Economic
Development and Corporate Accountability
Throughout
our nation's history, state and local governments have done much
to facilitate the growth and development of the American economy.
They built an impressive physical infrastructure and developed
the nation's human capital, without which our private sector economy
could not have prospered. In contrast, most government activities
undertaken in the last 20 years in the name of "economic
development" have little to do with the development of the
economy or job creation. Instead, they involve the use of public
resources to convince businesses to move from where they are located
to someplace else -- or in response to such entreaties, to convince
businesses to stay where they are. It has become a zero sum game,
simply shifting jobs around rather than creating them.
The Federal
Reserve Bank of Minneapolis has made clear, that firm-specific
subsidies reduce the resources available for basic municipal services
and infrastructure investments, limiting the ability of governments
to fulfill their primary responsibility in regard to fostering
private-sector economic development. Firm-specific subsidies also
represent an unwarranted intervention by government into the workings
of the free market: why should the government subsidize one machine
tool maker's cost of doing business relative to its competitors?
And, most unacceptable are economic development aid programs that
subsidize "bad actor" companies which pollute the environment
and/or endanger workers' health.
People's
Budget Recommendations:
1. New York
State should join the Minnesota Fed and others in the effort to
have Congress limit or eliminate the practice of state and local
governments competing against one another with tax subsidies to
move jobs from one community to another.
2. Firms receiving
public subsidies should be required to contractually pledge to
create a certain number of new jobs. State and local governments
should "recover" or "recoup" subsidies from
firms that don't deliver on their job creation promises.
3. Firms applying
for public subsidies should be required to meet a "code of
conduct" to ensure that public funds don't go to firms with
criminal convictions, violations or pending investigations regarding
compliance with environmental, labor or civil rights laws. If
the firm violates any such laws while receiving a subsidy, it
should be required to repay the award.
4. The beneficiaries of subsidy packages should be required to
file periodic reports on their progress in meeting their job creation
or retention promises. These reports should be available to the
public.
5. The state
should require corporate tax disclosure. To analyze whether or
not various corporate tax credits are accomplishing their stated
purpose, we need to know how much individual corporations benefit
from such tax incentives. The federal corporate tax disclosure
requirements allowed President Reagan to build the case for corporate
tax reform by showing that loopholes allowed many of the nations
largest and most profitable businesses to pay little or nothing
in taxes.
6. The state should enact the Investment Tax Credit (ITC) Accountability
and Job Creation Reform Act to make a greater portion of this
lucrative tax credit dependent on job creation and retention.
Fiscal Policy Institute, 1 Lear Jet Lane, Latham
New York, 12210 (518) 786-3156