Doing Business in Wisconsin
Several CEOs are downright sulfurous in their private assessments about doing business in Wisconsin. Their objections include personal and corporate tax increases, recent court rulings and legislative proposals to raise liabilities for corporations. The list also includes proposed expansions of regulation through bills like the one on climate change, new pro-union laws, the fiscal disarray in Madison and the proclivity of the state to be an outlier when it comes to conformity with federal taxes and regulations.
Call them crybabies if you like. But these are the guys making the decisions about where jobs are retained, reduced or added.
And, not so incidentally, they are human beings. They want to be liked and appreciated. They look for signals, and if they don’t like what they see and hear, they go elsewhere.
Some would say the state remains a good place to do business, and there certainly are many positives, like the competitive business tax rates, the pool of skilled labor and investments in education at all levels.
But CEOs are paid to look ahead, to try to figure out where things are going. The changes in the business climate, positive or negative, have a disproportionate effect on their thinking.
As of late, many don’t like the signals coming out of China, Washington, D.C., or Madison. They will assess the totality of those signals, and they will act on that assessment as they shape their strategies. Political leaders who don’t understand or don’t care about the signals they are sending can’t pretend to be serious about job retention or creation.
I can tell you that there is a movement afoot to take PRChina out of the industrial supply chain.
Quality problems, big-time.
Posted by dad29 on July 11, 2010 at 1137 hrs
There needs to be a realignment between the price of products and employee compensation so people can afford American made over China and elsewhere. Unions threw the whole equation out of whack with their demands, and now we’re all paying the price. That and Government regulations need to be eased as well. Stop making doing business in the U.S. damn near impossible, and stop stealing their profits to fund redistribution programs for the lazy.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 11, 2010 at 1240 hrs
Wisconsin treats businesses like they were toxic. If you have ever had a business and you have to deal with the state - it is never a pleasant experience.
Kentucky? Piece of cake - they bend over backwards to help you.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 11, 2010 at 1438 hrs
Immelt was quite a supporter of BHO. His comments are watershed.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 11, 2010 at 1505 hrs
I agree this:
...........Stop making doing business in the U.S. damn near impossible, and stop stealing their profits to fund redistribution programs for the lazy…..........Thank you Scott(I-C) for your comment.
Posted by precision2010 on July 12, 2010 at 0126 hrs
Unfortunately, this is a problem not limited to Wisconsin.
At the Aspen Ideas Festival last week, Mort Zuckerman (billionaire supporter of Obama) spoke about the Obama administration’s anti-business slant:
“We are, without question, in a period of decline, particularly in the business world,” Zuckerman said. “The real problem we have…are some of the worst economic policies in place today that, in my judgment, go directly against the long-term interests of this country.”
Zuckerman added that he detects in the Obama White House “hostility to the very kinds of [business] culture that have made this the great country that it is and was. I think we have to find some way of dealing with that or else we will do great damage to this country with a public policy that could ruin everything
Another speaker was Harvard Professor Niall Ferguson. Note the reference to our own Paul Ryan:
Ferguson added: “The critical point is if your policy says you’re going run a trillion-dollar deficit for the rest of time, you’re riding for a fall…Then it really is goodbye.” A dashing Brit, Ferguson added: “Can I say that, having grown up in a declining empire, I do not recommend it. It’s just not a lot of fun actually—decline.”
Ferguson called for what he called “radical” measures. “I can’t emphasize strongly enough the need for radical fiscal reform to restore the incentives for work and remove the incentives for idleness.” He praised “really radical reform of the sort that, for example, Paul Ryan [the ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee] has outlined in his wonderful ‘Roadmap’ for radical, root-and-branch reform not only of the tax system but of the entitlement system” and “unleash entrepreneurial innovation.” Otherwise, Ferguson warned: “Do you want to be a kind of implicit part of the European Union? I’d advise you against it.”
And look who else was there:
This was greeted by hearty applause from a crowd that included Barbra Streisand and her husband James Brolin. “Depressing, but fantastic,” Streisand told me afterward, rendering her verdict on the session. “So exciting. Wonderful!”
Brolin’s assessment: “Mind-blowing.”
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 12, 2010 at 0712 hrs
The liberals that are antibusiness have shown up as veterans of the anti war protests in the 60’s and 70’s. Previously Democrats and Republicans all tried to get businesses and jobs and worked together on foreign policy.
