| > If that were true, why is there is a single startup in the city today? Because that section of the tax code is not enforced. > If you think the Twitter in SF situation is unique We're not talking about the Twitter situation. Twitter extracting concessions from the city for its normal payroll tax obligations. For the record, I'm against that. We're talking about a completely different situation from Twitter, the issue with a company being taxed on employees' personal stock options gains. This has nothing to do with the Twitter tax break. > You asserted that the tax is somehow driving public companies out of SF, so you get to back up your assertions first. I currently run a startup that would not be able to stay in the city of SF if we went public. In a few years if we start going down that path, I really hope that this tax is no longer in place or I will be forced to move the company out of the city, which I don't want to do. Not sure what else I can provide you to back me up on that one, besides a letter from our accountants saying the same. |