Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

[KCPowercat]

For some it may not be a factor, for others it is.  At least according to comments made by some decision makers in the past concerning moves from KCMO.

You understand what the term scapegoat means right?

[aknowledgeableperson]

references?  I've never seen any company that matters in terms of employment seriously refer to the e-tax as a reason for relocating its business.  

It has been referenced a few times over the years in this forum with quotes from the Star with one coming from a company that provides assistance to companies looking for office space.  Will try to dig further if time allows.
The e-tax was not the sole issue but was a considertion.

Here is one from page 4 of this topic:

http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/s ... eedfetcher

Other factors in the move from City Center Square included Kansas City’s earnings tax and employees’ travel time.

Another from page 6 of the topic about repealing the e-tax:

Here's an article from a KC real estate broker that says the earnings tax is in fact damaging.  Almost every real estate broker I've ever talked to has talked about how the etax is almost always a factor.  Nevermind the number of opportunities that don't come to KC in the first place because paying an etax doesn't fit the company search criteria.

http://www.kansascity.com/618/story/1752944.html

[Highlander]

It has been referenced a few times over the years in this forum with quotes from the Star with one coming from a company that provides assistance to companies looking for office space.  Will try to dig further if time allows.
The e-tax was not the sole issue but was a considertion.

Here is one from page 4 of this topic:

http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/s ... eedfetcher
Another from page 6 of the topic about repealing the e-tax:

So that's the best you can come up with.  A 20 person firm that states as an afterthought that the e-tax was a consideration.  BS.  We both know that the e-tax had absolutely nothing to do with it and so does the guy that said it. 

[aknowledgeableperson]

So that's the best you can come up with.  A 20 person firm that states as an afterthought that the e-tax was a consideration.  BS.   We both know that the e-tax had absolutely nothing to do with it and so does the guy that said it. 

Funny.  You sound like a pro wrestling announcer who favors the bad guys.  When the bad guy wins by pulling the trunks or by some other unallowed means the announcer says "What are you saying, I didn't see it".  As stated the e-tax is not a primary consideration but it is one of those things that can tilt to the negative.

[Highlander]

Funny.  You sound like a pro wrestling announcer who favors the bad guys.  When the bad guy wins by pulling the trunks or by some other unallowed means the announcer says "What are you saying, I didn't see it".  As stated the e-tax is not a primary consideration but it is one of those things that can tilt to the negative.

I saw what the guy said and I don't believe it.  If it's that far down the list of considerations, it's not a consideration at all, it's an afterthought and that is exactly what it is.  You don't tell your old girlfriend you found a better looking gal (i.e., in this case a better deal), you just make up some crap and take the deal which is exactly what happened here.  Like Powercat says, it's a scapegoat.  If a company is that concerned about 1%, they need to be looking around for a buyer or a bankruptcy lawyer. 

[aknowledgeableperson]

I saw what the guy said and I don't believe it.

Just because he said something you don't like or agree with he is a liar.  And being the second item named on the considertion list isn't that far down the list.  Since this move did not involve any government incentives the decision of where to move to was probably more personal so an individual's likes and dislikes came more into play.
For you 1% may not be a big deal.  For others it may not be that big of a deal also but if given the opportunity to save 1% among other things they will jump at the chance.

[KCPowercat]

Their total tax bill is higher.....if they think escaping the etax is saving money they are either idiots or lying if you ask me.

[aknowledgeableperson]

Or by living and working in Kansas all of their tax money related to income stays in Kansas.

State income tax is state income tax.  Been awhile since I have had to do Kansas income taxes but if KS has higher exemptions or misc deductions that MO doesn't have the overall state income tax paid could be lower.  The E-Tax is strictly for KCMO and that may be a tax they do not want to pay if they don't have to.

[KCPowercat]

Not everybody making these decisions lives in leawood or the like.  Ks total tax bill is higher, this isn't a secret.

[aknowledgeableperson]

Ks total tax bill is higher, this isn't a secret.

So.  Maybe people perceive a better value for their tax dollar in KS or outside of KCMO.  Much like some will pay a higher office rent for the Plaza instead of a lower rate in South KC or by the airport.  When you go out for a drink do you order what is in the well or do you order a premium brand?  Or why not just drink water out and save money by drinking alcohol only at home?

[KCPowercat]

Value isn't what you are arguing.....you are saying the etax 1% moves companies.

[Highlander]

The management quote AKP provided had another great realization;  "Our employees are spread all over the metro so we are not exactly tied to the center of the city".  I would think that if your employees are truly spread all over the metro, you would have a very compelling reason to be in the center of the city.  And we should not be skeptical about what is being quoted in this article. 

[aknowledgeableperson]

Value isn't what you are arguing.....you are saying the etax 1% moves companies.

And they may not see any value in the 1% E-Tax so why pay it if you don't want or have to.

The management quote AKP provided had another great realization;  "Our employees are spread all over the metro so we are not exactly tied to the center of the city". 

