Should cities be allowed to offer private companies economic incentives to relocate?

Yes, IF and ONLY IF the city needs the business to thrive + its not hurting anyone who lives in the area.

Yes, as long as the environment is protected, and the company hired local residents for new jobs created

Only if they are relocating to Canada and not moving away and that the subsidy is smaller than the return.

This needs a more nuanced stance. Will the relocate benefit the citizens of the area? Are there other local business that can fulfill the need with support on their own? Is the company a multinational that will take money out of the country? It is not an easy yes/no decision.

I don't think they should, but they should be allowed to if the people of that city agree and if there's a high chance the tax revenue will exceed the incentives. A better strategy I think would be to spend money on improving infrastructure and the community to attract companies

I donr think they should, but they should be allowed to if the people of that city agree and if there's a high chance the tax revenue will exceed the incentives. A better strategy I think would be to spend money on improving infrastructure and the community to attract companies

That is up to each municipality to ensure that public officials enter into meaningful and productive contracts that attempt to benefit that community. Any official that willfully misleads the public and/or receives payoffs for promoting or agreeing to such an arrangement should be prosecuted and if convicted, EXECUTED. Did you hear that Trudildeau?

Yes, but I would prefer to abolish corporate taxes to benefit all companies in Canada and also punish them for moving jobs out of the country by mean of tariff when they import their products in Canada.

Yes, but it depends on the needs of each community, and if that money could be better spent on infrastructur

yeah as long as the private companies can say no? like you can OFFER anything they just dont need to say yes

Yes, as long as it benefits the local economy, population, creates tax revenue and doesn't harm the environment

Yes, but MAKE SURE that the money is well spent, meaning the benefits exceed the drawbacks!

Yes, as long as they stay in Canada.

No, and we need to nationalize private companies, or give the employees control of them.

Depends on the community and it's needs.

Depends on the community and it's needs. Both can work.

I think it depends on each community's needs. If private companies would bring enough revenue in to be able to advance with other community projects, then municipal governments should pursue that as an option. But, if you have the opportunity and the resources to make your community a better place for everyone, by building amenities that everyone can use, it would be my own personal opinion that this is usually the best course of action.

If you can, spend that money on benefitting the community. But, depending on the business, it could also be in a city's best interest to offer money to relocate.

It really depends on the situation of each municipality, because while it's easy to say that we should spend that money on infrastructure to attract businesses and make it a desirable place to live, what if the company builds that infrastructure that could make it attractive for the city? It's really hard to say.

Cities should be allowed to offer economic incentives for businesses to relocate, however it should also focus on improving the community, and infrastructure within to make it more desirable for people to live. It should also have high standards, such as environmental protections/and other regulations so that businesses can't get away with cutting costs at the expense of the environment/other issues.

Only if they stay in Canada.

As long as it's within the country, and they should be required to hire locals.

Yes, unless this practise leads to a race to the bottom

No, instead cities can eliminate the corporate taxes

No, instead cities can lower the corporate taxes to benefit all local companies

Yes, but they can only move forward with that incentive if they owner consents

No, private companies should be nationalised

Nationalize all corporations

they should be forced to move with no reward if they’re upsetting any local atmosphere or ecosystem with zero help from our tax paying dollars

All of the above . Its ok to offer ince tive to bribg new businesses to your area but not by giving them the key to the city and paying nothing while the others already there have to pick up the slack . Not at the expence of the environment , bring new jobs , to area helps the local economy , increases tax revenue , which can then be used for infrastructure, parks , and amenities. Federally though it would be nice to see jobs leavibg the country for cheaper labor get hit with higher tarrif taxes to bring it back here to the point it didnt make sence to leave in the first place . Buy local , buy canadian

Yes, but need to be careful about stealing jobs out from other municipalities instead of trying to equitably share job availability.

Yes as long as it benefits the community.

This has been a boondoggle so often i would say not.

Yes but nit in competition with other Canadian cities.

