4 ms·
Only a small fraction of that $17B would be spent on building the plant and hiring workers (1800 jobs is what I've read). Most is for the extremely expensive e
by reddog 6y ago
Only a small fraction of that $17B would be spent on building the plant and hiring workers (1800 jobs is what I've read). Most is for the extremely expensive equipment used to produce the chips and that will be bought and shipped in from elsewhere.
- adriancr 6y agoFirst, those 805M are tax rebates, they need to generate taxable profits to get anything back. Second, even the 1800 jobs, say 100k avg - 180M a year vs 42M reduced taxable profits? Apart from that, sure, you have huge equipment costs, where they come from now means its an opportunity for local companies to get in the supply chain. I'm not sure what you are implying but this seems like a win anyway. It's also interesting to see companies investing in the US, it means there are opportunities long term and US hasnt lost the chip sector.
- tinalumfoil 6y agoPresumably the government values US-based factories for reasons beyond just domestic employment (even if that's the biggest factor). Being able to produce chips in the US is good for national security.
- reddog 6y agoYes is is good for the US, but not so much for the Manor Independent School District that is being ask to not collect property (school) taxes on the plant despite the massive increase in attendance that it will generate.
- adriancr 6y agowouldn't income tax on employees or sales tax fix that?
- bluedino 6y agoSchool districts get some federal funding, but it's mostly from property taxes.
- pelliphant 6y agoI have no idea how american school funding works, but property taxes? Is that really true? That would mean that schools in richer areas with higher property values got more funding?
- totalZero 6y agoI think you're right. Semiconductor manufacturing is not a particularly employee-dense business, and the US must sustain power projection in the South China Sea and on the Korean Peninsula in the status quo, all the time, rain or shine. Even if you don't think about the product and supply chain, but only look at externalities, the US is less trapped in a battle of brinkmanship over Taiwan and South Korea if it has an alternative source of semiconductors in case of emergency. Keeping critical tech manufacturing in the Americas actually makes it easier for us to protect our allies in the Asia-Pacific region, by giving us less reason to make aggressive-looking moves that can be misinterpreted as offensive by China. Still, there is a clear economic benefit from such a move closer to home, even in times of peace and predictability. The US economy is all about outsourcing the basement and keeping the penthouse. But the hosts of our outsourced industry can "tech up," so to speak. If we let Asia-Pacific totally dominate the semiconductor fabrication industry, it's only a matter of time before they dominate the semiconductor design industry as well.
- httpz 6y agoWhile true that's more of a federal government interest while the tax breaks are coming from the local government. Maybe the local government will ask for some funding from the federal government.