Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

This has been tried several times in cities and by and large it seems to be profitable for the businesses.


sort by: page size:

Not surprised to see this posted here already.

Anyways, I find the idea presented in the article really interesting, and I honestly can see this system being used in cities that are "Degrowing" to provide similar services on a slimmer budget, while providing job opportunities for locals, and a new industry for a city to increase income flow.


Cities have done that for thousands of years. It's a symbiotic relationship. The businesses pay taxes which pay for services to make the businesses more viable.

I'm honestly surprised more places are don't try this - $10k for the potential tax revenue seems well worth it to me.

sounds like an interesting experiment that these investors want to foot the bill for, so why not? Perhaps ideas could be fruitful for other cities if proven to work.

Sounds like a great way to drive businesses away from your city. Penny wise, pound foolish.

That's how I understood it as well. This idea seems to be gaining popularity in a lot of places. I wonder how much this is going to cost their local economy in the long-term.

I'd be extremely surprised if that were true. Cities like to do this sort of thing because it expands headcount but I doubt it makes sense financially if you account for all costs.

Look up the Wörgl Experiment for more background on why this could be desirable.

Basically it was used successfully to keep a local economy going during the great depression.


Probably good for the businesses in the area which can raise prices though. Someone's profiting.

Yes, they're there to solve a problem not related to government revenue. Some cities use them as a revenue generator and they're examples of the effects of perverse incentives.

There's an obvious outcome from that: the companies will pay a tax/fee to municipalities for the right to do that. There's no scenario where that doesn't occur universally in the future. Cities love to regulate anything and everything they can within their jurisdiction. If they charge a reasonable fee for it, it's net beneficial. There will be a lot more rules sketched out over time for this type of product.

For tourist location it work. Government gets the money back in sales and other taxes. But in other cities it will be money pit with no possible way to recoup the cost. It can never work in rural areas because there isn't a dense enough population.

To add to your comment, many if not most municipalities tax industrial buildings at a higher rate than they do commercial buildings. This could indeed be a nice tax saving strategy for the business.

> Allow new businesses to be created without the city's red tape

Mostly


This is a very nice rebate... maybe too nice? It's hard to say, but other cities might learn a lot from this experiment.

Obviously that's not the goal but just to add an additiional revenue stream for the city while lying the local plebs straight in the face.

>There are a lot of municipalities doing exactly what you say and making the money back fast

Can you give us an example?


Yeah, not much difference to the end user but I think the council are trying to attract businesses. That could be the good mix up the economy needs. The future will tell whether it works or not.

What about a collective approach run by the businesses in a town rather than companies that charge high fees on both ends?
next

Legal | privacy