Liberty Mutual Tower | 157 Berkeley Street | Back Bay

Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

They probably shouldn't have gotten the subsidy in the first place but it's absurd to demand that it be taken away after it's been awarded. That reeks of punitive taxation.
 
Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

No, revoking it retroactively is absolutely the right thing to do. The state can do a lot more good elsewhere for that $50 million.
 
Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

What would people say to the idea of revoking medicare reimbursements after the procedure?
 
Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

Revoke it retroactively? Holy crap people. HenryAlan was along the lines of the right analogy.

Shirley's letter was filled with conjecture and examples of other projects that have no bearing on the finances of this property.

There is a big difference between "could Libery Mutual have paid for the tower without a tax break" and "would Liberty Mutual have paid for the tower without a tax break". Think about it this way, Fidelity is shriking in Mass and growing in NH, NC and Texas, because guess what? It costs less to be there.

Insurance companies pass along costs to customers. When you are competing against competitors in lower cost places (think Hartford, Columbus, GA, Columbus, OH, suburban Chicago, etc) it's hard to have lower business costs when operating in Boston's Back Bay. Sure, you probably can recruit brighter people that helps drive revenue/reduce expenses, but those people and that location costs far more.

For $50MM in savings, I can think of lots of sunbelt states that would happily have office space and lower labor costs that would have soaked up those jobs (not to mention they would have offered incentives too)

In other words, I can afford a new Hugo Boss suit, but I personally don't buy them until they go on sale.
 
Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

This

atlrvr said:
Shirley's letter was filled with conjecture and examples of other projects that have no bearing on the finances of this property.
Click to expand...

and this

atlrvr said:
There is a big difference between "could Libery Mutual have paid for the tower without a tax break" and "would Liberty Mutual have paid for the tower without a tax break."
Click to expand...

Could Kelley have paid for the subsidies by halving his salary for two years? Sure. Is that how companies are likely to run themselves? Certainly not. Nothing about Liberty Mutual makes it any different than any other company that has received tax increment financing (TIF), which I'm pretty sure this is, anywhere else in the country. This isn't really about Liberty Mutual or Boston. Rather, it's about TIFs themselves and what their importance is in the current governmental and economic system that promotes inter-municipal, state, and national competition to retain and promote job growth and tax base.

Concerning this, Shirley is somewhat mischaracterizing the economic impact of the TIF. If these have been set up as normal TIFs, then the $50 million figure is based on the estimated growth the development will have on the tax base. Normally in these situations, its not that the property isn't taxed, but rather that the tax rate is frozen for a set period of time (20 years in this case), before it begins to ramp up to the true assessment value of the property. Thus the true economic impact of the TIF is a bit more convoluted than just saying the city/state is losing out on $50 million in taxes. It would be more appropriate to say the city/state is losing out on $50 million of increased revenue from the site, with a direct cost of losing out on whatever increase in tax valuation the site would have created in the 20 year period anyway. Of course this direct cost could be small (if the site would have remained the same/undeveloped) or could be large (if the site would have been developed anyway), but that is much harder to project.
 
Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

Ron Newman said:
No, revoking it retroactively is absolutely the right thing to do. The state can do a lot more good elsewhere for that $50 million.
Click to expand...

I'm sure there are people who feel the government can do a lot more good using the money elsewhere that Ron Newman gets to keep thanks to home ownership (or childcare, charitable giving, etc.). But I think you'd agree that it's not fair to claw back that money from previous years (i.e., after you've already made a decision to buy a home, have children, etc.).
 
Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

Hold on there! Ronnie earned his money. Then the government took it from him.

Saying government did him a favor because "he gets to keep it" is like saying the robber did Ronnie a favor because he missed the fin note in his fanny pack!
 
Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

Someone please explain why and how insisting on ground floor engagement here would have driven LibMu to Hartford?? Seriously, would it really have been a deal killer? Was the gerbil tube a make-it-or-break-it proposition? Seriously.

It's the instantaneous variances here that I find far more odious than the tax break overall. We won't see a tax break on a day today basis, but a missed opportunity is a daily scar.
 
Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

tobyjug said:
Hold on there! Ronnie earned his money. Then the government took it from him.

Saying government did him a favor because "he gets to keep it" is like saying the robber did Ronnie a favor because he missed the fin note in his fanny pack!
Click to expand...

My comment wasn't meant to express an opinion on what the "correct" individual tax rates are or what expenses should be deductible. I was simply trying to make the point, that you shouldn't change tax law retroactively.