Yes, for local Canadian business and as long as the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives

very complicated. If it will be a more benefit to the community as a whole then yes. This includes keeping environmental integrity and of course showing that the tax revenue exceeds tax incentives

Need an example

Yes, but only if the local environment is not compromised, the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents, and local citizens can vote on the amount of incentives to offer

Yes, as long as any incentives have a short shelf life and that companies contribute fairly, in time, to the city’s economy. I’d like to see very clear commitments made on both sides eg. hiring local work force, fair tax incentives to start.

Yes, as long as local economies do not suffer and as long as citizens vote in favour

Im confused.

No, this takes tax funding from public schools, health care etc.

Too Capitalist

As long as they stay in Canada, yes. But citizens should be allowed to vote on the incentives with the government.

As long as it remains within environmental standards and benefits the community long term.

Yes but no bidding wars

Depends on individual case

We should punish or make moving jobs out of the country less appealing. We can spend the money on improving infrastructure, and the community to attract companies.

No, incentives should go to local citizens to create citizen-run enterprises that are anchored in the community and can never relocate.

Yes if the company creates jobs by hiring locally, the local environment is not compromised, and as long as tax revenue eventually exceed the incentives.

Yes, but only if the people and the local legislatures agree

No, we should not allow private companies any incentives tax them at 60% and regulate them and if they break rules dissolve them, Government must own all business.

No, focus on improving infrastructure and the community, as well as do NOT compromise the local environment, also punish them for moving jobs out of the country

Yes only if they are relocating in Canada

Depends on a lot of factors.

helps the local economy

Yes but only if it opens up new areas for farmland and natural growth

Yes, but as long as they stay in Canada

It depends on what the community, provincial and even national interest is, and it should be dependent on these, as well as what works for each community.

Yes, as long as it is in Canada

Citizens should be able to vote on the incentive, and it shouldn't compromise the enviroment

As long as the environment is not harmed in the process

No, the cities should look into expanding local companies so that the employment rate will go up in the process

Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised and the tax revenue will exceed the incentives

Depends on each community and it's needs.

No, spend that money on improving infrastructure and the community to attract companies and punish them for moving jobs out of the country.

no more private companies, period. it belongs to the state ❤️

How would the arrival of a big corporation in your town change your day-to-day life, for better or worse?

Nationalize all Industry

How might a city ensure that the benefits of hosting a giant corporation outweigh the sacrifices made in tax incentives?

No, Lower Corporate Taxes to benefit all local companies

If a company's arrival means a rise in your city's cost of living, is it still worth the economic incentives provided?

Yes as long as the environment isn't harmed and it is beneficial such as providing more jobs for locals and people overall, etc.

In what ways could a community benefit from having a major corporation like Amazon move in, apart from job creation?

No, it is generally a bad idea for the government subsidize private businesses.

Yes as long as the company plans to employ local citizens of the area and I would prefer a lower corporate tax for all businesses, but I believe personally that this should be left to the states.

Yes, it should be allowed, but it should not be mandatory for private companies to relocate if they do not wish to.

The city should decide whether or not they want to relocate.

yes but environment, hire locals, punish for outsourcing

Yes, but only as long as the tax revenue will eventually exceed the incentives, the local environment is not compromised, and it benefits the community.

Yes, and increased spending on infrastructure will further attract companies

Yes, as long as the the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents, the local environment is not compromised, and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives.

Yes, as long as the the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents, the local environment is not compromised, and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives

Yes, as long as the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives

Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised, the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, and the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents

All of the yes options but the last one (lower corp tax). Set the standard to 25% nationally and 2.5% state and 2.5% municipal.

Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised, the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, and the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents.

Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives

Yes, as long as the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, the local environment is not compromised, and the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents

Yes, as long as the local environment is not compromised, the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents, and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives.

Yes, as long as three criteria are met: the local environment is not compromised, the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, and the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents

Yes, as long as three criteria are met: the local environment is not compromised; the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives; the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents

Yes, but only if three criteria are met: the local environment is not compromised, the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives, and the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents

Yes, as long as three criteria are met: the local environment is not compromised, the company promises to create new jobs by hiring local residents, and the tax revenue will eventually exceed the tax incentives

Yes, within the country

I need more information for an opinion.

I need more information to decide.

Yes, but they should be persuaded not to

No, this gives unnecessary power to the government and would waste taxpayer money