These people, the present day liberals are a cancer that we can’t get fid of except for surgery and that is what we must do.
Cut the Obama team out for good and let him rest in ignominity like Jimmy Carter.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 12, 2010 at 0959 hrs
Perhaps we should start over again. No taxes, no regulations and no unions for all businesses.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 12, 2010 at 1420 hrs
Yeah Ofr, let’s party like it’s 1899.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 12, 2010 at 1423 hrs
Just wondering -
Which one do you think would hurt us the most?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 12, 2010 at 1551 hrs
Is John Torinus angry that the loophole closed? Corporations used to avoid taxes on Wisconsin profits by setting up a phony post office box “address” in a state without corporate income taxes.
Maybe if the loophole would have never existed, the state budget providing lots of services for WI business would not be in such a pickle.
How many WI corporations reported no tax liability in 2009?
When some corporations get rid of their tax liability, all the others end up paying more to make up the difference - and the workers pick up the tax liability too.
Maybe Torinus should talk with the exec team from Mercury Marine and Brunswick: Fond du Lac County and the city of Fond du Lac gave Merc $53 million in incentive packages – covered by Fond du Lac city and cty people. Brunswick paid no WI taxes for years.
“Wisconsin exempts manufacturers from sales taxes on purchases of machinery and equipment, fuel and electricity. Its machinery, equipment and inventory are all exempt from property taxes as well, along with its computers ” (wisconsinsfuture.org)
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 12, 2010 at 2306 hrs
Corporations used to avoid taxes on Wisconsin profits by setting up a phony post office box “address” in a state without corporate income taxes.
By ‘PO Box’ do you mean ‘corporate HQ’? Can you give an example of one business that has nothing but a PO BOX out of state in order to avoid taxes?
Once again, proving you are out of touch with the business world.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 13, 2010 at 0622 hrs
Now the local teachers union rep is going to advise us on fiscal matters.
You see JP out here in the real world we just cant stomp are feet and pout, or fill a gym full of children to whine and cry and fight for us. (while the children wrestle the giant aconda, JP watches from the safety of his helicoptor)When the check book is empty in real life its all gone , in real life we just cant raise taxes whenever the coffers get low. If your such an expert on such matters why dont you quit your tax payer funded position start your own business and start taking advantage of all these wonderful loopholes, heck its all so easy JP, show us how please.
Dont be offended JP but I think your problem is you read way too much, and lack real world hands on time in the trenches in an enviroment that is not run on public dollars.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 13, 2010 at 0834 hrs
“In real life we just cant raise taxes whenever the coffers get low.” I get it, but taxes can at least be collected when they are due.
Here’s a loophole for individuals: One claims they donated to the max, fakes the paperwork, and writes it off, - Where’s the oversight?
The anaconda simile is silly. Personal attacks? I’m on topic.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 13, 2010 at 0857 hrs
Here’s a loophole for individuals: One claims they donated to the max, fakes the paperwork, and writes it off, - Where’s the oversight?
That makes for chump change - the Home Buyer Tax Credit was much more lucrative fraudulent opportunity:
Home Buyer Tax Credit: Fraud, Errors Persist
The inspector general estimates that at least 1,295 prisoners fraudulently obtained more than $9.1 million in credits on their 2008 tax returns. What’s more, 241 of those prisoners were serving life sentences when they reported buying a house.
The report also found that 10,282 taxpayers obtained credits for purchasing the same homes that other taxpayers were using to claim the credit themselves. While the inspector general wasn’t able to put a precise dollar figure on it, the value of these inappropriate credits is expected to reach into the tens of millions
In addition, the inspector general flagged 2,555 taxpayers—who received $17.6 million in credits altogether—based on home purchases that occurred before the program had launched
Finally, the inspector general identified some 34 IRS employees who claimed the credit even though it’s possible that they have owned a home within the past three years, which would make them ineligible for the full $8,000
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 13, 2010 at 1030 hrs
Granted, my greasy, loophole example is chump change. Your example is a better example of the state, the people, getting hosed by tax cheats. Is the pillory part of the punishment?
