Mayor John Peyton: Investing in Jacksonville's Future

[tufsu1]

Yes, that's what brings new companies and jobs to jacksonville...higher taxes.  US is about to have the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world, so I don't think that we will see an influx of business coming to JAX for some time. 

Sure, our corporate taxes are higher than the rest of the developed world...but our personal taxes (mainly income tax) is one of the lowest....you ahve to get the $ from soemwhere.

The same holds true with Stephen's post above....Wyoming has low sales taxes, but check out their income tax rate!

[urbanlibertarian]

Big business and big government are very comfortable bedfellows.  Big businesses have a competitive advantage over small businesses when it comes to dealing with (or circumventing) regulations and tax codes.  They may also have the political influence to those regulations and tax codes written to their liking.

[riverkeepered]

This is an issue about whether we are going to invest in our future or not.  As a city that spends less on services than the state average ("recent JCCI study: ranks near the bottom nationally on its funding of services"), we are setting ourselves up for failure.  Take a look at the new JCCI study (http://www.jcci.org/projects/reports/2009CityFinance.aspx) and read Ron Littepage's piece in today's TU (http://www.jacksonville.com/opinion/columnists/ron_littlepage/2009-06-11/story/government_on_the_cheap_taking_toll_on_jacksonvil).  Our tax burden may be very low, but we don't have the money to invest in important infrastructure improvements, to provide essential services, or to even adequately maintain what we already have.  The question is, is it worth it?  Do we want this city to become another Detroit, or do we expect more for ourselves?  I for one want to ensure a high quality of life that partially comes from the benefits of certain services and capital investments that only our government can provide.   If it costs me a little bit more out of my paycheck, then I am all for it.   I am a firm believer that we pay one way or another.  Making wise investments in our city is so much cheaper for all of us in the long run.  The key is to make sure that we hold our elected officials accountable to spend our money wisely and efficiently.   

[stjr]

I have worked with corporate taxes and I can tell you that states such as California and New York have both high corporate AND personal income taxes. New York CITY even adds its own income tax on top of the NY STATE.  This is also true with Philadelphia and Pennsylvania.  California invented the aggressive UNITARY corporate income taxes which taxes multinational corporate income on an apportionment basis rather than where actually earned and regardless of which subsidiaries do business where.  This serves to limit the ability of a multinational to manipulate income to out-of-state subsidiaries in low tax jurisdictions.  Florida actually implemented this concept for its corporate income tax in the 1980's before the legislature backed down and rescinded it after IBM threatened to move its PC division from Boca Raton (which it eventually closed anyway!).  So, effectively, states with unitary income taxes can tax income shifted to Florida but Florida is unable to "return the favor" to its detriment.

If you were to make a list of public and/or major companies headquartered in California or New York, I believe you would find a lot more there than in Florida.  In fact, Silicon Valley, by itself, probably outranks all of Florida.  And, no one can argue that it isn't the source of innovation and new businesses in high paying, high tech industries.

What Florida tax structure is good for is attracting lots of retirees trying to avoid state imposed income and estate taxes.  Many of these are fixed or limited income people who not only rebel against taxes of any kind but could care less about Florida investing in such things as education (they are empty nesters), social services, transportation, etc. because they live in gated condo communities that act as bubbles insulated from the community at large and because they may have their real "loyalty" to a second or original community in another state.

What Florida has really done is try to shift its tax burden to taxes paid by tourists such as sales and gas taxes.  Problem is, when tourism drops the State gets clobbered.  Add to this, the huge drop in sales taxes due to the falloff of construction materials used in home building and the South Florida Republican led (Jeb Bush and Mr. Rubio) property tax mandated cuts, and Florida has pretty much gutted its ability to raise revenue.  Charlie Crist is using slight-of-hand to take Florida's reserve funds and one-time sources such as the stimulus money to balance the budget until he can escape the governorship for the senate and leave a mess for his successor.

[Keith-N-Jax]

A wealth of very good information there!

[brapt]

Guys,

This tax battle could go on for centuries.  Here, go play:  http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,5229.0.html.  Let's keep this on-topic.

I'm intrigued by some of the ideas people have had for urban core design and redevelopment on these forums and in this topic.  I would agree that the riverwalk expansion is probably one of the first things to begin.

Would the old courthouse support a new convention center as suggested in this thread?  That would seem an ideal location downtown.  If we spend our 2 years right, this could be our time to find a new home for our city's convention center and destroy the Prime Osborne extension.  I will not rest until the Jacksonville Terminal becomes a true rail Terminal once again!

I for one commend the Mayor and his participants in our local government for being pragmatic in knowing that, while we don't have the money for spending now, let's not waste time and instead plan for what we CAN do when the time comes.  It sounds to me that if a downtown vision isn't the plan we want we have only ourselves to blame...

[Doctor_K]

And Ron Mexico.  Where on earth did you get the idea that we would have the highest tax rate in the developed world?

I havent seen anything like that in my reading.  Please forward some links.

Don't know how reputable it is or how relavent, since it lists 2006 date, but this stands out to me:

http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/1466.html

A wave of corporate income tax reduction is sweeping through many countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), but not the United States. The latest to consider corporate income tax rate reductions are Australia,1 Germany,2 New Zealand,3 and Spain.4 Others, like Canada, are continuing to phase in corporate rate reductions in 2006 and beyond.5 This movement transcends political philosophy, with center-right ( Australia), centrist ( Germany) and center-left ( New Zealand, Spain) governments all considering corporate income tax rate cuts.

As OECD countries continue to lower their corporate income taxes, they can expect to reap more foreign direct investment from the U.S. A recent study by Deveraux and Lockwood found that a 10 percent corporate rate reduction by an EU member-state can reap a 60 percent short-run increase in investment by U.S. multinational corporations.6

While foreign governments entice U.S. investors by lowering their corporate tax rates, the federal government in the U.S. stands pat with the same rate structure it has had since 1994. Indeed, one of the ironies of tax policy during the Bush presidency is that five years of tax-cutting legislation have left the corporate income tax rate unchanged.

[mtraininjax]

Misty Skipper is the Public Information Officer

She works for the Mayor, don't expect anything earthshattering or mindblowing from her, she is his mouthpiece.

[Ron Mexico]

http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/22917.html

http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/features.nsf/Articles/FE9DCA58402875D7852573680064DA50?OpenDocument