Toyota driven out of California? Not so fast says Toyota (Los Angeles: rent, assessor)

[thelopez2]

Originally Posted by TVC15

From the article that I posted in post #19 it states this:

"Mr. Lentz said Toyota is determined to retain current employees, and is offering company-paid trips to Texas or Michigan, and relocation packages to anyone who wants to move, not just to higher level employees."

Would it be proper PR to say, we hope that 50% don't want to move so we can save money? I accept I'm wrong about the relocation package, I'll ask around. When I talk about relocation package I do mean something significant, not here is a few thousand for the moving truck.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by TVC15

Texas is not in going to run into any trouble by creating businesses and jobs. They have been a business friendly state for a long time.

Texas will run into trouble if it has to give companies large incentives to relocate into the state as these will erode its tax base and put the tax burden on the average worker rather than the businesses.

What is funny about these incentives, I think, is that are evidence that Texas isn't all that great to began with. Texas wouldn't need to offer large incentive packages if the state was a great place to do business.

Texas is only "business friendly" to people that think lower taxes and looser regulations are the only thing that matter to businesses.

[steven_h]

What is obvious is that Toyota is spinning this to keep their reputation in tact.

Of the four cities they were considering only Texas has 0 corporate tax vs. Cali's 14%. That is a huge chunk of corporate change.

I'd also add this little gem: It then narrowed the list to four finalists: Atlanta, Charlotte, N.C., Denver and Plano, an affluent suburb of Dallas. Torrance was never on the list, in part because Lentz wanted to avoid a culture clash between different arms of corporate management.

Was Toyota driven out of California? Not so fast - latimes.com

I happen to live just a mile from the Toyota facilities. I'm not exactly sure what "culture clash" means.

Toyota may say they're only moving to consolidate, but the reality is they'll be saving a ton of money. They'll make a boatload on selling their overpriced and highly desirable CA land, and will invest in cheap Texas dirt.

It's all about the money, and nothing more.

[steven_h]

Originally Posted by user_id

Texas will run into trouble if it has to give companies large incentives to relocate into the state as these will erode its tax base and put the tax burden on the average worker rather than the businesses.

That is absolutely untrue.

That's like saying Oregon, Alaska, Montana, New Hampshire, and Delaware will go under because they have no sales tax.

When people flood any state it's good for the state. Texas is making a windfall from income, sales, and property taxes. If you look at median home prices over the last decade, Texas RE barely lost value while CA, IL, MI, NV, FL were collapsing.

Texas is setting up to be a self contained state, and will be quite wealthy.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by steven_h

Of the four cities they were considering only Texas has 0 corporate tax vs. Cali's 14%. That is a huge chunk of corporate change.

Firstly California's corporate tax rate is 8.8% which is comparable to many other states with corporate tax rates. Texas doesn't have a corporate tax, but it does have a business revenue tax which doesn't exist in California. Property taxes, including business property taxes, are considerably higher in Texas as well. You have to look at the whole tax picture, simply looking at one type of tax doesn't cut it since each state has their own tax model.

Originally Posted by steven_h

That's like saying Oregon, Alaska, Montana, New Hampshire, and Delaware will go under because they have no sales tax.

Its nothing like that, states without sales tax generate taxes by other means. When you offer large incentives to business to relocate one of two things is going to occur, either you're going to erode your tax base or you're going to transfer the taxes to entities in the state. I imagine Texas is doing a bit of both, its eroding its tax base and borrowing and hoping it pays for itself over time and transferring the immediate tax hit to Texas workers and small business.

Originally Posted by steven_h

When people flood any state it's good for the state. Texas is making a windfall from income, sales, and property taxes. If you look at median home prices over the last decade, Texas RE barely lost value while CA, IL, MI, NV, FL were collapsing.

When people "flood" a state it will generate some immediate revenue, but over time it will generate a lot of costs as well. I don't think Texas is planning for the costs down the road of its population, its not properly investing in public infrastructure and its state finances leave a lot to be desired.

