More Developers Seeking Hand-Outs

[Conan71]

There seemed to be some mixed opinions on the $10mm given to Spirit and AA.

I read in the paper this morning that the development company headed by Peter Boylan (TV Guide maven) is seeking tax incentives including a waiver of sales tax on construction materials for the new luxury resorts at Grand Lake and Texoma.

Apparently the legislature won't get around to a vote on it before the end of this session.

http://www.kswo.com/Global/story.asp?S=6557069

Should we subsidize development like this for billionaire developers?

[cannon_fodder]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71
Should we subsidize development like this for billionaire developers?

No.  Tax money should be spent as an investment.  Like a bank, if the developer can show that Tax Incentives or handouts will provide a reasonable rate of return then it should be considered.  Reasonable rate of return for a government is not only monetary, but should consider standard of living, other spawned sources of revenue, as well as the strict long term monetary gain associated with the project.

Rarely, do I see proper analysis go into the handouts.

[YoungTulsan]

Handouts to business should be illegal.  Like on a constitutional or charter level.  Perhaps they could be allowed only by a vote of the public.   I do not care if it is surplus money.  If companies didnt see us giving other companies handouts, they would not be so brazen in demanding handouts for themselves.

In reality though, if we do not stay competetive there are plenty of other locations in the country that will gladly screw the tax base to one-up us.  The only possibility of a level playing field would be if these things were not allowed across the nation.

I am not anti-business, it could be offset by easing the tax code to be more friendly to attract businesses.  But make it unbiased, across the board, and simple.  Do not let the politicians cater to their buddies and interests.

(would never happen I know)

[Conan71]

I can see both sides of it.  The state essentially waives sales tax on the building materials, I believe they were also hunting for some property tax relief.  The state would later collect sales tax on the tourism business, hotel taxes, sur-taxes (if you were a madam instead of a "sur", we wouldn't charge you the sur-tax- old radio commercial, but I digress...) throughout the life-span of the resort.

So that's one way to spin it is to look at it as the state becoming an investment partner in a private enterprise.

The other way to spin it is why is it these developers come up with a plan and a budget, then come back later and start whining for hand-outs from the government?  Why not ask the investor group to pony up more cash instead of the majority of us who might not use the resort.  

I have my sailboat in a slip at an area lake I can stay on or can take advantage of staying at friend's places at other lakes.  Chances I'll stay in one of these two resorts is remote, to say the least.  Any resort I'd pay to stay in would be on a beach with an ocean front view.