Amazon pulls out of New York headquarters plan

originally posted by: CynConcepts

originally posted by: DAVID64
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Why?
Jobs and a Huge tax revenue for the state, so what did they have against it?

Perhaps they were concerned with the fact that they would create more middle class jobs? I mean...usually when an individual and family become less dependent on government, they tend to not want to just hand over their hard earned money and may rethink who and what they vote on...right?

I think you're on to something here. It was slave class and the rich in the parts of NYC I visited many years ago. I suspect the rich got richer. I did enjoy some places very well like Washington Park with a silent protest and Bobby McFerrin there just doing his thing playin' spoons and chanting nice things. Didn't know who he was at the time.

originally posted by: StoutBroux

originally posted by: Edumakated
Amazon only chose NYC because of the massive tax breaks. A lot of the other cities which were far better choices didn't offer up as much. While NYC is a great city, it is pretty much tapped out in regards to obscene cost of living, over crowded, etc.

Chicago would have been a much better choice for Amazon when looking at what they claimed was important (educational institutions, public transit, low cost of living, etc. Chicago would be #1 or 2 in EVERY category.

However, I thought Amazon missed a great marketing opportunity. They could have move to Detroit and really spearheaded a revival of a once great city. $130k type salaries would be lovely in Detroit. You'd need a few room mates in NYC making $130k.

Amazon is opening locations in two other states, Virginia is one of them, can't remember the other. You make some great points though. That would have been such a win win for Chicago IL or the state of MI and Amazon. It would have boosted Amazon's approval in many negative minds. Wonder why they didn't consider investing in those areas.

They will be choosing one more place since NY is out of the question. Maybe they will consider MI or IL. Crosses fingers.

Somewhere in TN. I think I recall seeing the story. I believe Atlanta would have been a good choice for them too.

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Pffft, then see ya, wouldn't wanna be ya. Build that mess in Wyoming, that 130k a year will get peeps a nice ranch.

a reply to: neo96

Yea fake news, two years in a row, every news site and business article says they came out at a -1. But you some guy on a conspiracy forum says it's fake.

a reply to: strongfp

Troll somewhere else.

We recorded a provision for income taxes of $950 million, $1.4 billion, and $769 million in 2015, 2016, and 2017. Our provision for income taxes in 2016 was higher than in 2015 primarily due to an increase in U.S. pre-tax income, partially offset by an increase in the proportion of foreign losses for which we may realize a tax benefit, an increase in tax amortization deductions, and a decline in the proportion of nondeductible expenses. We have recorded valuation allowances against the deferred tax assets associated with losses for which we may not realize a related tax benefit.

services.corporate-ir.net...

a reply to: StoutBroux

I think this is by design at this point by democrats/establishment....

Think about it. They will have these states locked for generations. Time to force out their ideals to other states.

Look at Colorado. People flocked there and politics have changed.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: strongfp

Troll somewhere else.

We recorded a provision for income taxes of $950 million, $1.4 billion, and $769 million in 2015, 2016, and 2017. Our provision for income taxes in 2016 was higher than in 2015 primarily due to an increase in U.S. pre-tax income, partially offset by an increase in the proportion of foreign losses for which we may realize a tax benefit, an increase in tax amortization deductions, and a decline in the proportion of nondeductible expenses. We have recorded valuation allowances against the deferred tax assets associated with losses for which we may not realize a related tax benefit.

services.corporate-ir.net...

In other words, they over paid taxes and go a refund for doing so...

To show you what honest debate looks like, I didn’t see those polls until now and now acknowledge it did have support.
a reply to: neo96

originally posted by: GraffikPleasure
a reply to: StoutBroux

I think this is by design at this point by democrats/establishment....

Think about it. They will have these states locked for generations. Time to force out their ideals to other states.

Look at Colorado. People flocked there and politics have changed.

I don’t know, according to various articles both mayor deblasio and governor cuomo wanted the deal and tried to save it.

But then state senators got in the way, at least according to cuomo.

Amazon Financial Statements


Taxes Paid (huge)

I saw this coming. Days before the announcement, I called the GA Governor to start working on Amazon again. Turns out this announcement isn't a big win for Atlanta, but it is a small win: They will be expanding every tech and corporate office. Atlanta is one of them.

a reply to: GraffikPleasure

Why do you think Dems want to axe the Electoral college?

a reply to: neo96

They didn't pay any federal taxes because they didn't need to.

Even Trump is all up in arms over this! Fake news again?

Fortune Reports.

MarketWatch Reports

Amazon benefitted greatly from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 and recorded a provisional tax benefit at the end of 2017 for the impact of Trump’s tax reform of approximately $789 million. Amazon had a significant amount of federal deferred tax liabilities at the time. As a result, the permanent reduction in the U.S. statutory corporate tax rate to 21% from 35%, forced a remeasurement of what would be due for those liabilities, resulting in a positive impact to net income.

ITEP wrote that Amazon’s 2018 annual report revealed that, instead of paying the new statutory 21% federal income tax rate in 2018, its effective tax rate was -1% because of the refund of $129 million. ITEP says the refund is “partly due to various unspecified “tax credits” as well as a tax break for executive stock options.” The “tax credits” Amazon takes advantage of are not unique to it and are not “unspecified.” Amazon enjoys tax benefits relating to excess stock-based compensation deductions and accelerated depreciation deductions that are benefits of the tax code available to every public company. Those benefits can be utilized to reduce its U.S. taxable income.

Reddit discussion. about the whole situation.

