In the biggest ever defeat for a subsidized project in history, Amazon announcedFebruary 14th that it was canceling its planned half of HQ2 for New York City, which was to receive subsidies worth at least $3.133 billion. After facing months of public opposition, the company provided a Valentine’s Day present in the form of capitulation. Amazon showed that, like Electrolux, its efforts to extract maximum subsidies from 238 cities constituted corporate rent-seeking on a grand scale. Not only did Amazon conduct an exploitative public auction for the supposedly single HQ2 facility, it furthered the impression that it was engaging in rent-seeking by its refusal to discuss alternatives with New York officials, by its absolute insistence on opposing a union for its workers, and by its sudden though not unexpected cancellation announcement. Activists scorched the firm, too, for the fact that for the second year running, Amazon will pay 0 in federal income tax despite earning $11.2 billion in profits in 2018 and $5.6 billion in 2017.
This is not to be confused with Foxconn, which is looking more and more like an economic development failure. There, it appears that the company will not be able to provide the investment and benefits it promised in Wisconsin. With Amazon, what we have is a case of the company being unwilling to continue the political battle to obtain its $3+ billion in incentives. While Amazon is by far the largest project ever defeated, such defeats are not unprecedented. I participated in two successful campaigns in the late 1990s and early 2000s against abusive tax increment financing (TIF) projects in the St. Louis suburbs of Olivette and O’Fallon, but these were on the order of $40 or $50 million, not $3 billion. Alas, I was also on the losing side of an exceptionally bitter battle against a TIF-funded mall in Hazelwood, Missouri, which still hurts to think about. The residents lost their homes to eminent domain, the city administration was high-handed and manipulative, and the new mall contributed substantially to the death of at least two nearby malls, part of the $2 billion retail subsidy merry-go-round during 1990-2007 documented by the East-West Gateway Council of Governments.
Astoria didn’t need this kind of project. It and the rest of Queens need a new subway tunnel and further transit improvements. The area is magnificent waterfront and ex-industrial. I almost had a job with the Pearlwick hamper company there years ago. Now it’s studio space, art museums and lots of vibrant small businesses.
Bringing in a monster development like this was wrong on two counts. It was like Rockefeller Center or Lincoln Center, breaking up the street grid and looking inward. These are very hard to get right and can harm the surrounding areas. It was a big government subsidy to a profitable private outfit. If they want to spend $3B, there’s a subway line that could use refurbishing.
And, Amazon needs a TIF for what reason?
“Despite doubling its profits in 2018, Amazon did not pay a cent of federal income tax for the second consecutive year, according to an analysis by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.
The big picture: Amazon actually received a rebate of $129 million — or an effective tax rate of negative 1 percent — thanks to tax credits and other breaks stemming from the GOP’s 2017 tax cuts. The Washington Post’s Chris Ingraham notes that while Amazon earned $11.2 billion in profit last year, it was able to pay a lower federal tax rate (1.5% in 2015) than the bottom 20% of American households.”