What Will The Neighbors Think?

Posted on by Michael Rathbone

Despite the recent adjournment of the Missouri Legislature’s special session (which cost Missouri taxpayers more than $280,000), it wasn’t a complete waste. During the debate about Aerotropolis, the Missouri House passed a corporate income tax cut that lowers the rate from 6.25 percent to 5.5 percent. Unfortunately, the tax cut didn’t become law, but I commend the House for at least trying.

Why is cutting corporate taxes important?

First, everything else being equal, cutting corporate taxes will leave more money available for business owners to reinvest in their companies. A company seeking to expand will have an easier time using its own profits instead of issuing debt or equity to raise capital.

Second, it’s fair.  As we have seen in Missouri, when legislators want to incentivize investment in the state, often they create targeted tax credit programs (like Aerotropolis). This allows the state to place a bet with taxpayers’ money on favored industries. Also, evidence shows that tax credits aren’t very effective. A corporate tax cut applies to every corporation in the state and thus companies can succeed on their own merits and not on how well-connected they happen to be.

Third, corporate tax cuts make a company more competitive. If Company A and B are in two different states and they make the same product at the same cost, but Company A has a higher tax rate than Company B, then Company B will have a competitive advantage. However, Company B would have a competitive advantage not of its own making; instead, the company would have an “artificial” edge due solely to its location. Company B can use that tax advantage to cut its prices and thus gain more customers than Company A.

Having a competitive advantage is important, especially in today’s economy. This applies to individual companies as well as states. If a state wants more job growth, then it needs a competitive tax environment. According to the U.S. Department of Labor (hat tip to Tax Foundation), most mass job relocations occur from one U.S. state to another and not to overseas locations. People in Kirksville, Mo., have more to fear about their jobs moving to Des Moines, Iowa, than to Delhi.

According to data obtained from the Tax Foundation, Missouri has the sixth-highest corporate tax rate compared to its neighbors (the states sharing a border with Missouri). However, if Missouri cut its corporate tax rate to 5.5 percent, it would have THE lowest corporate tax rate compared to its neighbors. In a time when every job is precious, and with the way things are in Washington, D.C., shouldn’t the state do everything it can to make doing business here more attractive?

Job Creation: How it Really Works and Why the Government Doesn’t Understand It

Posted on by Andrew F. Puzder

Tuesday, October 18, 2011, The Show-Me Institute partnered with the John Cook School of Business to present a lecture on the topic of job creation with featured speaker Andrew F Puzder, CEO of CKE Restaurants.

Puzder argued before an engaged crowd that the current regulatory burden and financial uncertainty brought about by recent federal healthcare legislation are precisely the things standing between entrepreneurs across the country and the creation of jobs. Puzder put it quite clearly: Reduce regulations, and watch unemployment fall.

 

It’s Not About China, It’s About Corporate Welfare

Posted on by Audrey Spalding

During the special session of the Missouri Legislature, there was no shortage of personal attacks levied at individuals and organizations who dared to question the wisdom of offering more than $300 million in tax credits to corporate interests in the state.

As the St. Louis Business Journal put it: “…devotion to God, country and the region was [questioned] by almost anyone who dared question the planks of the China proposal.”

From today’s St. Louis American, which is generally sensitive to incorrect negative stereotypes: “…and some rhetorical heat was added by tea party types who created hysteria around a threatened ‘Chinese invasion’ of Missouri subsidized by Missouri taxpayers.”

The claim above is similar to those echoed in online forums and elsewhere that the widespread public opposition to the Aerotropolis tax credits was based on a fear of increased international trade with China, or that concerns voiced came from uninformed individuals.

Ostensibly, the purpose of the tax credits was to encourage increased international trade at Lambert-St. Louis International Airport. However, the tax credit proponents made numerous claims that lacked evidence, or were flat out wrong.

I don’t dispute that well-informed individuals can disagree on a policy proposal. But throughout the past year, I have spoken to many community groups about tax credits and answered questions from many other individuals who were concerned about the Aerotropolis proposal. The accusation that those concerns are rooted in xenophobia is false.  I am disappointed that some tax credit proponents have characterized the advocates for reform in that way.

Look, the primary concern I heard was genuine interest in encouraging legislators to abandon corporate welfare policies of the past. True, some focused specifically on the Aerotropolis tax credits. But many voiced skepticism and concern about tax credit programs in general — on the grounds that state government shouldn’t be favoring some industries or individuals over others.

