There's a third option: forbid states and municipalities from offering incentives to individual organizations like this.

If the company wants to move to a location (or stay at one) to be there, fine; but it shouldn't move (or stay) because that location gave it the best bribe.

It's an incentive, not a bribe. No one is secretly getting money illegally.

I think governments should be able to make a calculus as to whether something like this will benefit their constituency.

This is not PR or high profile loss leader or trophy white elephant or other gimmick like the olympics or new stadiums. This is a bet on the company improving the local economy attracting other employers, competitors, increasing competition for employees, etc.

If I lived in MA I'd be all for this, just like SF bet on twitter reviving mid-Markt street --which it has.

They can't afford Geneva, Dublin more likely. As for your RFP: just don't do anything. You want to move here? Welcome. You don't. No big deal.

That's $181,250 per employee in tax-benefits. I'd be interested to hear what you think those 800 people "bring and represent" other than another screwing of tax-payers for the benefit of corporations.

800 probably well paid employees, that buy houses, who pay property tax, who pay local income tax, who pay for local restaurants, entertainment, and other items, a company that will hire from the local region, that will need services and provide revenue for many other local businesses.

And this is just after 3 seconds thought. Another 3 seconds will likely reveal more.

Another 3 seconds will reveal that your thinking is similar to the justification used for spending public money on stadiums, and giving tax breaks for movie filming. Both of which have been proven to have negative effects on the local economies.

Forbid them from giving sweetheart tax deals. Which is NOT forbidding them from attracting employers.