I read the article trying to find a reason why and didn't get an answer.. So I logged into my investor account and discovered that there is a provision for Amazon to pay $1.354 Billion in Corporate income tax... and that is calculated in the Normalized income available to common shareholders. So I'm not too sure what the article is talking about... That is an income statement... so then I looked at the balance sheet... It looks to have been deferred from depreciation. Balance sheet accounting is difficult to understand, but I believe that they can defer the income tax to depreciate assets. Because of the large depreciation write down, uou have to really question how much of the $11.2 billion is actually profit. Looking at AMZN their book value is about $40 billion, yet the market capitalization is nearly $800 billion. 20x that. I think it's overvalued still after a 20% haircut. The main reason they don't pay any tax is because they don't make any money. AMZN is a paper tiger.

In other words, for tax purposes, even though Amazon's making a lot of money, they're presenting their accounting in a way that says they have a lot of expenses, so they can claim they are not actually making an income. ("Income" meaning: Sales - Expenses = Income.) Edit: I was going off what the person above me said and clarifying that deferred expenses and aggressive depreciation are costs a company can inflate to avoid paying taxes. From reading the article, though, the Institute on Taxation and Economic policy seems to be implying that Amazon got a tax refund of $129 million because of the Trump administration's corporation-friendly tax cuts. The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act decreased corporate tax rates from 35% to 21% and didn't close "a slew of tax loopholes that allow profitable companies to routinely avoid paying federal and state income taxes on almost half of their profits."

I'm no financial expert, but a lot of financial experts are saying the exact same thing. And the whole reddit discussion with what seems like a lot of smart people who know their stuff are saying the same thing as well.

Outside of state and the obvious taxes that no-one can get out of. They paid NO federal taxes.

But hey, they're all wrong and you're right.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14
Oh please. We are talking about h1n1 visas and the like.

I was unaware that the federal government issued a swine flu visa...

Perhaps you meant the h1b1 or h1b visa instead?

Considering the h1b visa is now prioritizing those that have a degree from an institution in the United States, these are clearly people who are looking to legally contribute and immigrate as they're most likely doing their schooling and work here.

If you're talking about the h1b1, that's a pretty small subset of work visas, folks from Chile and Singapore are the only two countries that currently have those types of visas issued to their citizens due to a free trade agreement.

Either way, as a tech worker myself, I've never been displaced by an h1b (or h1b1) holder. So I personally have no issues with holders of those visas, they tend to be rather hard working, and from my personal experience tend to integrate well into the workforce and country.

Sorry this is what happens when I spent all day looking at health data and law. Yes, not h1n1 lol.

However, where do you live? I think people aren’t taking seriously when a person like me from the Bay Area describes the other side of the equation in how the Silicon Valley has impacted the area. It’s real easy for some ats members from Kansas to tell me it’s all hunky dory.

It’s not just foreign tech. I said in the original post that the disingenuous poster responded to that many claimed job opportunities are going to non locals, which includes international workers. That statement also includes people from other states or cities. That’s why neo’s xenophobic claims were absurd.

I’ve worked in international affairs. My friend group is very international. No xenophobia.

My point is still valid. Amazon admitted that not all jobs in Nyc would be for local folks.

Therefore, it’s not entirely accurate to state that “we are bringing 25,000 job opportunities” to the community, when some won’t go to local community members. Some of those are just being shifted from elsewhere or given to others.


a reply to: Hypntick

I'm buying long term put options on Amazon, pricey but I have muh feelings

there is something going on we aren't privy too, I'm expecting an attack on AWS soon as well

originally posted by: xuenchen
Amazon Financial Statements


Taxes Paid (huge)

Wasn't the state and city of New York going to literally PAY Amazon to move and stay there, at the expense of state taxpayers?

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: xuenchen
Amazon Financial Statements


Taxes Paid (huge)

Wasn't the state and city of New York going to literally PAY Amazon to move and stay there, at the expense of state taxpayers?

Actually it was just tax breaks and other stuff. No cash "payments" in advance (I don't think).

unless ?

a reply to: Hypntick

I live in Charlotte NC myself, but work for a subsidiary based in Alexandria VA, and the parent company is based in Milpitas CA. Now would you say that I "stole" a spot from someone in Alexandria because I'm based in Charlotte? You could possibly say that and possibly not as I'm a consultant and travel all over, so as long as someone is close to an airport and has the skill set it's not an issue.

Then again I've also worked for companies based out of San Ramon CA, and London UK, however these are larger (300k+) companies, so they by default have a wide presence. I've seen the impact something like this can have though, so I get where you're coming from as people will move to where they can find that higher paying job. However when people say these are jobs that are paying 130k per year, for the NY area, that doesn't sound exactly high. Just doing a simple cost of living calculation, I would need another 130k on top of what I make currently to have the same standard of living in the area they were looking at.

So would these jobs be a big draw for an experienced (10+ years) hire? Probably not, unless they live in the area already and it's a step up. I could see this being a bigger draw for the h1b crowd and those that are not quite green but maybe 3-5 years experience. You may draw some folks from other cities and states, but for the rate of pay they're offering I really do think you'll end up with more local talent than imported. That's just my opinion on it though.

If the majority of people in the area were against this, then I say it's a win for them. However if this is a very vocal minority of people who were against this, I would say it's a loss for the community. I will say this though, if they say they're bringing an opportunity, then that's all that it is. Someone local does have an opportunity for the job, but do they meet or beat the qualifications of those who may be transplants, that would be the question I would ask.

Edit:

originally posted by: toysforadults
I'm expecting an attack on AWS soon as well

This would not surprise me at all.

originally posted by: GraffikPleasure
a reply to: StoutBroux
Look at Colorado. People flocked there and politics have changed.

Same with Nevada.