Assistant Attorney General Keith Munro testifies before the Assembly Government Affairs committee at the Legislative Building in Carson City, Nev. on Thursday, Feb. 7, 2013. Munro presented two measures aimed at increasing government transparency. George Taylor is at left. (AP Photo/Cathleen Allison)
Cathleen Allison / AP
(Tom Joyce) – Nevada ranks first in the country out of the 50 states plus the District of Columbia when it comes to economic development incentive transparency, a report from Good Jobs First said.
The report praises the state for recent transparency initiatives. For example, the Nevada Governor’s Office of Economic Development website posts annual and bi-annual reports for the programs in question. They include jobs promised/created, wage outcomes, and capital investment outcomes. The reports are also downloadable as PDFs.
“Not only does Nevada have the highest score, but it is also the most improved state over the past eight years by absolute change in both scores and ranks,” the report said. “This impressive advance traces to 2015, when a law was passed to require that the Governor’s Office of Economic Development disclose recipient level data for various tax abatements. Besides disclosing the subsidy amounts for each company as well as job, wage, and investment promises and outcomes, it now provides a decent amount of information to the public on subsidy applicants before those awards are approved.”
The report notes that Nevada was ranked 44th in the country in transparency of its economic development in 2014.
Nevada was the top-ranked state on this list. Its 63.6-point score (out of 100) was a full 12 points better than the runner-up (Connecticut). The average score for a state was 22 out of 100.
Some economic development programs from Nevada that got high marks from the report include the Data Centers Tax Abatement, Modified Business Tax Abatement, Personal Property Tax Abatement, and the Sales and Use Tax Abatement. They all received a 68 out of 100. Meanwhile, the Transferable Tax Credit for Film and Other Productions scored lower; it got a 46 out of 100.
By
Tom Joyce | The Center Square contributor
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
RSS