Re:Amazon HQ2 finalists should refuse tax breaks, say nearly...
by tptacek on Wednesday January 31, 2018 @11:48AM
(#16275223)
In the scenario you propose, California isn't prohibited from paying to fly NC contractors to CA.
Travel from a prohibited state, including the return flight back, shall be construed as travel “to” the original destination.
It's not just that they don't require employees to travel there, they also don't pay for trips "This bill would prohibit a state agency from ... approving a request for state-funded or state-sponsored travel to ..."
The bill doesn't explicitly forbid government employees (and by extension, the government of California) from doing business with North Carolina - it just adds personal, out-of-pocket cost for doing so. (which probably amounts to the same effect.)