> "Everyone else" would have received the same breaks for that location and scale of project (less the $500MM you already mentioned).

Amazon left the impression with their year long spectacle they were getting a special deal. They really have nobody to blame but themselves.

Both that and Amazon not actually needing any assistance do not excuse the constant misinformation being repeated about this situation.

It would be public information if they did receive any tax incentives. As far as I understand, Google, Facebook, and Amazon's already existing 5,000 NYC jobs have been achieved the good old fashioned way, sans bribery.

> It would be public information if they did receive any tax incentives.

Sure, if you dig for it. New York is notorious for burying records under obscure bureaucracy.

> As far as I understand, Google, Facebook, and Amazon's already existing 5,000 NYC jobs have been achieved the good old fashioned way, sans bribery.

Just because a reporter hasn't decided to go digging for evidence (and succeeded) doesn't mean these companies didn't get breaks and subsidies. There are programs that cover certain areas of Lower Manhattan, though generally south of 96th St. there are not many city incentives. The state incentives that Amazon qualified for in LIC they certainly already qualify for, at least in part, as do Facebook and Google.

We can't prove a negative. If you want to convince us that Google and Facebook were motivated to hire in NYC because of tax incentives, provide some evidence. Otherwise, I don't think it's a compelling point.

Google has a history of using shell companies to hide its tax breaks.

>""Everyone else" would have received the same breaks for that location and scale of project (less the $500MM you already mentioned)."

And this 500 million dollars is kind of a really big deal. To the average NYC resident who has watched their transit system languish in a perpetual state crisis and disrepair this is 500 million dollars in "real" tax dollars woefully misspent.

First, the MTA has plenty of money. They need to stop wasting it.

Second, the $500MM was coming from the state. It would not, and will never, see the coffers of the MTA.

Third, if $500MM is such a big deal then the $2.5B in non-special incentives are a much bigger deal, and are getting completely lost in the misinformation that the entire $3B was a special deal for Amazon and that they would have got $0 without the dog-and-pony show.

>"First, the MTA has plenty of money. They need to stop wasting it."

No they don't. Albany has repeatedly diverted tax revenues earmarked for the subways. This goes all the way back to Governor Pataki. State then forced them the agency to borrow and spend obscene sum on debt servicing. This is well-known and has been well-discussed.[1] The state currently contributes well over 500 million to the MTA.[2] So clearly money from the state does "see the coffers of the MTA."

For 2019 the MTA has deficits of just over 500 million dollars. This information is public and readily available.[3] It's worth noting this is the same amount the state was going to give to Amazon via a grant.

Despite whatever waste and inefficiencies at the MTA it most certainly does not have anywhere near the 19 billion dollars needed for Andy Byford's Fast Forward plan.[4]

>"Second, the $500MM was coming from the state. It would not, and will never, see the coffers of the MTA."

Wrong. The MTA already receives direct financial contributions from NY State via its' Metropolitan Mass Transportation Operating Assistance Fund.[5] This is not new either.

The actual facts refute your assertions.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/18/nyregion/new-york-subway-...

[2] http://web.mta.info/mta/news/books/docs/MTA-2019-Adopted-Bud...

[3] http://interactive.nydailynews.com/project/mta-funding/#subs...

[4] https://ny.curbed.com/2018/5/23/17383870/nyc-subway-mta-over...

[5] https://www.budget.ny.gov/pubs/archive/fy18archive/exec/agen...