Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

KC topics that don't fit anywhere else.
Post Reply
kboish
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3258
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 12:25 am
Location: West Plaza

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by kboish »

Did they wave e-tax? Thats where KC always wins when relocating biz's w/n metro. Even if people don't move we still grab a chunk of their income :evil:
heatherkay
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1424
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:39 am
Location: River Market and Rosedale

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by heatherkay »

I don't think it said anything about the e tax, so I assume it was not waived.
kboish
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3258
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 12:25 am
Location: West Plaza

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by kboish »

thats what i was thinking. I agree w/ you heather-was mostly responding to brew.

KC "wins" on e-tax alone I'd think. overall we all lose of course.
knucklehead
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1367
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 1:51 pm
Location: Martin City

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by knucklehead »

It is $64 million in incentive to move 1,225 jobs a few miles.

That is $52 K per job.

Not as outragous as the AMC and Teva deals. (Teva was $132 K per job, AMC was similar)

But still a waste. I put the blame squarely on Kansas. they are the ones that escalated this war to its current pathetically stupid levels.
User avatar
KCPowercat
Ambassador
Posts: 34108
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by KCPowercat »

MO gets 3x the jobs vs. The Amc deal for the same incentive amount.... Does that make it a win? Lol
aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12661
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by aknowledgeableperson »

Just curious what about average income per job?

Did they wave e-tax?
The article states $11.1M from new tax revenues so I would assume that includes the E-tax.
kboish
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3258
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 12:25 am
Location: West Plaza

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by kboish »

aknowledgeableperson wrote: The article states $11.1M from new tax revenues so I would assume that includes the E-tax.
It doesn't. In talking with someone from EDC one of their main points on how this is a "win" for the city was b/c of offsets from the e-tax.

from the bizjournal
On Thursday, the Kansas City Council approved tax increment financing for Freightquote’s forthcoming 200,000-square-foot office building near Interstate 435 and State Line Road. The TIF would redirect economic activity taxes to reimburse the developer for certain costs that benefit the public.
I don't think e-tax is "economic activity". I think they're referring to sales taxes the biz does.
thegeester68
Parking Garage
Parking Garage
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:23 am

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by thegeester68 »

The 26 million in credits can only be taken if Freightquote meets the strict payroll qualifications. So depending on how jobs works out, it could pan out to be in our favor. In addition, that area actually has quite a bit of offerings (foodwise) to the north of 435 and towards Ward Parkway which isn't that far away. I think its a good win and great visibility for the corporate headquarters in that area. Also, the way I read this was they are moving/consolidating their corporate headquarters which means we are gaining the jobs from their other regional locations and not just from the Kansas complex. I might be mistaken though.
User avatar
Highlander
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 10233
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by Highlander »

Mixed emotions here. It's really rather sick that any company looking for freebies can now parlay their location into offers of corporate welfare from the fawning governments on both sides of the state line.

My concern is whether this latest announcement will accelerate the incentives war or will Kansas finally offer a truce? With Kansas bleeding as fast as KCMO now, both sides have got to realize it's a zero sum game being played out by fools.
mean
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 11240
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 9:00 am
Location: Historic Northeast

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by mean »

Being able to say, "As [elected official], I brought thousands of new jobs into [state]," is a powerful thing.
User avatar
KCMax
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 24051
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
Contact:

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by KCMax »

Collison: Incentive battle hurts area growth
Greg LeRoy, executive director of Good Jobs First, a national organization that tracks how states use or misuse incentives, observed that when it comes to the global economy, it’s about how metros are doing, not Lenexa or Overland Park.

So while officials in Topeka and Jefferson City can keep score moving companies around in metro Kansas City, it doesn’t mean anything to how key business leaders in New York, London and Tokyo think.

“It isn’t letting up, and unfortunately, because it’s a zero sum game, you have governments picking winners and losers, and the rest of us are paying for it,” Hall said.
Steve Rose: Why the border war will go on
Some of Hall’s arguments about what is occurring are irrefutable.

Tens of millions of taxpayer dollars are being wasted on incentives for companies that decide to move a few miles across the state line.

Furthermore, Hall is right that there is no net gain for the metropolitan area as a whole in this shuffling.

But there is a net gain to steal from each other, rather than having another town do the stealing. And that is the fallacy in Hall’s analysis.

However, many involved with relocations agree that if we somehow declared a moratorium on incentives, we would lose out to places like Dallas, which will do anything to lure a company to its boundaries.

And that is, in essence, what Hall is calling for, a moratorium. He seeks an agreement between Kansas and Missouri to work together to stop offering these incentives.

That is not realistic. Not only would it open the door to other cities stealing our companies, but it should be noted that Kansas has been a net beneficiary of these tax incentives.
User avatar
grovester
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4585
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: KC Metro

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by grovester »

While "some" might leave for other locales, it would reduce the frequency of these things. It is not easy for a JP Morgan to pull up stakes and risk/lose their employees. I would imagine a bi-state org could manage metro area retention in a manner fair to the states and the taxpayers. We need to quit being held hostage by the worst of the offendors. Let them walk.
KC-wildcat
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3528
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 10:54 am
Location: UMKC Law

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by KC-wildcat »

How does a bi-state moratorium open the door for other cities to steal our companies? Nobody is saying that KS and MO couldn't use incentives to attract out of state companies or to retain companies being courted by other states. In fact, by pledging to stop poaching eachother's businesses, KS and MO would have more resources to fend off out of state competitors like Dallas or Indy.
User avatar
KCPowercat
Ambassador
Posts: 34108
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by KCPowercat »

Exactly wildcat. He completely (purposely?) glazes over that point.... Which is the key.
kboish
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3258
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 12:25 am
Location: West Plaza

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by kboish »

Not only does he glaze over that point, but he seems to imply that KCMO is angling to have an all out ban on incentives (painting them as naive)...which is of course not at all what KCMO is trying to negotiate. As you two point out, KCMO wants to use incentives to lure new companies to the area/metro (which is what their intended to be used for).

IF he were a good reporter he would point out that each time a metro KS or MO company gets incentives it is a wasted opportunity in luring a new company to the area. This could be seen as a misappropriation or mismanagement of funds by the local gov. Always amazes me how red blooded republicans pick and choose what gov mismanagement of resources they have a problem with. Total waste.
User avatar
KCMax
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 24051
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
Contact:

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by KCMax »

American Italian Pasta to closer in KC, consolidate in STL

C'mon Kansas, you didn't even try to poach this one?
User avatar
KCMax
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 24051
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
Contact:

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by KCMax »

User avatar
KCMax
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 24051
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
Contact:

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by KCMax »

User avatar
chaglang
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 4132
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 12:44 pm

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by chaglang »

KCMax wrote:Rendering of new Freightquote building

Image

WOW, DYNAMIC!
OH, THE BUILDING. I was checking out that dude's Zeppelin t-shirt and didn't notice that there was a building behind him.
User avatar
chrizow
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 17161
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2003 8:43 am

Re: Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

Post by chrizow »

chaglang wrote:
OH, THE BUILDING. I was checking out that dude's Zeppelin t-shirt and didn't notice that there was a building behind him.
:lol:
Post Reply