Reread the article, it is not employees but clients spread around the city.  And it is most of their clients, not all.  And I will assume that many are in JoCo as where most of their employees live "so they don't need to be tied to the center of the city".  And where they are moving the offices to it is just a hop, skip, and a jump to 435 and to anywhere in the metro.

“Most of our clients are scattered around the metro, so we’re not tied to the center city,”

[Highlander]

Reread the article, it is not employees but clients spread around the city.  And it is most of their clients, not all.  And I will assume that many are in JoCo as where most of their employees live "so they don't need to be tied to the center of the city".  And where they are moving the offices to it is just a hop, skip, and a jump to 435 and to anywhere in the metro.

Same difference.  And it's not a hop skip and jump from the SW corner of the metro to anywhere else in the metro.  It's a really long way to much of the rest of the city.  That's why in most cities, downtowns have the competitive advantage for many businesses. 

Not only do I think the spokesman is being not being entirely honest about the e-tax being an actual reason for the move (it wasn't and we both know that), it's stupid to be discussing this when your only example is an insignificant 20 person company.     

[KCPowercat]

Same difference.  And it's not a hop skip and jump from the SW corner of the metro to anywhere else in the metro.  That's why in most cities, downtowns have the competitive advantage. 

Agreed...and KC downtown still does have that advantage...some companies just see the Kansas incentives and can't resist, not fully taking into account the long term impact on their move on their employees (and customers if applicable).  Even IF (big if) the majority of their employees right now live in Johnson County, they are cutting off a majority of the workforce living elsewhere in the city...and as we know, populations shift.  Very confusing how some companies think so short term.

[aknowledgeableperson]

 And it's not a hop skip and jump from the SW corner of the metro to anywhere else in the metro.  It's a really long way to much of the rest of the city.  

I live at the extreme SE corner of the metro.  I have a cousin that lives in the extreme NW corner of the metro.  Using the highway it takes 40-45 minutes door-to-door to get from one to the other.  Outside of rush hour local highways have zero congestion.  One can travel from College and Metcalf to 470 and 70 in 20-25 minutes.  So, for me, anything travel time less than 30 minutes is a hop, skip, and a jump which one can accomplish from College and Metcalf to just about anywhere in the KC metro.

[KCPowercat]

Don't people commute to jobs during "rush hour"  not sure many care how long it takes on a sunday afternoon.

This city needs its jobs in dense locations to maximize transit....not continue to build lanes of highways because either state gives millions to 20 jobs moving from the other state into some random office park.

[warwickland]

I live at the extreme SE corner of the metro.  I have a cousin that lives in the extreme NW corner of the metro.  Using the highway it takes 40-45 minutes door-to-door to get from one to the other.  Outside of rush hour local highways have zero congestion.  One can travel from College and Metcalf to 470 and 70 in 20-25 minutes.  So, for me, anything travel time less than 30 minutes is a hop, skip, and a jump which one can accomplish from College and Metcalf to just about anywhere in the KC metro.

reminds me of the way people used to talk in st. louis...they dont talk like that anymore. kc isnt on any different trajectory in that respect, things may or may not change, but they usually do.

[bobbyhawks]

I live at the extreme SE corner of the metro.  I have a cousin that lives in the extreme NW corner of the metro.  Using the highway it takes 40-45 minutes door-to-door to get from one to the other.  Outside of rush hour local highways have zero congestion.  One can travel from College and Metcalf to 470 and 70 in 20-25 minutes.  So, for me, anything travel time less than 30 minutes is a hop, skip, and a jump which one can accomplish from College and Metcalf to just about anywhere in the KC metro.

Fantastic!  In other news, I can make it from Abilene to Salina in 30 minutes! 

I think the point wasn't that you are able to make 30 minute highway drives that circumnavigate the city, but rather if you need to go to the airport, a Chiefs/Royals game, a hockey/soccer game, downtown, the American Royal, the Plaza, an air show, the Nelson, etc. you are generally talking 25, 30, or 40+ minute drives, sometimes not even factoring in traffic or time of day.  It makes a huge difference being close to a highway, but close to a highway is all you end up being.  This encourages people/businesses to ignore many of the great parts of our city and allows them to be a part of the city without ever really being a part of the city.

[studentper]

Fantastic!  In other news, I can make it from Abilene to Salina in 30 minutes! 

I think the point wasn't that you are able to make 30 minute highway drives that circumnavigate the city, but rather if you need to go to the airport, a Chiefs/Royals game, a hockey/soccer game, downtown, the American Royal, the Plaza, an air show, the Nelson, etc. you are generally talking 25, 30, or 40+ minute drives, sometimes not even factoring in traffic or time of day.  It makes a huge difference being close to a highway, but close to a highway is all you end up being.  This encourages people/businesses to ignore many of the great parts of our city and allows them to be a part of the city without ever really being a part of the city.

Good list, and I get your point, but except for the Plaza and Nelson, everything else a highway exit.