Question: In this economy, with Obama and Dayton’s regulations strangling you, with Minnesota’s and the IRS’ already-high business tax rates on top and Obamacare looming in the near future, please tell us: will Dayton’s proposal of a one-time $3,000 tax break in 2012 (and half that in 2012) to hire a veteran,unemployed person or recent graduate have a drastic effect – or any real effect at all – on your hiring decisions?
I’d especially like to hear from businesspeople – people who make payroll and do the actual hiring.
Depending on the job, $3,000 could be less than a month’s salary. Doesn’t move the needle at all. Wouldn’t even pay for a temp.
I no longer run my own business; but when I did, a tax credit would not have helped my monthly cash-flow. To get a tax credit, you have to pay the tax up front, then wait for a refund; but I instantly incur the additional unemployment, worker’s comp premium and payroll taxes.
Although . . . my grandkids are all unemployed, being primary school age. If I hired them on December 31 and they quit the next day, times $3,000 each, hmmm… .
Who is John Galt?
“Who is John Galt?”
He’s likely to be all of us should the load become too much to carry!
Nate, it is kind of like the JOBZ zone. In theory I support them. I understand it helped Pipestone compete with South Dakota.
But any company with smart management will look for ways to manipulate it. Was it Polaris? They got freebies to build a facility in Wyoming (or somewhere up I-35), and then closed a facility elsewhere in Minnesota.
Its called crony capitalism.
Instead, just have a favorable business climate and don’t hand out targeted corporate welfare. I think the left and right can agree on that.
No effect. I cannot hire someone unless cashflow and demand allows. Even if it were close enough that a government subsidy “pushed it over the edge,” I wouldn’t do it. What the government gives, it can take away. Especially coupled with the bevy of obligations to the government that hiring entails, it doesn’t make sense to risk it, especially for a small business.
“In this economy, with Obama and Dayton’s regulations strangling you…”
Type first, fact check never?
Obama’s White House has approved fewer business regulations than his predecessor George W. Bush at this same point in their tenures, and the estimated costs of those rules haven’t reached the annual peak set in fiscal 1992 under Bush’s father, according to government data.
As a local small business owner with 2 locations I can say that
Are business regulations really measured only by quantity now? That sounds like total BS to my. 🙂
bs;
There is one big difference; at least neither Bush used the NLRB (read UNIONS!) and the EPA as proxies to enact job killing regulations and rules like the Kenyan Klown does!