4 ms·

>>You need way more than $6,100 per employee per year to reach break-even, as those employees will have definite costs to the city in the form of expenditures o

>>You need way more than $6,100 per employee per year to reach break-even, as those employees will have definite costs to the city in the form of expenditures on services. will they not rent and buy sandwiches from the area? Or pay the NY state /NYC income tax? Or sales tax on a lot of stuff they buy /spend? NY comes way out ahead, IMO, over 10 years. Amazon pays $100+k salaries for such staff

the_gastropod 8y ago
Will none of them ever require police assistance? Fire protection? Will they ride the subway? Will they use the streets and bridges? Will they drink city water? Or use plumbing? Will they vote? Maintaining infrastructure and services for residents of a city costs money. Adding ~25,000 residents will absolutely increase these expenses. The additional tax revenue will almost certainly more than cover it. But let's not pretend that tax revenue is "free".
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- onetimemanytime 8y ago
  >>But let's not pretend that tax revenue is "free". Oh, in NY and similar cities surely it is not free: you pay a substantial state tax AND a city tax. Not to mention a fat sales tax and fees on roads and bridges. But if you rent in X neighborhood and live there you generally paid your dues on services. Let's not forget that people (especially AMZN /GOOG / FB employees) also pay fed taxes, that trickle down to states for infrastructure etc etc. Not crying about NY state fat cats wanting $500K pension after "working" for the state.
  - the_gastropod 8y ago
    Brooklyn resident here ;-) But I think you may have missed my point: there are expenses for city residents. A non-zero percentage of these new residents' tax revenues will be spent on the residents themselves.
  - cepth 8y ago
    Just for the sake of accuracy, most of the Northeast states are net givers in terms of federal taxation. I.e. for every $1 that NY sends to the federal government in federal taxes, it receives something like ~$0.80 in spending: https://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/oct17/100317.htm https://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/oct17/100317.htm. Most of the money that NY receives is for Medicaid and other entitlements. NY receives every year a total of $165 per capita for transit, slightly less than the national average of $168. When considering the cost of labor and materials in NY, that gap is probably much larger in real purchasing terms. On the other hand, NY state directly spends $639.2 per capita on transportation annually: https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year_spending_2019NYdn_20ds2n_60#usgs302 https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year_spending_2019NYdn_.... The actual cost of the "pensions" you deride is $1085.2 per capita per year to the state. If you look at total state and local spending, the total costs of pensions are $1758 per capita per year, and transportation is $1788.8 per year. Neither reaches 10% of total statewide spending. This doesn't directly negate your point about federal money trickling down, but NY is not receiving very meaningful assistance from the federal government.
    - onetimemanytime 8y ago
      I am sorry, but a lot of states--if not most--have lower taxes than NYC. Amazon is bringing 25,000 people earning probably over $100K per person and Amazon will be here for (at least) another 20-30 years. That person is buying a condo, eating at NY restaurants, paying local state and payroll taxes, dry cleaning at local stores, buying clothes locally, etc etc etc. We know that people at that age virtually spend all their money...so what if AMZN got an x% discount on volume? What more do you want?
