Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Steve Hill, state director of economic development, is looking at ways to ensure that education matches up with opportunities in the state’s economy.
Thursday, Aug. 2, 2012 | 2 a.m.
Gov. Brian Sandoval
What is believed to be the largest tax abatement deal in state history that promises to bring an Apple data center to Reno began in a cheese factory.
Gov. Brian Sandoval and his economic development director, Steve Hill, were on a tour at Reno's Pacific Cheese Co. to promote the governor’s economic development plan when Hill received a call that Apple was in town. Company executives were interested in locating in Northern Nevada and wanted to meet.
It was, coincidentally, a few hours after Sandoval presented his plan to diversify Nevada’s economy in February.
The result was what Sandoval described Wednesday as a "win all the way around." But it also highlighted the scant state oversight elected officials and business leaders appointed to oversee the Governor's Office of Economic Development have over the size of tax abatements.
Hill, the director of the Governor’s Office of Economic Development, approved the abatements worth $89 million over 10 years on Wednesday. That was after a separate meeting in which the board unanimously recommended approval of the deal.
But their role was purely advisory — a break from the way Nevada has historically given out tax breaks.
The Reno area will get 35 Apple employees making at least $25 an hour and 200 contractors. The company will also invest $400 million in the first four years and up to $2 billion in 30 years. Nevada governments will get from $16 million to $20 million over the first 10 years in taxes.
Most importantly, according to Hill, Nevada gets the marquee Apple name moving to the state. That name has already led to interest from other companies looking to locate data servers, he said.
In exchange, Apple gets breaks on its sales and property taxes. The state discounted all but 2 percent of the sales tax for at least four years and up to 12 years. The state also discounted 85 percent of property taxes for up to 30 years, depending on the levels of investment Apple makes in Nevada. (A separate deal with local governments in Northern Nevada effectively reduces Apple’s sales tax to 1/2 a percent.)
There are no abatements on construction costs.
The package of tax abatements were negotiated by Hill and highlight just how powerful the director of the Governor’s Office of Economic Development is.
Typically, the state issues tax breaks under a particular section of the law that caps the length of the tax agreements at 10 years.
But those incentives, Hill said, were not generous enough to make Nevada competitive with other potential locations. So, instead, the state used a separate law for tax breaks, which had never been used before.
It gave Hill wide latitude to set the terms of agreement.
Sandoval described the negotiations, which he was briefed on as they were ongoing, as “intense.”
“Apple was very respectful ... but it was firm, on both sides,” Hill said.
Hill said this was the best deal Nevada could have gotten without Apple deciding to locate elsewhere.
“We could have raised the tax rate, but then we would have gotten zero dollars,” he said.
Instead, for example, the company could have moved to a location in rural Oregon, where there’s no sales tax and they offer a 100 percent property tax break for 15 years.
There is still no contract between the state and Apple, Hill said, only a short list of terms laying out the property and sales tax abatements and conditions to which Apple has agreed.
That drew sharp questions from Secretary of State Ross Miller, a member of the board.
“It appears the board is largely ceremonial,” Miller said after the meeting. “This is a significant departure from the past.”
He took issue with the property tax provisions that could last up to 30 years.
“My daughter, who’s in kindergarten, will be my age and still subject to the deal approved today,” Miller noted.
Hill noted that both the Washoe County Commission and Reno City Council had previously endorsed the deal in public meetings.
Sandoval said his office will review possible changes to the board before the Legislature next meets in 2013, but he was not prepared Wednesday to make any recommendations.
“I hope it can be a catalyst for other companies,” Sandoval said at Wednesday’s meeting.
So, let's review.
$89 MILLION in taxes lost
35 jobs (first reported to be 40)
A governor unwilling to tax anyone (unless a court orders him to)
A state in long term desperate need of tax revenues
No actual accountability of Apple Computers if it doesn't comply with the agreement
A pipe dream that other companies will come here because of low taxes and some stupid headlines about a competitor moving here
Seriously, 89 MILLION DOLLARS for 35 jobs? WTF?
For $89 million we could create hundreds of start-up businesses each employing dozens of people EACH.
Research proves that taxes & headlines don't lure companies, education & an educated workforce do. Nevada doesn't fund education & lacks the trained workforce.
A BIG 'thumbs up' for Sebring's comments...
This is just giving it away.
Gov'ner B.S. and his 'economic development team'...
a bunch of rubes, offering to be taken advantage of.
Mission accomplished!
Sebring - Nevada doesn't give Apple $89 million. Nevada doesn't have that money to spend. It provides Apple a 85% tax break.
And it's not just 35 jobs. It's 35 "Apple" jobs and 250 contractor jobs each paying on average $90k. It's a massive number of construction jobs to build the data center, and offices in downtown.
