3 ms·

it's interesting that the criterion was the size of the company's gross revenues. (i.e. if a company has gross revenues greater than $20 million, it will be ass

it's interesting that the criterion was the size of the company's gross revenues. (i.e. if a company has gross revenues greater than $20 million, it will be assessed a tax of $275 per employee.) i guess it's desirable for the city to focus the tax on high revenue companies because, presumably, they're large and would have a hard time leaving Seattle. OTOH, i would think it would be more fair, in some sense, to base this tax on overall profitability. i.e. tax the companies that are the most profitable, or the most profitable per employee or something.

Jesus_Jones 8y ago
sounds like an income tax - not legal in this state. but sure, taxing the rich corps makes sense.
lovich 8y ago
Profitability is an easily gamed stat. While their target value might not be the most optimal, it's a simpler system and it's much more difficult to game revenue numbers without hurting your business
kevin_b_er 8y ago
You need to cross reference things like Hollywood accounting[1]. Profit can be manipulated. The original Star Wars movies have never made a profit. Let that sink in. Corporations and the rich are quite good at cooking the books for a variety of purpose in order to subvert the will of the people. So "profit" is not a good measure. They're too good at lying about it in the right way. * [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
- HillaryBriss 8y ago
  yes. thank you. it's well known that profit figures can be manipulated, especially in the entertainment business, which offers perhaps the most egregious case. but not every corporation goes to those extremes. the fact remains that many corporations report that they have earned a profit, year after year. the federal government (until last year's extreme tax law overhaul) was on track to collect about $400 billion a year in taxes on corporate income. (see https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FCTAX https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FCTAX ) (if corporations are so easily able to make their profits vanish with accounting tricks, why did they push so hard for this tax rate reduction?) on the other hand, employee head counts are not immune to manipulation. they too can be decreased: job functions of actual employees can be sourced to outside contracting firms. some jobs can be eliminated or automated. the point i was trying to make, overall, is that it's wise to take the needed cash from those who are most able to pay it. i'm not sure employer head count really captures that. and it adds a disincentive to job creation. is that the best idea they can come up with?

Jesus_Jones 8y ago

sounds like an income tax - not legal in this state. but sure, taxing the rich corps makes sense.

lovich 8y ago

Profitability is an easily gamed stat. While their target value might not be the most optimal, it's a simpler system and it's much more difficult to game revenue numbers without hurting your business

kevin_b_er 8y ago

You need to cross reference things like Hollywood accounting[1]. Profit can be manipulated. The original Star Wars movies have never made a profit. Let that sink in. Corporations and the rich are quite good at cooking the books for a variety of purpose in order to subvert the will of the people. So "profit" is not a good measure. They're too good at lying about it in the right way. * [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting

HillaryBriss 8y ago
yes. thank you. it's well known that profit figures can be manipulated, especially in the entertainment business, which offers perhaps the most egregious case. but not every corporation goes to those extremes. the fact remains that many corporations report that they have earned a profit, year after year. the federal government (until last year's extreme tax law overhaul) was on track to collect about $400 billion a year in taxes on corporate income. (see https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FCTAX https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FCTAX ) (if corporations are so easily able to make their profits vanish with accounting tricks, why did they push so hard for this tax rate reduction?) on the other hand, employee head counts are not immune to manipulation. they too can be decreased: job functions of actual employees can be sourced to outside contracting firms. some jobs can be eliminated or automated. the point i was trying to make, overall, is that it's wise to take the needed cash from those who are most able to pay it. i'm not sure employer head count really captures that. and it adds a disincentive to job creation. is that the best idea they can come up with?