Another Reason Not To Hire

Quote from dumb_mother:

if a 30$ once a year tax is enough not to hire someone you must live in china or india

You have to consider the costs in aggregate. It's a gigantic ruse to simply focus on one cost while collectively these costs are a back breaker for many businesses.
 
Quote from BigDan:

If they're spending on paying the unemployed, why not just refrain from firing people?
Because the tax is based on active employee wages (at least here in IL).
 
Quote from datamerc:

Because the tax is based on active employee wages (at least here in IL).

That is about the jist of it. Employers of size play the numbers and name game for tax purposes. If you have an associate that is on indefinate layoff but still on rolls there is a tax benefit. You can keep thier 401k money locked in and still show them on the books in an obscure way. As far as labor jobs and service job go outsourcing is still the mantra. The government is making the correct moves by taxing these corporations, so they must either pay up of pull out. Then next step in game is to have a phantom HQ over in another country, 60 Minutes has an episode devoted to this. Then the issue for the corporations becomes repatriating the profits. the game goes on and on ... The game will end when full globalization occurs. There will no where to hide for the corperations. IN the states nothing major for hiring will occur until after the 2012 election. How can you plan 10 years down the road if you are not certain which way the US will go. There is a major shift in sentinment for all demographics in the US. The change in a couple key NY areas was the tell.

Welcome to Neo Fuedalism,

Akuma
 
Quote from denner:

You have to consider the costs in aggregate. It's a gigantic ruse to simply focus on one cost while collectively these costs are a back breaker for many businesses.

This tax increase is no different than any other.

The employees ultimately foot the bill by getting a lower annual raise or starting salary.
 
Back
Top