Big Box Worries Come Back to Chicago

Let them just try to open a Wal-Mart in Chicago. If Chicago really hates it (as opposed to a few government elites bought off by political pressure groups hating it), then nobody will go to the Wal-Mart.

Then, it closes within a year due to zero customers, and the company never ventures inside the city limits again.

A fair test. Let’s go for it.

Perhaps Mr. Randall and those in positions of power to do a job FOR Chicagoans,instead of ON Chicagoans and Illinois residents in general ,should resolve this issue for now and for the future, to wit :"Why Wal-Mart Set Up Shop In Italy “[Wall Street Journal]

More than 4,500 miles separate a small Wal-Mart Stores Inc. office in Florence, Italy, from the company’s dozens of Illinois retail outlets. But thanks to a convoluted tax arrangement, court records show, Wal-Mart’s Italian operation has helped the giant retailer cut its state tax bill in Illinois by millions of dollars a year.

Wal-Mart set its affairs so that its Italian outpost is the only operating unit of a real-estate subsidiary that controls billions of dollars of the retailer’s property in Illinois and other states. Because technically its only employees are based in Italy, the real-estate unit claims its operations are foreign, exempt from Illinois corporate income taxes.

Earlier this year, the Illinois Department of Revenue objected to the Italian tax maneuver, demanding $26.4 million in back taxes, interest and penalties. Wal-Mart paid the amount in dispute and then sued the state for a refund, according to a complaint filed in May in Illinois Circuit Court in Springfield, Ill.

A Wal-Mart spokesman declined to comment beyond a prepared statement: “We have a disagreement with the state of Illinois over our tax liability last year, and we’ve asked a judge to resolve that for us.” He declined to explain why Italy was chosen as the home of this particular foreign operation or whether Wal-Mart has other such arrangements.

For a few additional words from another thread:What’s lost in most of the media coverage about this case is why it really matters and what can be done to prevent these kinds of corporate tax shenanigans in the future. 

There is a change we can make to our state tax laws that would prevent corporations from trying many of these types of tax schemes in the future. It’s called “combined reporting.”

Under this system, multi-state corporations would have to file a report with the state that discloses their entire business structure, including related entities. This would include relationships with holding companies like the one Wal-Mart owned 99 percent of and paid its rent to. Over time, using this strategy to close corporate loopholes would raise hundreds of millions of dollars that could be used for investments in things like education and roads or put back into the hands of working families by expanding the state earned income tax credit. (WMW) That certainly would return tax revenue to its rightful owners,the citizens of Illinois......and NOT to a sham investment trust in Italy.

Here is a resource tool for communites to assisst in brokering better deals:"THE IDEAL DEAL”
NEW HANDBOOK GIVES LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS
SMART TOOLS FOR BETTER DEALS

Chicago and Washington—Local governments can write more effective contracts to improve the odds that companies receiving economic development incentives keep their promises to create good jobs and other community benefits - or pay taxpayers back.

That’s the message from “The Ideal Deal: How Local Governments Can Get More for Their Economic Development Dollar,” a new handbook released today by Good Jobs First and the Center for Urban Economic Development (CUED) at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

The handbook is co-authored by Dr. Rachel Weber, Associate Professor in the Urban Planning and Policy Program at the University of Illinois at Chicago and attorney David A. Santacroce, Clinical Professor with the University of Michigan Clinical Law Program. Weber has extensive experience surveying localities and writing about best incentive-deal practices; Santacroce has litigated and written about legal remedies for failed incentive deals.

“We are pleased to share best practices we have culled from local development officials,” said Weber. “Everyone benefits when deals are clearly defined - taxpayers, communities and employers alike.”

“No one likes to spend too much on a deal, and no one wants to sue if a deal doesn’t pan out,” said Santacroce. “Deliberate procedures and thorough contracts minimize the odds that problems will develop.”

The report takes local economic development practitioners step-by-step through the different elements of contracts that treat public incentive packages as a quid pro quo for public benefits. Each section discusses a different element of the ideal deal: valuation of public costs and benefits, performance standards, disclosure and oversight, and enforcement.  The report is freely available at www.goodjobsfirst.org/pdf/idealdeal. (Good Jobs First)Note: Please pay special attention to the fact that not only is the byline ,Chicago, but,the handbook is co-authored by Dr. Rachel Weber, Associate Professor in the Urban Planning and Policy Program at the University of Illinois at Chicago.That certainly would merit a second look,for the concerned citizens of Chicago.

How do you know ddrb? Do you live in Illinois?

Chicagoan: How do I know what? As a matter of fact,I do have lomg term family ties to Chicago.

A fair test. Let’s go for it.

How about cleaning up the 300+ dark stores before we blight the landscape with “test” stores?