So, the choice is get 15% of billions, or zero percent of nothing?? Hmmm. Let's play hardball with Apple. That makes sense. Oregon or Wyoming would gladly let them build for nothing. Apple wanted to build in Reno because of its distance to the Bay Area.
Agree on the education. But it's gonna tax years to dig out of that mess.
This Apple deal exposes our 19th century tax structure that favors gaming and penalizes hi-tech. For NV to land hi-tech companies who purchase massive amount of equipment on a consistent basis they are forced to abate sales taxes. Oregon, home of Apple, Intel, Micron, and many others does not have sales taxes, but they do have income taxes.
NV's sales and the lovely MBT (payroll) taxes penalize all companies and start-ups on the "front-end" when the companies have to pay taxes before they make income. Oregon has it right by taxing businesses not on the front-end, but the back-end after the companies have actually produced income. Oregon's GDP growth leads the west, by the way, even after increasing income taxes on wealthy households and businesses in 2009.
The solution for NV is a tax-neutral shift from sales and payroll taxes to income taxes. Of course, it will be very difficult to convince voters to approve income taxes (twice), but it's possible if bargained correctly by eliminating sales and payroll taxes.
From reading the report, I got the impression that it wasn't much of a contest between Reno and the other cities. Not only were the incentives less attractive, factors like the cost of living and the cost of electricity were less favorable in the other locations. Electricity and power are important for a server farm. Northern Nevada fit the bill and, in an unbelievable display of magnanimity, generously agreed to foot a good chunk of it, too.
Apple's "billion dollar" server farm in Maiden, North Carolina has had little effect locally, according to reports. The 50 new employees aren't making a dent in the struggling town, and the promised 200 contractors aren't necessarily on-site. And North Carolina got soaked for only half of what Nevada has agreed to. Are they smarter than us, I wonder. But who could be smarter than Apple -- avoiding federal taxes by sitting on billions offshore, then leaning on local taxpayers to construct and maintain their operations. You'd think they were a welfare case, when they're really just corporate scheisters.
David McGrath Schwartz says this is believed to be the largest tax abatement deal in state history, leaving me to wonder about all the other tax abatement deals in state history, the amount they've generated and the amount they would have generated, if we were inclined to return to the people all the tax revenue collected on their behalf.
Looks like it took some fancy legislative footwork to finagle this deal. And it looks like an unacceptable amount of power has been bestowed on the economic development director. Is this constitutional? It is certainly questionable.
The Apple deal began in a cheese factory. Was it a limburger cheese factory, I wonder, because the whole thing really stinks.
Free stuff for rich people and companies? I guess Romney will put an end to that?
Steve Hill, a State appointed official, cannot "waive" taxes for Apple or any company or developer. Elected officials must be held accountable for such major, and in this case outrageous, decisions. The Govornor in 18 months has not created ANY jobs with his new economic development program. Southern Nevada unemployment is again on the rise, and Sandoval, Hill and their great new program have done nothing to find us jobs or create new jobs. The entire state and local ED program is a waste of time and our tax dollars.
One reason Nevada comes to the table with big concessions in mind from the start is our high electricity cost. Without sweeteners to overcome that bitter fact of Nevada business life, our 'economic development team' can't even get in the game. And when they do get in, maybe they are dazzled by the size of a prize like Apple to the point of giving away the store. Those who weren't there can only guess . . . until Mr. Hill publishes his memoirs.
Sebring, really? I don't know where to begin except... how can you possibly count the $89 million as LOST? Are you the same sort who spends the bonus before you've signed the contract?
Nevada didn't PAY anyone. The $89 million was never in Nevada's coffers. If there were no abatements, there would be no Apple either. So, how could we have funded hundreds of start-ups? Does Apple PRECLUDE those 100 start-ups? Or (and I consider this much more likely) does the existence of Apple in our state INVITE start-ups?
Your logic, sir, is dizzying.
"So, let's review.
$89 MILLION in taxes lost
35 jobs (first reported to be 40)
Seriously, 89 MILLION DOLLARS for 35 jobs? WTF?
For $89 million we could create hundreds of start-up businesses each employing dozens of people EACH."
There will be no taxes at all if Apple does not come. That is the rub, knowing how to maximize the taxes he can bring in. Telling Apple they have to pay the full tax will end up minimizing that tax revenue because they won't come. How stupid are you?
"I hope it can be a catalyst for other companies," Sandoval said at Wednesday's meeting. yeah right. Did someone really crap on the Nevada Taxation IT Director Vince Cherpeski's chair and desk? see http://nevadastatepersonnelwatch.wordpre...
Sebring, come on.....I believe the prior comments reflect most people who understand economics. There was nothing lost in Nevada, only gains to our State. This is a great deal for our State if the legislators can get this done.
The only loss occurs to California due to their high taxes.
35 Apple employees at 52,000.00 a year jobs. Teachers and firefighters make more money in this state.