Oh no! Utah is doing it again. It's subsidizing private venture! Just like all of our professional stadiums. This is horrible! Increasing the economy in Utah and creating new jobs, who would want that?

I'm willing to bet no one throws up their arms in protest like those who did just that in regards to the recent construction of the RSL stadium. Utahns should all take a course in economics before complaining about government creating incentives for businesses and individuals. It's pathetic how short-sighted some of us are.

Utah would be an excellent choice for P & G. A strong, smart and stable work force, low humidity, and our earthquakes so far haven't been as large as California's. It's a no-brainer!

Thank you!!!

You are absolutely correct! Gov't should use incentives to draw private companies. But when they use taxes, it is made up somewhere. Hold on to your wallet!

This deal and RSL seem like very different deals. Both have the opportunity for positive economic impact but the first line of the article said its a rebate which would indicate to me that the company has to "PAY" first before the state pays anything. In fact as I read the article further it seems to me the state is only giving back 30 cents on the dollar. I don't know about you but if you gave me a buck and then told me some time later I only had to return 30 cents, I would do that deal every time. Wouldn't you?

Be clear - this is exactly the same deal (almost to the dollar) as the RSL stadium. SCP had to fork out $110M before the state would write the check, making it a rebate.

People, government gives money to private businesses all the time! Why do they do it? Because they have the potential to get even more money back through taxes on those businesses and taxes on the money its employees make. It's called an investment, and it's a major source of income for almost all governing bodies. Utahns need to stop being so afraid that the government is out to get them & bleed them dry.

WOW! Eighty five Million!

110 Million!

MIND BOGELING!!!!

Anonymous:

Your comment suggests that you feel the incentives include taking money out of current tax revenue. This is not the case. Instead, the government is offering a cut on the taxes that Procter and Gamble would have to pay for a time.

When all the numbers are done, Utah citizens and state tax commision would all come out winners, as the revenue that the business would bring into the state far exceeds the tax cuts.

As a past Box Elder County resident, I hope this works out for Utah.

Congrats to our Governor and the leaders working on this opportunity. This would be great for Utah and especially for Box Elder County if this works out. The numbers are simple enough to run and I am sure the fiscal analysts have done them and checked them twice to make sure that this is a net increase to Utah's economy. I for one am glad Utah is trying to be more competitive recruiting top companies.

Many people have a negative opinion of tax money subsidizing the RSL stadium in Sandy. Do the same people have a negative opinion of tax money subsidizing other corporations, such as Micron, IM Flash, and now Procter & Gamble?

It would not take long to bring up the Stadium issue. And look, it's on the first comment!

Utahns can not continue to complain about low wages if they get upset about the state putting out incentives to bring jobs here.

What happens if there are more jobs than people...wages go up.

Tax money for soccer ‘entertainment’ and money for job creation are two different things. Without employment nobody could go watch soccer. Not that many pay to see it anyway. Why just this morning on 103.5 the arrow, the DJ’s were laughing about how they can't even give away RSL tickets.

Soccer doesn’t have an economic impact like a plant that employs thousands of people. Also, P&G is a proven company, RSL is a soccer team that has little support and will eventually fail.

So we have the Governor's Economic Development commission offering $85 million in taxpayer dollars to bring a plant to Utah that will produce throwaway paper products.

At the same time we have the Governor's Global Warming commission telling us that our carbon footprint is too big and we're killing Mother Gaia.

Make up your mind, Governor Silver-Spoon. Do we want economic growth, or not?

If so, then stop pretending that we need to cut down on carbon emissions.

If not, then don't waste taxpayer dollars to subsidize a factory that will surely increase our "carbon footprint".

Wow, soccer vs. jobs, that might be the most ignorant anti-soccer post I've ever seen (and I've seen a few). Let's analyze your statement point by point, shall we?:

"Not that many pay to see it anyway" - Ummm, actually RSL averages 16,000 paid per game. That's a statistical tie with the Jazz, yet RSL has 1/20th the payroll. RSL is 4th in MLS in attendance.

"Soccer doesn't have the economic impact like a plant that employs thousands" - You do know that when Real Madrid and the U.S. National Team came that each game brought over $10M in out of state revenue, right? 100% of that was discretionary spending. How long would it take "thousands" of employees to spend that much disposable income?

"RSL is a soccer team that has little support....." - See my comments above.

".....and will eventually fail" - What makes you think that? Where's your evidence? Just because you don't like or understand soccer doesn't mean it will fail.

Yep, your comment was a real gem. Full of truth and facts and all that.

Thanks for posting that data. The old "soccer stinks" crowd don't realize the impact of having an MLS franchise had on Utah. Soccer is only going to appreciate in value for the coming generations. RSL is going to be part of it.

It is my understanding that the property has already been purchased about three miles west of Bear River City in Box Elder County.

I'm embarrassed by some of the comments from my native state. I have lived away from Utah for the past 24 years. I love Utah, but I cannot comprehend your hestitation with this company. By the above comments, I am led to believe that you simply do not understand the positive impact that Procter and Gamble will have on your community and State. Where P & G is: good things happen. Small communities and larger ones all benefit from the numerous projects and organizations that Procter and Gamble consistently is involved in. For the past 23 years we've been a Procter and Gamble family. Read, get informed, ask questions and then make your comments.