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
      - megaremote 8y ago
        You don't seem to be listening at all.
- tracker1 8y ago
  Where do you think police and fire funding comes from? It's taxes, paid by residents, and patrons to businesses... it's not like the people moving in will just take, and not pay any taxes at all.
  - brianpgordon 8y ago
    What position do you think you're arguing against? Because it's not what the actual topic in this thread is. CydeWeys simply pointed out that the state needs to make more than $6,100 in additional revenue from each worker because they're not just paying Amazon's tax incentives (which cost $6,100)- they're also paying to provide police/fire/etc coverage for the new worker.
jacurtis 8y ago
The argument is that there is also a burden/liability cost of bringing on an additional 25,000 citizens. They will have students that go to NYC schools, they will have disputes that need police officers, they will have emergencies that need EMTs/Firefighters, and they will have have cases that may burden the court system. They will also use the subway and they will litter and they will wear down the roads. These add burden costs to the city. Yes they will easily generate more than $6,100 in revenue per year for the city from income tax alone (6.65% is the NYC current tax rate in the $79,000 - $215,000 income bracket. This would bring in $7,248.50 a year based on the average of $109K income from income tax alone. Yes these employees will buy lunch everyday, they will buy TVs and iPads and bed sheets and alcohol and stuff. They will pay 8.85% sales tax on all these goods (only 4.5% of which goes to the city). If we assume they spend 50% of their income on sales taxable goods then they would pay another $9,646.50 a year in sales tax. So the question is how much on average does one citizen cost the city (the burden cost). As long as it is less than $16,895 (the sum of both previous figures) than things should be ok. The city also monetizes its' citizens through other means such as traffic tickets, property tax, state lottery sales, cigarettes, alcohol purchases, etc. So this $16K number is a low-ball figure. I am inclined to believe that the burden cost of a citizen is well below $10k a year. For easy math if we assume that a citizen does cost the city $10k per year, and the tax subsidies do cost $6,100 per year then that means the overall burden cost is $16,100 which would be the break-even point for an amazon employee. Money the city can earn on that employee above that figure would generate a net-benefit for the city. Anything below that figure would be a net-determinate to the city.
- nkurz 8y ago
  I like the direction of your argument, and your overall conclusion might be true, but I think there are some significant flaws. First, I think you are confusing the New York STATE tax rate with the New York CITY tax rate. The 6.65% you quote is the rate for the state. The city tax rate is significantly lower. Second, you are making the classic error of applying a marginal tax rate to the entire income, rather than just the portion within the brackets. Income lower than the bracket is assessed at a lower rate, so the effective rate on the total is less. Anyway, when I plug the $109,000 salary into a calculator here https://smartasset.com/taxes/new-york-tax-calculator https://smartasset.com/taxes/new-york-tax-calculator and use a Brooklyn zip 11238, it shows a "Local" tax of $3560. I'm not how it affects your overall argument, but I don't think it's true that "they will easily generate more than $6,100 in revenue per year for the city from income tax alone".

