Eight years later, it's become clear they weren't going anywhere.https://twitter.com/TrishaThadani/status/1121058395916627968 …
-
-
Replying to @EskSF
That’s not exactly true. Fintech companies started to immediately relocate from SF to the East Bay after Prop C passed in November:https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2019/01/31/with-square-move-on-horizon-fintechs-increasingly.html …
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @EskSF
Square is keeping its SF space tho and expanding into Oakland
4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
.... Which sends tax revenue that SF would otherwise collect into Oakland
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @EskSF
unless Oakland tries to tax it to provide for its most disadvantaged citizens, that is
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
IIRC Oakland already has a relatively aggressive business tax to the point where I’m not sure the expansion is about Prop C, rather than SF’s completely absurd office market
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
SF’s business tax affects fintech cos differently than other kinds of software companies. It’s way more material for them given that they have to pay out most of their ostensible receipts to other payment networks.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
isn’t gross receipts what Dorsey wanted?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I have no idea what Jack wanted in 2012 or whatever. I just know that I observed fintech company behavior change after Nov., even though I supported Our City Our Home.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
My understanding is that the fintech complaint (which I don’t think is unreasonable tho I also supported C) is that they are taxed on nominal handled payments rather than on their actual revenue, bc of how it’s written
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
Right
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.