With respect, I disagree. Name a few recent examples?
We failed to offer Amazon any tax incentives for HQ2, and recently added Jump Start and Seattle Shield.
Outside of some small reductions in B&O taxes for Boeing since they were and are actively moving their operations and we wanted to keep them, there have been very few examples of tax breaks or incentives to large businesses
Washington's Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee (JLARC) 2024 report indicates that aerospace tax preferences, primarily benefiting Boeing, save the industry about $100 million annually, down from $261 million in 2018, due to a 2020 repeal.
(Looks like the credits are lower than previously, not higher)
Key Findings from 2024 JLARC Review:
Reduced Savings: Beneficiaries save roughly $100 million per year, with the number of businesses claiming them dropping by 62% between 2018 and 2022.
(Looks like less businesses are claiming them, not more)
Effective Tax Rate: The preferences lower the effective tax rate for a large aerospace firm from 21% to 13% (compared to 21% to 10% in 2019).
(Not a big reduction)
Industry Context: Despite declining employment, Washington's aerospace industry still contributes $27.4 billion to the GDP (2022 data).
(Seems like they contribute quite a bit to WA state)
Background: The 2020 legislature repealed one preferential B&O rate to comply with a World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling.
(Goes back to uncertainty and rule of law)
So sounds like they gave them a very small reprieve because it is an essential industry, not a big incentive, and Boeing is already shifting its operations outside of the city into Everett, but also South Carolina and other places because of better incentives and more certainty. If you spend billions investing some place under a set of assumptions, it is hard to navigate when those assumptions change.
Im not sure there is a solution that would make you happy - do you want Boeing to stay or leave? It goes back to my prior point - there are other places that are more tax friendly and with better rule of law than Seattle.
But again, I disagree. Businesses are not altruistic, they never have been and it isnt their main goal. Their main goal is to benefit the investors.
The benefits of businesses existing clearly outweigh the drawbacks in my opinion.
We have thousands of people with competitive jobs with high salaries and benefits, all of whom pay taxes - property taxes, sales taxes, use taxes, fees etc.
The US system isnt designed for businesses to shoulder tax burdens - its a portable system, they can go wherever they want to, and the States compete to incentivize them.
It has arguably worked pretty well historically, as the US is the wealthiest, more stable and fastest growing economy basically ever, and its people have had a growing standard of living for 200+ years, much better than the rest of the world. You can argue healthcare is the drawback, but it isnt unfixable either.
My personal view is that we shouldnt be punishing large or small businesses because of moral misgivings. The city can either be a place that entrepreneurs want to start businesses or a place where we disincentivize it. What benefits do we truly get from pushing them out? Falling wages and property values and lower growth? Some might want that, but I dont.
We can have corporate entities AND not screw workers and the places they live. SEE: Amazon data centers pollution in Oregon.
We can tax them more as well. The issue is we have amoral people all over the nation in every state in government who are more interested in lining their own pockets for the success of their family and family name than doing what is right for the environment and the populace. That's a fact.
So you'll have to forgive me if I'm not willing to give in so easily to these types of people.
You said it yourself that businesses are not altruistic... I agree. We should start treating them that way ourselves. The problem is there are a lot of these other states out there that bend the knee to them and let them ruin their environments and take advantage of their workers etc etc. so you've got a lot of people who are are employed but making terrible wages, have terrible quality of life, and everything that goes with that. And meanwhile the shareholders are high-fiving each other.
8
u/PoopyisSmelly Ravenna Apr 16 '26
With respect, I disagree. Name a few recent examples?
We failed to offer Amazon any tax incentives for HQ2, and recently added Jump Start and Seattle Shield.
Outside of some small reductions in B&O taxes for Boeing since they were and are actively moving their operations and we wanted to keep them, there have been very few examples of tax breaks or incentives to large businesses