New York and California Each Lost $1T When Financial Firms Moved South(bloomberg.com)
bloomberg.com
New York and California Each Lost $1T When Financial Firms Moved South
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2023-asset-management-relocation-wall-street-south/
16 comments
They do, but clicks won’t make themselves.
Bloomberg blatantly pushing deceptive rentier class propaganda?
Financial industry simps reposting it on HN?
I'm shocked! :-)
How do the southern states intend to spend their $1T windfall?
Hmmm, and what do those states have in common?
is it a shared belief that the rich should contribute to society through taxation, and regulatory agencies that try to protect consumers?
no it must be <culture war issue>
no it must be <culture war issue>
> shared belief that the rich should contribute to society through taxation
New York and California also have massive bureaucracies and a tax and rulebook to match. I’ve generally been less irked by their rates than the time and energy it takes to prepare their returns.
New York and California also have massive bureaucracies and a tax and rulebook to match. I’ve generally been less irked by their rates than the time and energy it takes to prepare their returns.
California is #12 in total tax burden in 2023. (https://wallethub.com/edu/states-with-highest-lowest-tax-bur...)
Maine, Vermont, Iowa all havae higher total tax burdens than California. New York, however is #1. On the other hand, New York City is THE place to be to find fame and fortune in any number of professions. Finance, the arts, fashion all come to mind immediately.
Maine, Vermont, Iowa all havae higher total tax burdens than California. New York, however is #1. On the other hand, New York City is THE place to be to find fame and fortune in any number of professions. Finance, the arts, fashion all come to mind immediately.
I still remember living in California and every year checking the turbotax box that said I was not claiming a deduction from the Armenian Genocide Restitution Fund or whatever.
Funny how people are willing to deny benefits to others while claiming different benefits for themselves. Me thinks you'd feel differently if, say, a fund were created to compensate people for consuming PFASs (which you undoubtedly have). Or, maybe not.
Regardless, I think it's important to be consistent: If you deny benefits to others, then don't accept them yourself.
Regardless, I think it's important to be consistent: If you deny benefits to others, then don't accept them yourself.
Tax returns are not the most efficient way to correct all of society's historical injustices.
I think everything is working as intended in this case: some states have decided on having very high taxation rates, and other states have decided they will shift that burden to alternative taxation schemes (sales/property taxes). And these companies have decided to vote with their feet by moving to what they perceive are better tax environments for them. More might follow in the future, others will never move.
It’s not cultural war, it’s just market dynamics.
It’s not cultural war, it’s just market dynamics.
It’s the same market dynamics which lead to the deindustrialization of the United States. Some countries have high costs of living coupled with burdensome work safety and child labor regulations. Other countries are less concerned about workplace safety. And others still are happy to be tax havens in exchange for a percentage or two.
I’m not just saying this to be facetious or contrarian. My point is that markets aren’t “just so” systems. We decide the parameters under which these amoral corporations operate.
I’m not just saying this to be facetious or contrarian. My point is that markets aren’t “just so” systems. We decide the parameters under which these amoral corporations operate.
That's not remotely the same thing as the states losing $1T. You'd think Bloomberg would know the difference.