7 ms·

This would make me extremely uncomfortable as an employee. I expect my state taxes to go to help cover expenses across the state, pay for social programs, emerg

by lsy 5y ago

This would make me extremely uncomfortable as an employee. I expect my state taxes to go to help cover expenses across the state, pay for social programs, emergency expenditures, etc. Knowing that my tax dollars were being kicked back to my employer would make me feel like I wasn’t putting in my fair share. I understand that money is fungible and companies get tax breaks often but the way this is phrased puts a bad taste in my mouth.

ed25519FUUU 5y ago
Maybe I'm in the minority but I would feel absolutely fine. Income tax is just one part of the pie. In fact, many states (such as Texas, Washington, and Florida) have no income tax at all, yet they manage. Property taxes will go to fund schools and state governments, not to mention localized sales tax and cash infusion.
- tjr225 5y ago
  > In fact, many states (such as Texas) have no income tax at all, yet they manage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Texas_power_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Texas_power_crisis
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Texas_power_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Texas_power_crisis Now do California. Clearly high taxation doesn't correlate to stable electrical power. There's a handful of states without income taxes. They mostly manage just fine. Or about as fine as the states with income taxes. They raise similar revenues in other ways.
    - tjr225 5y ago
      > Now do California. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000%E2%80%9301_California_electricity_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000%E2%80%9301_California_ele... All I could find was this, the wikipedia article doesn't mention any deaths however, whereas it appears 70 people died during the Texas crisis this year. I'm aware of the rolling blackouts in the bay area least year as my employer was impacted but it seemed more or less livable due to their rolling nature. I live in a state without income tax. Its actually quite a shit show: https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2020/10/22/mark-harmsworth-west-seattle-bridge-repair.html https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2020/10/22/mark-har...
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - _-david-_ 5y ago
    Believe it or not that was not due to taxes.
    - tjr225 5y ago
      If there was a greater tax base in Texas a more robust energy infrastructure could have been in place. However; their votership preferred to keep things as is. They suffered the consequences. This is very, very simple.
- wolverine876 5y ago
  > many states (such as Texas) have no income tax at all, yet they manage That's debatable. Just because they do it doesn't mean it's a good idea.
- elliekelly 5y ago
  What if $company, for whatever reason, decided every employee in $state would have their salary reduced by X% across the board and $state announced they would step in and use taxpayer money to make up the difference in $company employee paychecks. Would you be absolutely fine with your taxpayer money being used to subsidize labor in that way? What if $company is highly profitable and sitting on more cash than $state government has available? What if you're a business owner in $state and have to compete in the market for labor where one big player with tons of money gets to pay less for the same work? It's not about income tax so much as it is about the government subsidy being granted and whether or not it's the best use of the government's limited financial resources.
- nrmitchi 5y ago
  Texas, rather than having income taxes, just has relatively high property taxes compared to other states. It's not like you don't pay any taxes living in Texas. In fact, I would consider high property taxes with zero income tax to be a rather regressive form of taxation that strongly benefits high income earners.
- piva00 5y ago
  > Property taxes will go to fund schools and state governments, not to mention localized sales tax and cash infusion. And poor areas become poorer because the local municipality collects less taxes than the one with more affluent residents. Ultra-locality of spending isn't efficient, it just maintains the status quo, it makes counties compete between each other for companies or residents and not all can attract the rich people or companies to fund themselves. Schools should be equally funded regardless of how rich the people who live in the area are. This is the most basic component for an equitable society: a level playing field on education.
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
The title was altered by the submitter. "Kickback" isn't a word Apple or the NC .gov would touch with a 10ft pole. It appears nowhere in the article. I suspect it was altered that way to promote exactly the reaction you had.
- La1n 5y ago
  Does it matter that they say kickbacks when the article implies it is? >These payments are recouped from the income taxes Apple’s new employees would normally pay to the state.
  - dariusj18 5y ago
    What confuses me is the wishy-washiness of "would normally pay to the state". Are they not paying the money to the state?
- lsy 5y ago
  From the North Carolina Dept of Commerce: “JDIG grant payments are determined using a formula that takes into consideration the new taxes generated by the new jobs that are created. A percentage of those newly generated funds are reimbursed to the awarded company, for the limited term of the grant and as long as the company meets its performance target.” I’m not really worried so much about the nomenclature used, but the principle of reimbursing my taxes to the company makes me uncomfortable.
  - piva00 5y ago
    It smells of state funding with a bunch of extra steps...
onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
Also - how is this remotely fair to all the other software and hardware companies in NC that employ people and provide similar benefits but still have to pay state income tax? If there's anyone who /doesn't/ need a competitive advantage, it's Apple. They are utterly smashing their competition in every regard already.