Texas home prices didn't crash because they never boomed.

[steven_h]

Originally Posted by user_id

Firstly California's corporate tax rate is 8.8% which is comparable to many other states with corporate tax rates. Texas doesn't have a corporate tax, but it does have a business revenue tax which doesn't exist in California. Property taxes, including business property taxes, are considerably higher in Texas as well. You have to look at the whole tax picture, simply looking at one type of tax doesn't cut it since each state has their own tax model.

Does this look like Texas is going broke?

https://www.texastribune.org/2013/12...than-expected/

Cali has the second highest cost of living in the states, the highest median home prices, higher property taxes, and much higher sales tax. It also has the most over-regulation of any state. I live here, and am well aware of the "whole picture" >>>Now our whackamole Senate has forwarded a bill that would raise taxes on companies based on pay gap. <<<THAT IS GOING TO SEND COMPANIES RUNNING


Cali also has a moving tax rate depending on the industry. The range is 8.85% to 10.84%, so while I overstated, it's still far higher than 0%, and THAT was the point after all.


There is no argument that can make Cali even remotely seem like a more affordable place to move a company.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by steven_h

Does this look like Texas is going broke?

https://www.texastribune.org/2013/12...than-expected/

California's projected surplus is more than double that of Texas so by this measure California is doing a lot better. But a state's projected surplus, by no means, tells the whole story of a states finances.

Texas has a lot of state debt and its pushing a lot of costs into the future to avoid spending. California is actually starting to do things right, its going to use its surplus to pay down debts and it has started some major infrastructure projects.

Originally Posted by steven_h

Cali has the second highest cost of living in the states, the highest median home prices, higher property taxes, and much higher sales tax. It also has the most over-regulation of any state. I live here, and am well aware of the "whole picture"

Cost of living indexes aren't reliable indicators of actual costs because they don't account for lifestyle changes. For example, families can easily offset higher real estate costs by living in smaller homes.

California doesn't have high property tax and its income tax is very progressive, working and middle-class families in California pay very little income taxes.

Originally Posted by steven_h

Cali also has a moving tax rate depending on the industry. The range is 8.85% to 10.84%, so while I overstated, it's still far higher than 0%, and THAT was the point after all.

There is no range. The only businesses that pay 10.8% are bank and financial corporations, all other corporations pay 8.8%.

But yes 8.8% is higher than 0% but you're ignoring, once again, the fact that Texas has a business revenue tax and has much higher business property taxes.


As someone that actually has a business and understands business taxation, I disagree with the claim that its not affordable to operate a business in California. As I mentioned before, it would be more costly for me to operate in Texas and I'm currently located in one of the most affluent communities in the Los Angeles area.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by steven_h

What is obvious is that Toyota is spinning this to keep their reputation in tact.

What is obvious, from your posts on this topic, is that you either didn't read the information provided, or you don't understand it.

You also misstate several realities - such as lack of corporate tax - which is offset by Texas' business revenue tax - and even that Texas will earn a boatload through "income tax" when Texas doesn't have an income tax. You further overlook the real estate tax difference (higher by far in Texas - 3rd highest in the nation compared to California's 33rd ranking).

Your position is qualified by living close to Torrence exactly how? Anything like being able to see Russia from Wasilla Alaska?

[TVC15]

Originally Posted by user_id

Texas will run into trouble if it has to give companies large incentives to relocate into the state as these will erode its tax base and put the tax burden on the average worker rather than the businesses.

What is funny about these incentives, I think, is that are evidence that Texas isn't all that great to began with. Texas wouldn't need to offer large incentive packages if the state was a great place to do business.

Texas is only "business friendly" to people that think lower taxes and looser regulations are the only thing that matter to businesses.

Same old hogwash coming from you. Not one thing you posted is credible or accurate.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by TVC15

Same old hogwash coming from you. Not one thing you posted is credible or accurate.

I disagree. In this case, I concur with user entirely.