Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (46593)	5/24/2004 12:00:49 PM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 794221

Another "anti-Wal Mart" article in the "Times." This one is a massage of a union handout and presented as reporting. "Goodjobs" is an obvious union front. Shameful. The "One Billion" is over an unspecified period of time. These articles remind me of the title Ayn Rand's first speech in Boston. "America's most persecuted minority. Big Business." May 24, 2004 Wal-Mart's Expansion Aided by Many Taxpayer Subsidies By BARNABY J. FEDER Wal-Mart Stores collected well over $1 billion in state and local government subsidies during its decades-long expansion from a regional discount chain to the world's largest retailer, according to a report scheduled to be released today by a group that monitors job-subsidy programs. "We're not accusing them of doing anything illegal or unusual in the corporate world," said Philip Mattera, research director of Good Jobs First, a group based in Washington that compiled the report with financing from the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union. But, Mr. Mattera said, the report argues that the low wages paid by Wal-Mart and the downward effect that has on wages at other retail operations, its negative effect on small businesses in the communities where it locates and its contribution to urban sprawl and traffic raise serious questions about the value of giving it sizable financial incentives to expand. Similar complaints have been leveled against other "big box" retailers like Target and Kmart. But Wal-Mart's size, profitability and capacity to force other retailers to react to its practices make subsidizing its growth especially questionable, Mr. Mattera said. Greg LeRoy, founder of Good Jobs, said the report bolstered the group's argument that taxpayer-financed subsidies to giant retailers should be restricted to those expanding into poor neighborhoods where shoppers are underserved. Good Jobs also lobbies states and communities to require companies to pay what it calls a "living wage" to all workers as a condition for getting subsidies and urges that subsidy agreements include strong "clawback" provisions. Such restrictions require companies to repay subsidies if they fail to deliver on jobs or other benefits they project in their applications. A Wal-Mart spokeswoman, Mona Williams, said the retailer, which was not provided with a copy of the report, did not know the correct subsidy total. But, she said, if $1 billion is correct, Wal-Mart could make good use of the figure in its advertising. In the last 10 years, she said, Wal-Mart has collected more than $52 billion in sales taxes, paid $4 billion in local property taxes, and paid $192 million in income and unemployment taxes to local governments. "It looks like offering tax incentives to Wal-Mart is a jackpot investment for local governments," she said. Wal-Mart, based in Bentonville, Ark., has more than 2,900 Wal-Mart stores and 91 distribution centers in the United States. It also has more than 530 Sam's Club stores and nearly 70 Neighborhood Markets, which were not covered in the report issued today. The company had net income of nearly $9.1 billion on revenues of $256.3 billion last year. Good Jobs said it found published reports of 91 Wal-Mart stores having received tax refunds or credits, job training funds, community investment in roads and other subsidies ranging from $1 million to $12 million. The total was $245 million. In interviews with Good Jobs, local officials provided data indicating that 84 of Wal-Mart's distribution centers received subsidies averaging $7.4 million, for a total of $624 million. And searches of databases for tax-exempt bonds issued by state and local authorities to provide low-interest financing found that such benefits to Wal-Mart cut $138 million off the cost of developing 69 stores. "The actual total is certainly far higher but the records are scattered in thousands of places and many subsidies are undisclosed," the report said. The report focused strictly on development subsidies. Critics of Wal-Mart say that wages in its stores are so low that many employees are eligible for food stamps and that lack of medical benefits leaves them dependent on taxpayer-financed medical services, which amounts to a large hidden subsidy. In an e-mailed statement, Wal-Mart said its wages were "usually greater than those paid to other nonunion retail workers and virtually identical to those of unionized grocery workers." It said it also offered a range of fringe benefits. Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company EDIT: Here is a blog comment. However, WM seems to be fighting back more than its opponents would like. It directly responds to charges that it takes too much from government: In the last 10 years, she said, Wal-Mart has collected more than $52 billion in sales taxes, paid $4 billion in local property taxes, and paid $192 million in income and unemployment taxes to local governments. "It looks like offering tax incentives to Wal-Mart is a jackpot investment for local governments," she said. That's an incorrect comparison. The question is whether, absent WM, the government tax revenue would have been the same--but without the subsidy. Sloppy thinking on all sides on this one. WM also gives a new twist to the charges that it spends too little in wages: Wal-Mart said its wages were "usually greater than those paid to other nonunion retail workers and virtually identical to those of unionized grocery workers." To my knowledge WM has never claimed that it pays its workers wages "virtually identical" to those of unionized grocers. alwayslowprices.net