They're using a really common anti-tax argumentation tactic. Instead of establishing a causal link between the 966 business that left and the corporate tax rate

They're using a really common anti-tax argumentation tactic. Instead of establishing a causal link between the 966 business that left and the corporate tax rate by doing a study they've simply called 2 people and quoted them in the article about why they left. So what about the other 964 business owners? Why don't they call those people and ask them too? The fact is they have no idea why those people left, and they have no idea why the other 13,000 businesses left. And they say nothing about new businesses being created. The rest of the article is some cherry-picked facts about how much it costs to start a business. But no explanation as to why that's unreasonable other than that it's more than any other US state. The only article about "Regulations" is a Cato Institute ranking. The Cato Institute works tirelessly to eliminate anything that they see as impeding businesses. But some regulations are good. Just because California ranks highest in regulation doesn't mean anything. It's just a smoke screen to convince us there's a problem. I'm left to conclude the author has no idea what they're talking about.