[bobtn]

Tax Breaks To Anchor United Technologies In State, Spark Facilities Upgrades - Courant.com

Given the quantity of jobs involved, this seems like a fairly good deal, although the fact the shortest guarantee of a Ct hq is with Sikorsky is eye-opening.

[WouldLoveTo]

Wonder how much homeowner taxes in East Hartford will go up with this deal?

[Mr_250]

Good deal, but why all of a sudden give them a tax break? My bet, word is that UTC is selling off Sikorsky and moving it's headquarters elsewhere. We need to keep these jobs here. It's not approved yet though, but it will be.

[NewJeffCT]

The article does say that part of the deal is Sikorsky keeping their headquarters here for at least 5 more years, and Pratt & Whitney for at least 15.

[TobinJ]

Molloy did it as a spin of the Sikorsky news the other day, he had to cover up those losses if he wants to stand on a platform of "I created all these jobs" during his reelection. Meh these "business deals" bother me because the details are too gray, companies declaring hq, moving from one town to another...gray.

[bobtn]

Originally Posted by Mr_250

Good deal, but why all of a sudden give them a tax break? My bet, word is that UTC is selling off Sikorsky and moving it's headquarters elsewhere. We need to keep these jobs here. It's not approved yet though, but it will be.

With UBS getting megabucks to keep 2,000 jobs at a time when they had 2,800, and with UTC's aforementioned ABC strategy and their touting % of workforce in low cost regions to analysts, when they would demand megabucks was a matter of timing, not probability. I thought they would get far more.

[hartford_renter]

This is Malloy Socialism

He wants a command style economy where he gets to choose which companies stay and which ones leave

If you want companies to stay cut taxes for everyone. Don't give 400 million so you don't look like a fool when another company leaves.

This is awful on so many levels

[mrgmrg]

One of a couple of large features in the New York Times I've read in the last several years discussing how tax incentives for jobs are a waste of money: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/02/us...pagewanted=all

It's just kind of embarrassing that the best we can do is resort to delaying tactics that will ultimately fail rather than address the root cause of these problems. You'd think someone like Malloy would regard what the Times and other liberal papers have been saying for years now.

[Stratford, Ct. Resident]

Originally Posted by TobinJ

Molloy did it as a spin of the Sikorsky news the other day, he had to cover up those losses if he wants to stand on a platform of "I created all these jobs" during his reelection. Meh these "business deals" bother me because the details are too gray, companies declaring hq, moving from one town to another...gray.

Malloy is always 2 steps ahead of his fellow politicians.

He won't say "I created jobs" with this deal. He'll say: "DeLauro/Blumenthal/Himes/etc.(all the same party as his) failed at the federal level to get defense dollars, so i did what i could at the state level".

Wait for it........

[NewJeffCT]

Actually, didn't UTC just get a big defense contract that had me wondering if Democrats in Washington steered it to a blue state whose governor is facing a tough re-election bid?

And, part of the deal ensures that UTC will increase their in state payroll to $1.65 billion/year and maintain it at that level or higher for the 15 years. So, it's guaranteeing somewhere north of $50 million/year in state income tax.