The only thing I know for sure about my 2011 taxes is that I've paid them and won't have to pay them again. Changing credits, deductions, etc. that have already been awarded introduces uncertainty. If you told me the homeowners tax credit was being tossed in 2013, I'd be pissed, but I could at least plan for that and allocate my money accordingly. I can't allocate money spent in the past.
You might say LibMu doesn't deserve a $50M credit, but it's not fair to take it away after they've already started construction.
 
Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

AFL, I know. But don't be sure that government coudn't find a way to make you pay twice!

Shep, look at the bright side...they brought Hartford to you.
 
Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

Shepard said:
Someone please explain why and how insisting on ground floor engagement here would have driven LibMu to Hartford?? Seriously, would it really have been a deal killer? Was the gerbil tube a make-it-or-break-it proposition? Seriously.

It's the instantaneous variances here that I find far more odious than the tax break overall. We won't see a tax break on a day today basis, but a missed opportunity is a daily scar.
Click to expand...

Does the gerbil tube or the lack of street level engagement indicate a variance? I ask, because I really don't know, but I kind of doubt zoning requires store fronts. If it does, then almost every building in the neighborhood was granted a variance.

I like store fronts and street level engagement as much as the next ArchBoston denizen, but I don't particularly favor mandating it. If the market calls for it, the building will be modified. But let's not pretend that every great building has such amenities on the first floor. I can think of several cherished buildings in Boston, NYC, and elsewhere that offer no street level engagement.
 
Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

HenryAlan said:
Does the gerbil tube or the lack of street level engagement indicate a variance? I ask, because I really don't know, but I kind of doubt zoning requires store fronts. If it does, then almost every building in the neighborhood was granted a variance.
Click to expand...

Probably not, but I'm sure the height/density required a variance.
 
Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

One of the recent articles on this explained it, now I'll have to search back.

The blank street wall DID indeed require a variance, according to the source I recall.
 
Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

atlrvr said:
Revoke it retroactively? Holy crap people. HenryAlan was along the lines of the right analogy.

Shirley's letter was filled with conjecture and examples of other projects that have no bearing on the finances of this property.

There is a big difference between "could Libery Mutual have paid for the tower without a tax break" and "would Liberty Mutual have paid for the tower without a tax break". Think about it this way, Fidelity is shriking in Mass and growing in NH, NC and Texas, because guess what? It costs less to be there.

Insurance companies pass along costs to customers. When you are competing against competitors in lower cost places (think Hartford, Columbus, GA, Columbus, OH, suburban Chicago, etc) it's hard to have lower business costs when operating in Boston's Back Bay. Sure, you probably can recruit brighter people that helps drive revenue/reduce expenses, but those people and that location costs far more.

For $50MM in savings, I can think of lots of sunbelt states that would happily have office space and lower labor costs that would have soaked up those jobs (not to mention they would have offered incentives too)

In other words, I can afford a new Hugo Boss suit, but I personally don't buy them until they go on sale.
Click to expand...

I can't believe this topic got you to blog.

What happened to supply & demand determining the price points for Labor, Materials and rents?

The city officials have put themselves in a serious bind this is why costs continue to spiral out of control.
#1 Boston has become possibly the 2nd largest Employer in the city
#2 All those city Pensions & healthcare
#3 The city is not friendly to the Private sector more friendly to Non-Profits.
Like Hospitals and College Institutions.

The private sector is getting mutulated by these political hacks with their rules & regulations in the city.
BID is a perfect example what is wrong with the city. Create an extra tax for the successful business in downtown. Then give tax breaks to Liberty Mutal to build in the backbay.

If Liberty Mutual moved out of the backbay then the Landlords would have to lower than rent and so on.
 
Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

The businesses themselves have to vote on BIDs. The city doesn't just show up and impose it.
 
Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

underground said:
The businesses themselves have to vote on BIDs. The city doesn't just show up and impose it.
Click to expand...

Oh okay.......As a successful business owner what does BID actually do that my own city, state, and other taxes don't cover? What successful business owner would actually vote for this type of stupidity then watch the Mayor and Governor support all the tax breaks to Fan Pier, Liberty Mutual and JPM.

Does that make any sense?

Downtown Filenes looks like a scene from Saving Private Ryan.

I will admit Liberty Mutual Building is ten times better than the box shit they threw up at FAN PIER. That is a disgrace
 
Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

TheRifleman said:
As a successful business owner what does BID actually do that my own city, state, and other taxes don't cover?
Click to expand...

Mostly just pays for stuff like flower pots, fancy signs, and greeters. It's hardly some nefarious plot to raise your taxes.
 
Re: Liberty Mutual plans major Boston expansion

Seeing as how imposing the BID tax has absolutely nothing to do with elected officials (other than the fact that they passed the initial legislation allowing them), it's really not at all. You probably want to learn a little bit more about what you're criticizing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top