by lsy 5y ago

ed25519FUUU 5y ago

Maybe I'm in the minority but I would feel absolutely fine. Income tax is just one part of the pie. In fact, many states (such as Texas, Washington, and Florida) have no income tax at all, yet they manage. Property taxes will go to fund schools and state governments, not to mention localized sales tax and cash infusion.

tjr225 5y ago
> In fact, many states (such as Texas) have no income tax at all, yet they manage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Texas_power_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Texas_power_crisis
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Texas_power_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Texas_power_crisis Now do California. Clearly high taxation doesn't correlate to stable electrical power. There's a handful of states without income taxes. They mostly manage just fine. Or about as fine as the states with income taxes. They raise similar revenues in other ways.
  - tjr225 5y ago
    > Now do California. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000%E2%80%9301_California_electricity_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000%E2%80%9301_California_ele... All I could find was this, the wikipedia article doesn't mention any deaths however, whereas it appears 70 people died during the Texas crisis this year. I'm aware of the rolling blackouts in the bay area least year as my employer was impacted but it seemed more or less livable due to their rolling nature. I live in a state without income tax. Its actually quite a shit show: https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2020/10/22/mark-harmsworth-west-seattle-bridge-repair.html https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2020/10/22/mark-har...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- _-david-_ 5y ago
  Believe it or not that was not due to taxes.
  - tjr225 5y ago
    If there was a greater tax base in Texas a more robust energy infrastructure could have been in place. However; their votership preferred to keep things as is. They suffered the consequences. This is very, very simple.
wolverine876 5y ago
> many states (such as Texas) have no income tax at all, yet they manage That's debatable. Just because they do it doesn't mean it's a good idea.
elliekelly 5y ago
What if $company, for whatever reason, decided every employee in $state would have their salary reduced by X% across the board and $state announced they would step in and use taxpayer money to make up the difference in $company employee paychecks. Would you be absolutely fine with your taxpayer money being used to subsidize labor in that way? What if $company is highly profitable and sitting on more cash than $state government has available? What if you're a business owner in $state and have to compete in the market for labor where one big player with tons of money gets to pay less for the same work? It's not about income tax so much as it is about the government subsidy being granted and whether or not it's the best use of the government's limited financial resources.
nrmitchi 5y ago
Texas, rather than having income taxes, just has relatively high property taxes compared to other states. It's not like you don't pay any taxes living in Texas. In fact, I would consider high property taxes with zero income tax to be a rather regressive form of taxation that strongly benefits high income earners.
piva00 5y ago
> Property taxes will go to fund schools and state governments, not to mention localized sales tax and cash infusion. And poor areas become poorer because the local municipality collects less taxes than the one with more affluent residents. Ultra-locality of spending isn't efficient, it just maintains the status quo, it makes counties compete between each other for companies or residents and not all can attract the rich people or companies to fund themselves. Schools should be equally funded regardless of how rich the people who live in the area are. This is the most basic component for an equitable society: a level playing field on education.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago

The title was altered by the submitter. "Kickback" isn't a word Apple or the NC .gov would touch with a 10ft pole. It appears nowhere in the article. I suspect it was altered that way to promote exactly the reaction you had.

La1n 5y ago
Does it matter that they say kickbacks when the article implies it is? >These payments are recouped from the income taxes Apple’s new employees would normally pay to the state.
- dariusj18 5y ago
  What confuses me is the wishy-washiness of "would normally pay to the state". Are they not paying the money to the state?
lsy 5y ago
From the North Carolina Dept of Commerce: “JDIG grant payments are determined using a formula that takes into consideration the new taxes generated by the new jobs that are created. A percentage of those newly generated funds are reimbursed to the awarded company, for the limited term of the grant and as long as the company meets its performance target.” I’m not really worried so much about the nomenclature used, but the principle of reimbursing my taxes to the company makes me uncomfortable.
- piva00 5y ago
  It smells of state funding with a bunch of extra steps...

onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago

Also - how is this remotely fair to all the other software and hardware companies in NC that employ people and provide similar benefits but still have to pay state income tax? If there's anyone who /doesn't/ need a competitive advantage, it's Apple. They are utterly smashing their competition in every regard already.