The News & Observer
May 30, 1995
Business incentives under fire
The Associated Press
Copyright © 1995, The News & Observer
A suit challenges the use of tax money to lure industry. Meanwhile,
Alabama might resort to bonds to pay for a Mercedes-Benz plant North Carolina
sought in 1993.
Local governments in North Carolina have continued
to use tax money to attract businesses even as a trial nears in a lawsuit
challenging the constitutionality of business incentives, state officials
said.Used with permission.
William F. Maready, a Winston-Salem lawyer, has sued Winston-Salem and
Forsyth County. Maready claims that using tax money to recruit new businesses
or help existing industries violates the state constitution because public
money cannot be used for a private purpose.
Local government officials say the grants do not violate the state constitution
because they expand the tax base and create jobs, thus satisfying the public-purpose
standard in the constitution.
The trial is scheduled for August.
Economic-development officials in North Carolina say cities and counties
have continued giving grants since Maready sued in February. Forsyth County
has since given two grants totaling $55,000.
But problems with incentive packages have surfaced elsewhere in the
A report last year by officials with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis
said incentives unfairly disrupt market forces, and urged Congress to take
action to stop an "economic war among the states," The Winston-Salem
Since Maready's suit was filed, the attorney general of Georgia has
concluded that an economic-development program violates the Georgia constitution.
Alabama plans to issue up to $145 million in bonds to meet payments
promised to Mercedes-Benz -- a sign that the 1993 deal to bring the automaker
to the state was too costly, as critics said.
North Carolina had fought hard to land the Mercedes-Benz factory --
a $300 million investment that would have created 1,500 jobs -- and offered
an incentive package worth $109 million. State and local governments in
Alabama promised more than $250 million worth of cash, tax breaks and other
Also in 1993, North Carolina voters rejected a proposed constitutional
amendment that would have allowed cities and counties to issue bonds for
industrial improvements without taxpayer approval. It lost by a 4-to-1 ratio.
"There is an increasing awareness on this board and among the public
of the inherent injustice of economic-development-incentive programs,"
said Steve Arnold, a Guilford County commissioner. One part of Alabama's
deal gave Mercedes-Benz a break on its corporate income tax by allowing
the company to use its state tax payments to pay construction costs.
Fob James, Alabama's current governor, has said the tax break probably
was illegal -- as the state's teachers association argued: Under Alabama
law, corporate income taxes must be used for education.
James said this month that the state will have to issue up to $145 million
in bonds to meet the payments promised to Mercedes.
All rights reserved. No part of this article may be
reproduced, translated, or transmitted in any form or by any means without
permission in writing from The News & Observer.
Copyright © 1995, The News & Observer.
| Click here to go to The News & Observer homepage. |
| Case Home
| Out-Box |