3 ms·
How is it anticompetitive? None of those public services have real competition to begin with. Whether you agree with Disney being allowed to run their own utili
by caddemon 4y ago
How is it anticompetitive? None of those public services have real competition to begin with. Whether you agree with Disney being allowed to run their own utilities, roads, EMS, etc. there would not be any competition with or without Reedy Creek.
I actually find it ironic that Republicans are supporting this. It is an example where by and large a private company has done a better job providing various public services than the government would. Revoking Reedy Creek will put a greater tax burden on the relevant counties. It seems like a lose/lose to me, and also an example of stupid "culture wars" taking precedence over the politics of the real issue at hand.
- kolanos 4y agoTo start Florida has a corporate income tax (~5.5%) and a sales tax (~6%), neither of which Disney has to pay in their autonomous zone. They only have to pay property tax. They also don't have to adhere to any developmental regulations (other than ones they impose on themselves, as they are the governing body) or related expenses. Think Six Flags gets such perks?
- caddemon 4y agoYes, Florida's corporate income tax is basically fake: https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/os-ne-florida-corporate-tax-avoidance-20191113-sx37z4l3d5b6viugtl4thlqxem-story.html https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/os-ne-florida-corporate... And I can't find any evidence that Disney doesn't need to charge Florida sales tax within the parks. They definitely charge the state sales tax on ticket sales as I just checked the email receipt from my most recent trip.