Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
04.18.2008 1:26 pm

Sinquefield: Some tax credits are bad

In a missive sent out today, mega-political contributor Rex Sinquefield offers his thoughts on the mega-tax break bill moving through the Legislature.

He doesn’t like it.

Sinquefield’s article, co-written with University of Missouri-Columbia economist Joe Haslag, takes aim at the unprecedented subsidy being considered for Montreal-based Bombardier Aerospace.

State officials are trying to persuade the company to build an aircraft plant near Kansas City International Airport. The lure: up to $40 million a year in tax credits for 22 years.

Sinquefield and Haslag dispute the argument that the state recoups its investment in such deals through greater individual income and sales taxes and through the “multiplier” effect.

“Unfortunately, this almost certainly is wrong,” they write.

They say the state’s general fund gets 3 cents to 4 cents from every dollar of goods and services produced in the state. Thus, for the state to break even, the economy has to produce between $25 and $33 worth of goods and services for every dollar of tax credit granted, they say.

“While some projects may produce such robust yields, there are no guarantees,” they say. A better strategy, they say, would be to eliminate the income tax altogether, one of Sinquefield’s priorities.

The article is headlined “Tax Credits Aren’t Always A Good Idea.” Presumably that is to distinguish the Bombardier deal from the tax credits that Sinquefield has been pushing to give scholarships to special-needs children to attend private schools.

His Show-Me Institute site has his studies on these issues.

Bombardier’s proponents are sure to argue with Sinquefield’s analysis. They say the aircraft deal is unique because the company would actually repay the credits when it begins production. However, the bill is vague on just when and how that would happen.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (3 votes, average: 4.33 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...
5 comments

Comments are closed.

I would have to agree with Sinquefield and Haslag on this plan. Its frightening to me that some people think that Missouri can actually afford this kind of gamble. This would cost the state millions of dollars that we don’t have!
This would be the largest tax credit in the state and a foreign company would benefit. There is no guarantee Missouri would see the growth they predict. Either our taxes would go up to pay for this or other state services would see cuts.
I hope, for the sake of our great state, this does not pass.

— Mysti
4:20 pm April 18th, 2008

Sinquefield doesn’t like it because it’s not benefiting him. Give too many tax cuts to the wrong people and there won’t be any pie left for him.

— shecky
10:00 am April 19th, 2008

Tell us all shecky, what has Sinquefield proposed that will benefit him?

Eliminate the income tax? Yes probably would help him but would help many more than him.

Eliminate the earnings tax? Don’t know if he pays it but again benefit those of us who do.

Tax credit scholarships? If he donated to an organization that had the tax credits he would but so would eveyone else who donated to them.

Tell us shecky, what has Sinquefiled proposed for his benefit? Sounds like he is proposing things that benefit a lot of people not just himself.

— FYI
3:37 pm April 19th, 2008

I must say, it’s sad to not see the forest for the trees. This is a BAD idea, on so many levels, but most of all the fact that over the last fiscal year we saw unreasonable cuts to medicaid because it “wasn’t in the budget”, Missouri sold higher ed loans at a great risk to students, and now we can somehow spend $40 million a year for one business? I want to see economic growth as much as the next guy, but I don’t think this is the way to do that: especially considering that it seems to have come on the heels of cuts to basic social programs. You can say whatever you want about Sinquefield’s perceived politics, but he’s an investment expert. This tax credit needs a lot more scrutiny than it’s getting. It’s a huge investment, and its scope is relatively concentrated. The payoff in uncertain. It reminds me of Detroit, and the undying investment in Ford long after they stopped creating jobs, and union workers are getting the shaft as jobs move overseas. It’s what happens when you put all your eggs in one basket, because without competition, unions have less leverage.

It would be interesting to see what business has moved into Missouri without this magnitude of aid in the last several years. It would be interesting to see how much payoff there actually is for economic packages, and what benefit St. Louis would see from this–any? That much money, I’d hope it went to something that helped all of us.

— benini
5:28 pm April 20th, 2008

For once I actually agree with Sinquefield. Then I saw this: Sinquefield dumps $300,000 into Missouri political races during first quarter of 2008.

— Nick
8:59 am April 21st, 2008