Michigan Should Reject Special Corporate Developer Bills

Senate bills 111-115 being considered

The Michigan Legislature is considering a package of bills that would give a few lucky developers special subsidies. Senate Bills 111-115 are unfair, ineffective and irrational and lawmakers should reject them.

These bills allow a handful of well-connected builders to get subsidies paid for from money that would otherwise fund government programs. Someone who starts a development — say, a sports stadium — would be selected by Lansing and, after putting up the initial capital, be able to take money from taxes paid by nearby individuals and taxpayers and keep it.

 

 

The research on these types of deals is clear: Tax increment financing and other selective business subsidies don’t work. For two decades, Michigan’s MEGA program — which gave tax breaks to corporations — created less than 20 percent of the jobs it promised while 96 percent of projects failed to live up to expectations. Research showed that MEGA had zero or a negative impact on job growth, but taxpayers are paying out billions because of it. Recent studies of TIF programs, similar to what these bills allow, show they result in fewer jobs and lower income and do little to help local cities.

Stay Engaged

Receive our weekly emails!

Michigan legislators recently rejected a bill to cut the income tax rate for everyone, saying it would be too costly. How can we afford subsidies for big business when we can’t afford a tax cut for families? Rather than give away up to $1.8 billion in taxpayer money to well-connected crony capitalists, lawmakers should allow regular people to keep more of what they are owed.

Members of the House Tax Policy are now considering the bills. The lawmakers on that committee, who can be reached through the links below, are:

Jim Tedder, R-Clarkston
David Maturen, R-Vicksburg
Martin Howrylak, R-Troy
Klint Kesto, R-Commerce Township
Peter Lucido, R-Shelby Township
Hank Vaupel, R-Fowlerville
Steven Johnson, R-Wayland
Bronna Kahle, R-Clinton
James Lower, R-Ionia
Wendell Byrd, D-Detroit
Sheldon Neely, D-Flint
Jim Ellison, D-Royal Oak
Abdullah Hammoud, D-Dearborn.


Related Articles:

Economic Interference Week

Why Government Fails at Economic Development

Will Republicans Backtrack on Corporate Welfare Cuts?

Do Not Assume Economic Development Spending is Effective

Calls to Expand Michigan’s Economic Development Programs Fall Short

Michigan Employers Create Thousands of Jobs without the Aid of Politicians

Stay Engaged

Simply enter your email below to receive our weekly email:

Facebook
Twitter

There aren’t many policies that get near unanimous support from economists, but free trade is one of them. Despite this, a central theme of the 2016 presidential campaign, heard from both political parties, was that free trade was somehow harmful to the United States and corrective action was needed. Mark Perry, an economics professor at the University of Michigan-Flint and scholar with the American Enterprise Institute, makes the case for why President Trump’s assessment of free trade is misguided.

Related Sites