Question

The tax professional occasionally is in a position to negative with a state or city taxing jurisdiction to garner tax relief for a client as an incentive to locate a plant or distribution center in that geographic area. In times when construction budgets are high and interstate competition is fierce to attract or retain business that are making location decisions; such tax concessions can be significant. For instant, to encourage a business to build a large distribution center in the area, community leaders might be agreeable to paying roads , sewer, water,, and other improvements after issuing bonds . Reducing property taxes by 50 percent for the first 10 years of the center's operations, or offering interest rate discounts or cash grants for the construction of new facilities. For corporate taxpayers, cash incentive payments received from a government or civic group constitute gross income. An incentive granting community provides the concessions even though the influx of new workers may place a strain on public school facilities and likely necessitate improvements in traffic patterns and other infrastructure. Consider the positions of a large employer that has been located in the area for more than 50 years. By how much should it be willing to absorb the tax increases that result when economic development concessions are used to attract new, perhaps temporary, businesses to the area? Should the employer challenge the constitutionality of the grant of such sizable tax breaks to some, but not all, business taxpayers in the jurisdiction? What should be the rate of "impact fees" assessed on new developments? Does your analysis change if the new business competes with the longtime resident for sales? for employees? For political power? Prepare a discussion commenting my reaction to the issues present.

Answer 1

State and local governments use economic incentives to attract businesses, but existing companies may be affected by increased tax burdens or competition. The constitutionality and fairness of selective tax breaks, alongside the appropriate rates for impact fees, are important considerations. The decisions on these aspects must balance immediate economic benefits with long-term sustainability.

Step-by-step explanation:

State and local governments strive to attract and maintain businesses within their jurisdictions by offering various economic incentives. This is crucial for boosting the state's economy, improving employment rates, and enhancing resource management. Corporate income tax concessions, investment in infrastructure improvement, and other perks are common practices to lure corporations to set up plants or distribution centers.

However, these incentives can raise concerns among existing businesses, especially if tax breaks granted to newcomers elevate the tax burden on long-standing companies. The debate includes whether long-term employers should absorb this burden or challenge the fairness and constitutionality of selective tax relief. Furthermore, the imposition of "impact fees" on new developments requires an equitable and balanced approach to avoid adversely affecting the local economy and community resources. The calculus changes when new businesses directly compete with established enterprises in terms of sales, employee recruitment, or political influence. In such cases, an in-depth analysis considering the broader impact of the incentives on the competition and overall community welfare is critical. Tax breaks, while fostering near-term economic development, have long-term implications that need a comprehensive evaluation for sustainable growth.