For good or bad, tax dollars for economic development is the way the game is played by all states. I would much rather have my taxes help subsidize a business of this type which can bring tangible economic benefits to Utah than a ridiculous soccer stadium that is merely a status symbol for Checketts and his bunch that will likely struggle to stay financially afloat. More people in Utah and elsewhere will notice and care that a P&G plant is located in Utah than an unnecessary stadium for a sport that relatively few adults care about.

Read the article! No Utah citizen tax dollars are being used or will be used for the "$85 Million dollar" P&G deal. P&G will have to generate tax in payroll, corporate income and sales tax paid to the tax commission before they get a dime REBATED. The state is not writing a check. If I give you a dollar today and asked for 30 cents "BACK" next week, "who" is giving "who" money? Think about it. P&G is giving Utah a dollar and they are getting 30 cents back AFTER the money has been paid and sitting in the Utah Tax Commision bank account. Its not tax payer dollars. Seems clear to me! That being said, the P&G deal is NOT the same as the RSL deal.

Internationally, bribery is a crime. Within the United States, bribery is the method that the individual states use against one another to attract business. Call it what it is.

I'm surprised that no one seems to differentiate between giving a tax rebate to encourage a soccer stadium and in giving a rebate to encourage a fine manufacturing and distribution to locte in Utah.
The soccer stadium collects its revenue from Utahns, not from out-of-state customers. Thus it is like making money by taking in each others' washing.
On the other hand, P & G products produced in Utah will be overwelmingly purchased by out-of-state customers. This brings new revenue into the state!

The Utah incentive program makes sense in that it rewards the out-of-state company for what they do, not for what they assume and promise they will do.

"No Utah citizen tax dollars are being used or will be used for the "$85 Million dollar" P&G deal. P&G will have to generate tax in payroll, corporate income and sales tax paid to the tax commission before they get a dime REBATED. The state is not writing a check. Think about it. P&G is giving Utah a dollar and they are getting 30 cents back AFTER the money has been paid and sitting in the Utah Tax Commision bank account. Its not tax payer dollars. Seems clear to me! "

The fact that such convoluted logic and ignorant math seems clear to you, indicates that the quality of education in this country is declining faster than I thought.

This is really a sad commentary on the intelligence of the american tax payer.

You are aware that if their tax burden is $100, and big brother gives them back $30, then there is $30 that has to be made up by the rest of the taxpayers????

Good grief. Free money for everyone!!! Come and get it from BE CLEAR!!

John, get real!! Their tax burden will be zero if they do not move to Utah!! You are the one with convoluted logic and of economic reality. I suppose you will dismiss my thoughts as evidence of a lack of economic education on my part since I merely received my MBA from Harvard Business School.

#Are you serious:

"actually RSL averages 16,000 paid...4th in MLS in attendance."

You're conveniently skipping over how both of those figures have dropped consistently over the past years. MLS isn't new anymore. And the team just doesn't win games. That's not destined to bring in new converts.

"RSL has 1/20th the payroll" (Compared to Jazz).

Unless the taxpayers are footing the bill for the players' payroll, this isn't even relevant to the discussion.

"When (two major exhibition games came)...each brought over $10M in out of state revenue... How long would it take thousands of employeees to spend that much..etc"

Since new employees are residents rather than visitors, a fair comparison between the two must include employees' full income, not disposable, when calculating the impact on our economy.

300 employees at an average of $43k equates to $12.9M in the first year alone. Also per the article, $400M in 10 years and over a billion in 20.

RSL's every-other-year event bringing in $10m is nice, but ain't even close to those figures.

Giving up $85M in taxes for $280M return seems a decent investment, especially since otherwise they'll just build elsewhere and send that huge revenue to someone else.

@John:

"You are aware that if their tax burden is $100, and big brother gives them back $30, thenthere is $30 that has to be made up by the rest of the taxpayers????"

Let's be a little more realistic.

If their tax burden is $100, and we give them back $30, but because this plant has opened in Utah and employed Utah residents, we bring in $50 in income taxes and $60 more in sales taxes, I would have to say we've come out ahead, wouldn't you?

If you add that all up, you've got $210 in tax revenue coming in, minus $30 being rebated, for $180 in net tax revenue that can go to good use. Or, they can build in some other state whose residents can figure this out, and we can get... hmm.. diddley-squat?

"This is really a aad commentary on the intelligence of the american tax payer."

Your post is a sad commentary on the intelligence of the average tax whiner. I look at this deal and see more revenue coming in than going out because I look at the whole picture, not JUST the rebate. Try it.

John,

A simple "You were right, I was wrong" will show contributing to this BLOG was worth the time spent. Insulting me or my intellegence is your right, not admitting that you may be misinformed or uneducated on the matter would be the true "sad commentary". Thanks Dave and Dave for sharing "unconvoluted" logic.