Hey, there! Log in / Register
World sneaker headquarters: Reebok moving to Boston
By adamg on Thu, 11/03/2016 - 10:10am
The Globe reports the sneaker company wants to flee Canton for new digs in our very own Hub, joining New Balance and Converse.
Of course, the move will be accompanied by layoffs. And, of course, even though the company already said it's moving to Boston, the mayor's office is looking at what sort of tax breaks it can unwrap as a housewarming gift.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Did Marty lean economics from
Did Marty lean economics from 'Crazy Eddie' Antar or something? These tax giveaways are INSANE!
Which tax giveaways are you referring to?
Because the Globe article says "John Barros, the city’s economic development chief, said the company hasn’t yet discussed the possibility of a property tax break, but city officials haven’t ruled one out."
Perhaps you didn't read the article, but I think Adam was chumming the waters a bit with his "already looking at tax breaks" comment, which seems pretty inaccurate. I mean, they haven't even discussed it with Reebok, much less said yes or no.
There are good reasons to be critical of that sort of economic incentive, and possibly good situations in which to use them. But it makes no sense to criticize a decision that hasn't even been made.
Why even broach the subject of tax incentives then?
"Hey, Corporate Giant, you forgot to ask for a tax break! Don't worry, we're listening!"
That is worth criticizing. Loudly.
With such plentiful tax breaks on offer
Why should be vote for a CPA tax increase? Seems to me the city and BRA, oh I mean the independent agency that calls itself the BPDA, are always so eager to deal away taxes and land, and public goods - think sunshine in public parks- that they shouldn't be asking for pocket change from the public when giving millions to the corporations.
I voted for Marty. Sorry.
I've been trying to give him the benefit of the doubt through his various missteps and debacles, from Long Island to the Olympics to the Grand Prix, but this is the last straw. It's no longer a question of WHAT is he thinking. He's not THINKING at all.
We forgive you
I think many voters are feeling like they got duped. No worries.
I didn't vote for him.
I voted for the least "towniest" candidate. Our city missed a chance to take Boston to the next level....
Vote Marty out in 2017!!!
Love to....
But somebody needs to emerge as a viable challenger-easier said than done.
Some time ago
Somebody on UHub commented that companies were actually moving into the city from the suburbs to get away from car culture, and was attacked for it because it wasn't 1970s thinking or something - despite naming several companies who had done so.
I don't remember who it was, but he was right.
Instead of Tax Breaks these
Instead of Tax Breaks these companies should demand guaranteed improvements, service levels, and future expansion for public transit. It'd be about the same in the end (rather than decreasing revenue, you leave it flat and spend it) but wind up benefiting the entire Metro area for years to come.
nah
you'd just have groups of locals complaining that the parking lots for the new MBTA improvements and extensions etc were too big/small/cast a shadow somewhere
improvements?
improvements? NIMBY!!!!!!!!!!
Getting away from car culture
Getting away from car culture, also known as not paying the remaining employees enough to own a car.
Suey!
Come on piggies.. time to eat!
This is why massive deals like GE are very wrong for the city. They set a precedent that the city might bend over and hand out tax breaks to every company that wants to move here. Companies are now aware of this and going "Where's mine?!?" I'm aware we've been giving tax breaks for years but in recent years these "breaks" have just gotten obscene.
It's great that companies want to relocate here to the city, however they are doing it for the wrong reasons.
GE and Reebok
Are very different deals. If you're trying to lure a company here and have a tax break that will still generate revenue for the city (and won't strain services), that's a positive. If a company states it's moving to your city, and you're STILL trying to give them breaks, that's foolish.
It's the same
A tax break is a tax break is a tax break. You can spin it anyway you want, it's still a tax break. No matter who it is.
However,
I actually agree with you for once (which is rare). Its like the movie tax break we had.. it was a blanket tax break for everyone. So movie companies, big or small, came in droves to take advantage of it. I'm totally OK with this. But to give special sweatheart deals to select companies to put the ink into a contract into getting someone moving here is not OK. At least make it a blanket tax break so every business can enjoy the benefits. The more businesses moving here, the more the off set of that blank tax break will be. (meaning the more people come, the less of a 'hit' it has on the city since the outcome would be greater than if we did not have the break)
Who says they announced before they were given?
Did they issue a press release saying that they're moving, and then their next call was to the main city number, to ask if they could speak with the mayor, about possibly getting some tax breaks?
Doesn't any business that saw the GE deal know that deals with Boston are done deals before anyone hears about it?
And who would be the loser company who would move to Boston now getting a tax deal first? That CEO would get fired.
And then we gnash our teeth
Because people like Donald Trump take advantages of the tax breaks given to them by a Democratic Mayor and a 13 member Democratic City Council. This is absolutely trickle down economics. The politicians give us good Northeastern liberals what we want: womens choice, pro-lgbt, pro-diversity, etc., but on the matters that really matter = $ they are still owned by the rich and give the rich what they want which is more money and lower or no taxes. We only have the face in the mirror to blame for this.
If only we paid attention to what our government was up to as closely as we paid attention to what our athletes do.
What is the PARP value of Marty Walsh?
(PARP = Politician Above Replacement Politician)
Kitten
Welcome to the club. I've been paying attention and bitchin about this for years.
Pretty sure those things were not just 'given'
I am definitely on the no-special-tax-breaks-for-big-corps side. However...
You make it sound like reproductive rights, lgbt and racial equality laws were an easy get - 'Oh sure, we'll pass those to keep the rabble quiet and happy'. But regardless of whether you think those changes in civil rights law were a good idea or not, there's no denying that it took decades of hard work by a huge number of really dedicated people to make them happen.
Also, the idea that fiscal issues, and not civil rights, are the only things "that really matter" is just silly. Both are important, and letting pols screw up either is shirking one's responsibility as a citizen.
PUMA too
PUMA has a huge office in downtown Boston, I think its their worldwide marketing and PR office, and their North American Headquarters is in Westford.
Hmm, there might be a post coming up ...
You've reminded me that Boston actually used to be quite the footwear city - maybe not the shoes themselves, but of the companies that made the machinerry that made the shoes. We were home to United Shoe Machinery Co., whose downtown headquarters still stands - as does the Cambridge headquarters of its BB Chemical subsidiary (that white art-deco building on Memorial Drive that most people probably know better as the old Polaroid building).
And hey, there's even a tenuous Gaffin-family connection. My uncle was a shoe jobber in New York (basically, he'd buy discards from department stores, then re-sell them to smaller stores) and he used to make regular visits to Boston to buy shoes (there was that one time he imported shoes direct from Italy; alas, Gaffinetti shoes never took off). Plus, my father-in-law started off as an adhesives chemist at that BB Chemical building in Cambridge.
Another example to Vote NO on Question 5
This article and the heading of my post says it all.