the_gastropod 8y ago

Will none of them ever require police assistance? Fire protection? Will they ride the subway? Will they use the streets and bridges? Will they drink city water? Or use plumbing? Will they vote? Maintaining infrastructure and services for residents of a city costs money. Adding ~25,000 residents will absolutely increase these expenses. The additional tax revenue will almost certainly more than cover it. But let's not pretend that tax revenue is "free".

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
onetimemanytime 8y ago
>>But let's not pretend that tax revenue is "free". Oh, in NY and similar cities surely it is not free: you pay a substantial state tax AND a city tax. Not to mention a fat sales tax and fees on roads and bridges. But if you rent in X neighborhood and live there you generally paid your dues on services. Let's not forget that people (especially AMZN /GOOG / FB employees) also pay fed taxes, that trickle down to states for infrastructure etc etc. Not crying about NY state fat cats wanting $500K pension after "working" for the state.
- the_gastropod 8y ago
  Brooklyn resident here ;-) But I think you may have missed my point: there are expenses for city residents. A non-zero percentage of these new residents' tax revenues will be spent on the residents themselves.
- cepth 8y ago
  Just for the sake of accuracy, most of the Northeast states are net givers in terms of federal taxation. I.e. for every $1 that NY sends to the federal government in federal taxes, it receives something like ~$0.80 in spending: https://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/oct17/100317.htm https://www.osc.state.ny.us/press/releases/oct17/100317.htm. Most of the money that NY receives is for Medicaid and other entitlements. NY receives every year a total of $165 per capita for transit, slightly less than the national average of $168. When considering the cost of labor and materials in NY, that gap is probably much larger in real purchasing terms. On the other hand, NY state directly spends $639.2 per capita on transportation annually: https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year_spending_2019NYdn_20ds2n_60#usgs302 https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year_spending_2019NYdn_.... The actual cost of the "pensions" you deride is $1085.2 per capita per year to the state. If you look at total state and local spending, the total costs of pensions are $1758 per capita per year, and transportation is $1788.8 per year. Neither reaches 10% of total statewide spending. This doesn't directly negate your point about federal money trickling down, but NY is not receiving very meaningful assistance from the federal government.
  - onetimemanytime 8y ago
    I am sorry, but a lot of states--if not most--have lower taxes than NYC. Amazon is bringing 25,000 people earning probably over $100K per person and Amazon will be here for (at least) another 20-30 years. That person is buying a condo, eating at NY restaurants, paying local state and payroll taxes, dry cleaning at local stores, buying clothes locally, etc etc etc. We know that people at that age virtually spend all their money...so what if AMZN got an x% discount on volume? What more do you want?
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - megaremote 8y ago
      You don't seem to be listening at all.
tracker1 8y ago
Where do you think police and fire funding comes from? It's taxes, paid by residents, and patrons to businesses... it's not like the people moving in will just take, and not pay any taxes at all.
- brianpgordon 8y ago
  What position do you think you're arguing against? Because it's not what the actual topic in this thread is. CydeWeys simply pointed out that the state needs to make more than $6,100 in additional revenue from each worker because they're not just paying Amazon's tax incentives (which cost $6,100)- they're also paying to provide police/fire/etc coverage for the new worker.

jacurtis 8y ago

The argument is that there is also a burden/liability cost of bringing on an additional 25,000 citizens. They will have students that go to NYC schools, they will have disputes that need police officers, they will have emergencies that need EMTs/Firefighters, and they will have have cases that may burden the court system. They will also use the subway and they will litter and they will wear down the roads. These add burden costs to the city. Yes they will easily generate more than $6,100 in revenue per year for the city from income tax alone (6.65% is the NYC current tax rate in the $79,000 - $215,000 income bracket. This would bring in $7,248.50 a year based on the average of $109K income from income tax alone. Yes these employees will buy lunch everyday, they will buy TVs and iPads and bed sheets and alcohol and stuff. They will pay 8.85% sales tax on all these goods (only 4.5% of which goes to the city). If we assume they spend 50% of their income on sales taxable goods then they would pay another $9,646.50 a year in sales tax. So the question is how much on average does one citizen cost the city (the burden cost). As long as it is less than $16,895 (the sum of both previous figures) than things should be ok. The city also monetizes its' citizens through other means such as traffic tickets, property tax, state lottery sales, cigarettes, alcohol purchases, etc. So this $16K number is a low-ball figure. I am inclined to believe that the burden cost of a citizen is well below $10k a year. For easy math if we assume that a citizen does cost the city $10k per year, and the tax subsidies do cost $6,100 per year then that means the overall burden cost is $16,100 which would be the break-even point for an amazon employee. Money the city can earn on that employee above that figure would generate a net-benefit for the city. Anything below that figure would be a net-determinate to the city.

nkurz 8y ago
I like the direction of your argument, and your overall conclusion might be true, but I think there are some significant flaws. First, I think you are confusing the New York STATE tax rate with the New York CITY tax rate. The 6.65% you quote is the rate for the state. The city tax rate is significantly lower. Second, you are making the classic error of applying a marginal tax rate to the entire income, rather than just the portion within the brackets. Income lower than the bracket is assessed at a lower rate, so the effective rate on the total is less. Anyway, when I plug the $109,000 salary into a calculator here https://smartasset.com/taxes/new-york-tax-calculator https://smartasset.com/taxes/new-york-tax-calculator and use a Brooklyn zip 11238, it shows a "Local" tax of $3560. I'm not how it affects your overall argument, but I don't think it's true that "they will easily generate more than $6,100 in revenue per year for the city from income tax alone".