Back to my point: If the state (and the FED) keep the pressure on people who deliberately avoid paying their fair share of taxes, the rest of the business and individuals will have to shoulder less of the burden. After this post will follow some comments as to how the state is corrupt and the monster must kept lean through low taxes (and that’s well and good); however, government and taxes keep the roads intact, the criminals anxious, and more young people graduating and paying taxes vs. becoming social burdens (Still, within these three examples are expenses that can’t be controlled: Inflation, energy costs, legal obligations, etc.)
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 13, 2010 at 1110 hrs
My younger brother runs a trucking business in Wisconsin. I’ll bet that he has his fair share of regulatory headaches to endure, as well as taxes that bleed him dry. As beautiful a state Wisconsin is to live it, it’s as ugly as sin with the current administration under Diamond Jim Doyle with his animus towards business…and a Federal Government willing to abet that animus.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 13, 2010 at 1136 hrs
Not that I’m a (Hello) Neumann supporter, but no-one seems to question WHY Neumann (or any other business) should have to pay a fee (read tax) to transfer property to himself.
Answer: Because this is Wisconsin and we’ll tax the f__k out of you if we damned-well please, that’s why!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 13, 2010 at 1146 hrs
Back to my point: If the state (and the FED) keep the pressure on people who deliberately avoid paying their fair share of taxes, the rest of the business and individuals will have to shoulder less of the burden.
A very big amen to that. However, that should go for everyone shouldn’t it? Maybe include Hollywood where every big star ‘lives’ on an island somewhere. Another one that I love is the commercials for tax services. “Do you own 100,000 in back taxes? We can get the IRS to accept a fraction of that!”
JP, the only question I have to that is whether some taxes should be there in the first place. Look at the Neumann ‘fiasco’. He didn’t pay taxes for transferring property from himself to himself? I think loopholes are generally put there in the first place, on purpose, to get certain contributors a tax break. When everyone else figures it out, they start all over. Seriously, if everyone had to follow all of the goofy tax laws, there really would have been tax revolts long ago.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 13, 2010 at 1409 hrs
If somebody is cheating breaking the law they should own up to whatever the penalty is.
What seems to happen is the wrong people are made to be the examples and the big fish keep on swimming. Until you had the fun of the state coming in and stripping you naked I dont know if you can comprehend the feeling.
Your bookeeper keeps impecable records, everything you do is on the advice of your CPA, you have no intention of cheating any tax laws, but they will find something, it will be a grey area not something as simple that stands out as black and white, right or wrong. There is no debate no correcting, you will pay the proposed tax, penalty , and interest, or fight us in court. Economics will quickly show you to just belly up and pay as to fight for your principals in court will cost you five times as much. They know all this and they know what road your going to take and now with budgets bulging at the seams they will ride business harder .
Thought several times about leaving the state It may happen some day, right now I think a double dip is coming so hunker down it will be.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 13, 2010 at 1507 hrs
@Tuerqas
The tax haven island has turned to mega yachts because it comes with a bigger moat.
Cigarette taxes are a sick joke: It’s argued that cigarette smokers are a burden on the health care system; however, the 20-30% who die younger/quicker than they normally should have are less of a burden on social security and Medicaid after paying in for 40 years. Taxing them is a double profit.
I’d be more OK with social security if nothing was borrowed for it to pay for other things. I’d prefer it was 100% backed by precious metals.
Paying taxes on a used vehicle is questionable, specifically when the vehicle is not an investment but to get to work.
No to all stadium taxes.
Death taxes - No.
Frankly, I would prefer one big flat state/fed sales tax, flat property taxes (gotta fund local police, fire, streets, water works, sanitation, garbage, etc) , and no income taxes.
...and every new armed conflict or war brings a war sales tax along with it so its actual cost and existence is not so nebulous.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 13, 2010 at 1908 hrs
Frankly, I would prefer one big flat state/fed sales tax, flat property taxes (gotta fund local police, fire, streets, water works, sanitation, garbage, etc) , and no income taxes.
Would you tax luxury items at a higher rate? Would you tax food? Personally, I agree with you, but ‘flat state/fed sales tax’ is a little unclear. I mean. you do have to bring in enough money to run the Government and pay off the debt.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 15, 2010 at 0833 hrs
Total Entries: 19998
Total Comments: 134033
Most Recent Entry: 05/24/2012 05:43 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 05/24/2012 06:50 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 121
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/24/2012 07:21 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).