The Irving City Council will vote Thursday on millions of dollars in economic incentives to support the huge campus that’s expected to house 4,000 workers…
The agreement with Irving calls for Wells Fargo to “occupy at least 800,000 square feet of office space in the newly constructed buildings by December 2026. The proposed new office development would serve as a regional hub for Wells Fargo.”…
Irving proposes in its economic incentive agreement to give Wells Fargo up to $19 million in tax increment finance district funds to build a 4,000-space parking garage and “to reclaim a portion of the lake between the two adjacent parcels on the south side of Promenade Parkway.”
A separate economic incentive of up to $12 million would support construction of the Wells Fargo offices.
The project will increase the city’s tax “property value by a minimum of $200,000,000,” according to the City Council filings.
I can imagine the argument from Irving and similar communities about why the tax breaks are worth it:
- Such a move helps entice national and international brands to your community.
- Such a move brings jobs to the community.
- The tax breaks will be outweighed by the tax and physical improvements to the property in question.
All of this helps boost the status of the suburb and the economic prospects in the community.
On the other hand, tax breaks have downsides:
- Lots of communities offer tax breaks. The company may be less interested in this specific community and more interested in how much money they can get from a community.
- Less money will come into the community than if no tax breaks were offered.
- At some point, the tax breaks run out and then what happens to the company and the newly developed property?
As the title of this post asks, how much development in suburban areas like Irving involves tax breaks? Would Wells Fargo locate in Irving or in the region without tax breaks?