I hope that when the legislature reconvenes in 2012, we can have a public debate regarding the merits of tax credit programs, instead of resorting to name-calling.

World Series Ticket Scalping

Posted on by David Stokes

Ticket scalping was one of the first issues this blog tackled when we started in 2007. This story in today’s St. Louis Post-Dispatch gives an update on how the situation has unfolded in St. Louis for the 2011 World Series baseball playoffs. Just as predicted, using basic economics, legalization of ticket scalping has resulted in lower prices and greater consumer choice (StubHub!, etc.). One scalper doesn’t bother with political spin:

“You made more money when it was illegal — it wasn’t even remotely close,” said Tony Green, a ticket broker for 20 years. “We knew all the cops, so they wouldn’t bust us.”

So, how did my 2007 prediction on ticket scalping work out? There may be no way of knowing if more people are paying above face value for their tickets to these playoffs, but I still think that is a reasonable belief. However, my predicted overall price decrease for major sporting events was apparently dead on (not that it was a difficult prediction).  

In case you have not watched it yet, please enjoy this video of the Show-Me Institute turning all of our interns loose in a ticket-scalping competition last summer.

 

 

Unnecessary Taxes

Posted on by Bruce Stahl

Tax Increment Financing (TIF) harms schools. At least that’s what the superintendent of the Liberty School District says. He claims TIF is to blame for the magnitude of a proposed 43-cent tax hike that school district officials have placed on the Nov. 8, 2011, ballot.

From the Liberty Tribune: “The tax rate the district considers necessary would be significantly lower if not for TIF,” Superintendent Mike Brewer said.

Frankly, I’m inclined to agree with him.

TIF allows developers to freeze taxes at a base level and invest any increase in property tax value that otherwise would go toward taxes into developing the property, for up to 23 years. Essentially, TIF allows newly-developed property to escape the higher taxes that higher property values normally entail. If a residential developer acquires approval of a TIF plan from the city, new homeowners can send their kids to public schools but the taxes collected will go towards paying off the debt for the development instead of financing their children’s education. A good deal if you can get away with it.

Missouri law governing the use of TIF underrepresents schools and grants cities a majority on commissions authorizing TIF use. Considering the 43-cent tax increase that Liberty School District officials have placed on the ballot, it seems schools are feeling financial pressure from TIF and that property owners are possibly facing higher taxes. For the sake of lower taxes and better education, TIF law should be revisited.

A Victory for Missouri Taxpayers

Posted on by Audrey Spalding

The Missouri General Assembly has finally adjourned its special session without creating $360 million in new tax credit programs. This is great news for Missouri taxpayers.

Proponents of the so-called “Aerotropolis” tax credits argued that they would primarily help subsidize warehouse construction and facility construction in order to encourage increased international trade. Don’t get me wrong, I support increased trade. After all, that is one of the best ways to grow an economy.

But, the bulk of the Aerotropolis tax credits didn’t seem to be directed at that admirable goal. My colleagues and I were early and passionate critics of portions of the legislation that didn’t appear to make much sense from a public policy standpoint.

We wondered: Why was the state considering subsidizing warehouse construction in the St. Louis area if more than 18 million square feet of vacant warehouse space was already available? Why did versions of the legislation give the mayor of Saint Louis City and area county executives the power to restrict who could receive hundreds of millions in tax benefits? Why were the construction tax credits in some cases limited to individuals and companies who owned more than 100 acres of land? Where was a substantive cost-benefit analysis?

It didn’t help that proponents of the tax credits cited conflicting, and seemingly overblown, job estimate numbers. Missourians should consider those types of estimates with skepticism. Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon made similar promises last year, when he visited Moberly to announce the creation of more than 600 jobs. The state and local governments promised public support for the development. Unfortunately, in recent weeks we have learned that the jobs have failed to materialize and the city of Moberly may be on the hook for millions in bond payments.

It bears repeating: Tax credits have a poor track record for success.

Frankly, I find it incredible that so much political effort (and taxpayer money) was spent on trying to tack a new form of corporate welfare onto attempts to implement tax credit reform. The legislature is aware that reform is needed; Nixon’s own Tax Credit Review Commission recommended cuts and sunsets to many of Missouri’s tax credit programs. Indeed, several legislators were actually part of that commission. And yet, here we are, having spent more than a month and more than $280,000.

