year to run at full operation, a 7 year tax deferment conditioned on guaranteed jobs is perfectly reasonable.

Don't get me wrong, the Amazon hunt was a pathetic and slavish clown show and I am in no way defending the Amazon tactic of basically requesting a list of gifts, but targeted tax incentives are very useful in growing jobs.

I also don't like the idea of treating a release from an intangible local tax liability as "income" considering a locality may not need to impose a tax at all and think if you impose a 100% tax on something that probably means you haven't found a way to legally ban it.

Thank you for that. It is true that generic tax breaks should be allowed as long as ALL companies would get that tax break. But company specific tax breaks are a very unfair system of tax breaks.

Not all companies need to prorate a water treatment system for their salad dressing company 7 years. Not all companies need to delay machine and tool tax on their data center servers for 2 years until fully operational. Not all companies need to lock in 5 years worth of bulk electricity rates to calculate economic feasibility. Not all companies need to lease industrial facilities from a public owner. Schit, my city owns multiple industrial parks and hundreds of commercial properties through an Industrial Development Authority... this involvement has created close to 2,000 jobs in my community of 40,000. This bill would crush our economic development program and send us spiraling back to the 15% unemployment we had 10 years ago. Not everywhere is phucking new York city where jobs can just set up due to tens of millions of nearby people. My city landed a new factory from a UK company recently and yes incentives were involved... without the incentives they stay in England... how are we "better off" with those jobs staying in Europe? You cant expect jobs to come if the company cant make a profit and this awful bill essentially bans attempts to ensure that businesses dont go under.

This would have a dramatic impact on economic development in a bad way and is a major federal intrusion into local decisions. Thats one of the many things that bothers me about this bill ... it is the locality's decision to offer incentives yet the tax is on the company who merely accepts an offered benefit. This acts like it is curtailing "corporate bidding" when in reality it is curtailing local governments. More often than not it is the locality soliciting the business... its rare to have a business just show up and demand a list of concessions al a Amazon. This would kill strategic negotiations by localities including concessions obtained that benefit the local community and frankly reads like something that only children who never have dealt with economic development would suggest. If passed it is struggling communities who would feel this the worst and anyone who doesn't live in California or the New York metro area should be concerned.

Seriously a phucking 100% tax on smart local government decisions... absolute garbage designed to protect New York, DC, and maybe a half dozen other major metros at the expense of everyone else.

[Deep Dixieland Senator, Muad'dib (OSR MSR)]

Mr. Reactionary makes a number of good points.

Also here is an idea. Rather than imposing this from the top down with ZERO input from the regional governments this effects. I would suggest that maybe Atlasia should think of having an Atlasian Heads of Government Meeting. Where things like this and other standardizing legislative ideas could be discussed and have legislation agreed to and enacted by the regions themselves. This would show that those of you in Nyman are actually pro regions and not dictatorial tyrants imposing legislation on regions.

I would be happy to expand on the Atlasian Heads of Government Meeting idea should y'all be interested.

[lfromnj]

Mr. Reactionary makes a number of good points.

Also here is an idea. Rather than imposing this from the top down with ZERO input from the regional governments this effects. I would suggest that maybe Atlasia should think of having an Atlasian Heads of Government Meeting. Where things like this and other standardizing legislative ideas could be discussed and have legislation agreed to and enacted by the regions themselves. This would show that those of you in Nyman are actually pro regions and not dictatorial tyrants imposing legislation on regions.

I would be happy to expand on the Atlasian Heads of Government Meeting idea should y'all be interested.

On one hand I agree regional governments do need a lot of debate in this bill but this bill must be passed federally. If it is passed regionally it creates a prisoner dilemma's situation that will result in every region doing the best decision for itself(allow special tax breaks) although it is a worse decision overall.

[Esteemed Jimmy]

Does anyone have anything else to add?

[lfromnj]

End Corporate Bidding Act

HOUSE BILL

Be it enacted by the House of Representatives and the Senate of the Republic of Atlasia in Congress assembled,

SECTION I: RECOGNIZING CORPORATE BIDDING

1. The Government of the Republic of Atlasia recognizes:
a) Corporations and cities often engage in "bidding wars" when looking for places to invest in, during which they "bid" for tax breaks and financial grants from local governments.
b) These practices are harmful and have little benefit to anybody but the corporation.

SECTION II: ENDING TAX BREAKS FOR CORPORATE BIDDING

1. Any financial benefit or tax break provided by a regional, state, or municipal government to a company or corporation in order to entice investment in the area shall be defined as "special income".
2. The special income attained from said financial benefits shall be taxed at a 100% rate.

People's House of Representatives
Pending

Sponsor: MB
House Designation: HB 18-33

Small wording amendment.

[fhtagn]

I cannot support a measure that hurts poor areas in our nation. I also echo the statement by Southern Deputy Speaker Muaddib that before we can go through with this, there needs to be more input from the regions. Ideally, this would be a bill best suited for regional legislatures, not federal.

[lfromnj]

I cannot support a measure that hurts poor areas in our nation. I also echo the statement by Southern Deputy Speaker Muaddib that before we can go through with this, there needs to be more input from the regions. Ideally, this would be a bill best suited for regional legislatures, not federal.

I disagree. Although I will now vote against it as it stands currently because we do need more discussion, this is a bill that should be federal to solve the prisoner's dilemma situation.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

I believe the regions should have a say on this and not the federal government. In many cases bidding does help low-income areas as they build up their companies on the cheap and create jobs so many desperately need. I'll currently oppose this measure.

[Esteemed Jimmy]

I believe the regions should have a say on this and not the federal government. In many cases bidding does help low-income areas as they build up their companies on the cheap and create jobs so many desperately need. I'll currently oppose this measure.

Opposing this bill for the same reason.

[Sestak]

Guys, Lfromnj's point about the prisoner's dilemma then only being handed off to the regions instead of cities is a pretty strong point in favor of the legislation being federal and is worth more discussion and consideration by those who are pushing to regionalize the proposal.

[Esteemed Jimmy]

I motion for a final vote. Representatives have 24 hours for objections.

[Esteemed Jimmy]

A final vote has begun on this bill. Please vote AYE, NAY, or ABSTAIN.

End Corporate Bidding Act

HOUSE BILL

Be it enacted by the House of Representatives and the Senate of the Republic of Atlasia in Congress assembled,

SECTION I: RECOGNIZING CORPORATE BIDDING

1. The Government of the Republic of Atlasia recognizes:
a) Corporations and cities often engage in "bidding wars" when looking for places to invest in, during which they "bid" for tax breaks and financial grants from local governments.
b) These practices are harmful and have little benefit to anybody but the corporation.

SECTION II: ENDING TAX BREAKS FOR CORPORATE BIDDING

1. Any financial benefit or tax break provided by a regional, state, or municipal government to a company or corporation in order to entice investment in the area shall be defined as "special income".
2. The special income attained from said financial benefits shall be taxed at a 100% rate.

[fhtagn]

Nay

[JGibson]

AYE

[Esteemed Jimmy]

Nay

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Nay

[lfromnj]

Abstain- I in general support the general premise of the bill but with further discussion I can't support the current state of the bill. I do hope we can bring this back in an improved manner through Federal law as this law would be garbage if it was passed regionally.

[alancia]

Abstain

[Coastal Elitist]

Nay