Imagine what could have been accomplished if legislators had spent that much time and effort on accomplishing something substantive. Our state may face a large budget shortfall next fiscal year, and may have to make tough budgetary decisions as federal “budget stabilization” dollars run out. Or, what if the legislature had worked harder on passing more sweeping education reform? School choice continues to be limited to St. Louis City and Kansas City, though certainly students in Columbia and Springfield deserve the ability to choose quality schools just as much as students in urban areas.

Hopefully, the Missouri Legislature will spend less time on corporate welfare during 2012, and more time fixing the state’s worst problems.

Because of cases like  Moberly; the seemingly political provisions of the Aerotropolis legislation; and the general poor performance of tax credits, we will continue to comb through similar proposals. We will continue to argue against legislative proposals that will harm Missouri taxpayers. And, we will work to propose market-based solutions to Missouri’s pressing public policy problems.

Risky Business

Posted on by Audrey Spalding

In 2006, Indiana leased its 157-mile toll road to private investors for a $3.8 billion lump sum payment. The lease would last for 75 years, and the money generated from the deal would fund pent-up transportation projects (which were estimated to cost $2.6 billion).

At the time, there was an incredible amount of blowback, with the deal barely squeaking through the legislature and facing court challenges.

“The whole thing stinks,” said Indiana State Rep. B. Patrick Bauer, then the House Democratic leader. The two companies, he said, “got a heck of an unbelievable deal. We got a bad deal.”

And now, Governing magazine reports that the companies that bought the lease may not be able to make payments related to the deal. The project lost more than $260 million last year.

More astonishingly, Indiana officials say that the terms of the deal mean that if the toll road project defaults or goes into bankruptcy, the companies that bought the toll road could either find new investors, or the toll road would be returned to the state, with Indiana keeping the $3.8 billion.

In this case, it appears that the Indiana government got a pretty good deal.

Compare the case above to the news that developers are asking Saint Louis County to issue $7 million more in debt to finance the NorthPark development. The NorthPark development was also launched in 2006, during the height of the real estate bubble.

From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

“The developers are not only seeking to refinance the mortgage, but they’re also upping the size of it by almost 50 percent,” said Brian Tournier, director of research with Ascent Investment Partners in Brentwood, which specializes in bond investments. “And the county, ultimately, will be on the hook.”

As business owners know, the reward for taking on risk is the possibility of making a profit. The risk of failure is why so many of us do not set out to build a better mousetrap, be it Pets.com, Myspace, or Zynga.

What is so shocking about the Indiana toll road case is that it was a situation where government allowed the private sector to take on risk — for a price. If the state really won’t be held financially responsible if the project continues to lose money, then the state managed to shift all of the risk associated with the project to the private companies that invested in it.

In the case of NorthPark, it looks like the county is getting ready to take on more risk. And why, exactly? NorthPark could stand to profit if the development is successful. But if it isn’t, the county could lose. Proponents may point to job or investment increase estimates. But those numbers frequently fail to materialize.

There is no better example of what can go wrong when government takes on risk than that of the fiasco in Harrisburg, Pa. The city took on $125 million in debt to rebuild and expand its incinerator, which it hoped would become a money-maker. Instead, the incinerator project is more than $288 million in debt. The city, bankrupt as a result, has to cancel Christmas (well, its annual Christmas parade).

When you hear elected officials talking breathlessly about taking risks for the promise of money or jobs, think about Harrisburg or Mamtek, right here in Moberly, Mo. Though the jobs and investment numbers promised may be little more than a dream, the risk of failure is real.

I have to say, in light of other failures, this line from Saint Louis County Councilman Steve Stenger (D-Dist. 6) about NorthPark troubles me: “The county knew the risks going in to this development. But that’s a risk that you have to take if you want progress.”

If officials want to get into the business game of taking on big risks with the potential to make big profits, they should get out of government. In business, if you make the wrong choices and fail, you are financially responsible. When government tries to take on the risk of private businesses, taxpayers are on the hook for failure. And sadly, government officials rarely are held accountable for bad bets.

In this case, Missouri can learn from Indiana and Mamtek. A better move is to leave risk and profit to the private sector.

Support Us

The work of the Show-Me Institute would not be possible without the generous support of people who are inspired by the vision of liberty and free enterprise. We hope you will join our efforts and become a Show-Me Institute sponsor.

Donate
Man on Horse Charging