Fiat Chrysler will HQ in London England.

[Bham1982]

Obviously you can't comprehend simple text. Like I said, if it was JUST about lower taxes, they would move to Bulgaria.

I still don't understand your point. Obviously no corporate decision is JUST about one factor, and plenty of places have even lower corporate taxes and costs.

BUT, it's more than being JUST about taxes. London has prestige as a financial center.

What does "prestige as a financial center" have to do about incorporation decisions? Nothing, because incorporation decisions are about legal domicile, not staffing. Auto companies don't have that many corporate finance guys, anyways, and if this drove locational decision making, the Big 3 would have always been in NYC.

Do you get what the word "prestige" means yet?? It's very prestigious to have your world HQ in London.

No, it isn't. If anything, companies try and avoid association with high cost cities. Makes the accountants very nervous, and contradict corporate messaging. That's [[in part) why Alcoa is officially HQ in Pittsburgh and MacysCorp in Cincy, even though the executive offices are in NYC. It's [[in part) why some of the biggest companies on earth are in nothing locations.

The most valuable U.S. companies, in order, are HQ in the
following cities-

Cupertino, CA [[Apple)
Irving, TX [[Exxon Mobil)
Omaha, NE [[Berkshire Hathaway)
Bentonville [[WalMart)
Fairfield, CT [[GE)
Armonk, NY [[IBM)
Redmond, WA [[Microsoft)
San Ramon, CA [[Chevron)

The most valuable European company, Nestle, is HQ in Vevey, Switzerland.

BTW last I checked, Italy's main language isn't English either--it's Italian, yet Turin has been Fiat's world HQ for a long time. As well as Bulgaria being an EU member, they have airports.

Thanks for the irrelevant anecdotes. Wow, who knew there were corporate HQ in non-English speaking nations? Who knew there were airports in Eastern Europe?

[iheartthed]

I still don't understand your point. Obviously no corporate decision is JUST about one factor, and plenty of places have even lower corporate taxes and costs.

What does "prestige as a financial center" have to do about incorporation decisions? Nothing, because incorporation decisions are about legal domicile, not staffing. Auto companies don't have that many corporate finance guys, anyways, and if this drove locational decision making, the Big 3 would have always been in NYC.

No, it isn't. If anything, companies try and avoid association with high cost cities. Makes the accountants very nervous, and contradict corporate messaging. That's [[in part) why Alcoa is officially HQ in Pittsburgh and MacysCorp in Cincy, even though the executive offices are in NYC. It's [[in part) why some of the biggest companies on earth are in nothing locations.

The most valuable U.S. companies, in order, are HQ in the
following cities-

Cupertino, CA [[Apple)
Irving, TX [[Exxon Mobil)
Omaha, NE [[Berkshire Hathaway)
Bentonville [[WalMart)
Fairfield, CT [[GE)
Armonk, NY [[IBM)
Redmond, WA [[Microsoft)
San Ramon, CA [[Chevron)

The most valuable European company, Nestle, is HQ in Vevey, Switzerland.



Thanks for the irrelevant anecdotes. Wow, who knew there were corporate HQ in non-English speaking nations? Who knew there were airports in Eastern Europe?

With the exception of GE, those companies are all located in the vicinity of where they were founded. FCA is an unusual situation because they opted not to locate the headquarters in the home country of either company that had been merged. Off the top of my head I can't think of any example of that involving an American based company.

[davewindsor]

I still don't understand your point. Obviously no corporate decision is JUST about one factor, and plenty of places have even lower corporate taxes and costs.

Of course, you'll never understand. I don't know if you're doing it on purpose or maybe it's just you. But, then again, the following sentence makes me wonder if you understand it a little. No, I don't think so or you wouldn't have just said that.

Let's go over this again.

1) Hermod said the move to London is about, "...the President/CEO and his inner circle who are "planting the flag" in London to avoid US and Italian taxes."

2) I responded it's not just about taxes. There's also a prestige factor with moving to London. If it was just about taxes, it would make more sense to move to Bulgaria, which is also a European Union member. Why would anybody want to move to London to cut costs when real estate prices are as high as Manhattan prices?? Because it's not just about cutting taxes.

3) You respond to me that it makes no sense to move to Bulgaria. No sh-t Sherlock. I made the same point. Hermod said they're moving to another country to pay less tax; I said there's more to it than that like "prestige" otherwise they would just move to Bulgaria. What part of this are you not getting?

What does "prestige as a financial center" have to do about incorporation decisions? Nothing, because incorporation decisions are about legal domicile, not staffing. Auto companies don't have that many corporate finance guys, anyways, and if this drove locational decision making, the Big 3 would have always been in NYC.

Again, no sh-t Sherlock. Did I say their entire head office is moving down there? No, as Hermod said, it's the CEO and his inner circle that moving down there.

And prestige has everything to do with it. But, it's absolutely hopeless to continue explaining to you what prestige is because it keeps going in one ear and out the other with you.

Oh and please tell me why it's not important for an auto company to have a lot of corporate finance guys when they offer inhouse financing and leasing on cars, fleets and need to raise billions of dollars for retooling their plants??

No, it isn't. If anything, companies try and avoid association with high cost cities. Makes the accountants very nervous, and contradict corporate messaging.

Ridiculous. I didn't know you ran one of the big accounting firms. What qualifies you to make such a bold statement??

Also, please explain to me why so many corporate HQs are in Manhattan and London and why the real estate prices are so high down there? Like it was stated earlier, it's not the whole company that's moving down there, just the corporate heads.

That's [[in part) why Alcoa is officially HQ in Pittsburgh and MacysCorp in Cincy, even though the executive offices are in NYC. It's [[in part) why some of the biggest companies on earth are in nothing locations.

The most valuable U.S. companies, in order, are HQ in the
following cities-

Cupertino, CA [[Apple)
Irving, TX [[Exxon Mobil)
Omaha, NE [[Berkshire Hathaway)
Bentonville [[WalMart)
Fairfield, CT [[GE)
Armonk, NY [[IBM)
Redmond, WA [[Microsoft)
San Ramon, CA [[Chevron)

The most valuable European company, Nestle, is HQ in Vevey, Switzerland.

Usually companies HQ'd outside of financial centers are located in the cities they were founded. I tried pulling up a list of corporate HQs located in London and pasting it here, but the list is so long that the system will not let me paste and save it in this post.

Thanks for the irrelevant anecdotes. Wow, who knew there were corporate HQ in non-English speaking nations? Who knew there were airports in Eastern Europe?

Ya, thanks for the irrelevant arguments and responses. As for the rest, you were the one who said Fiat-Chrysler needs to be in an English speaking country.

[Bham1982]

2) I responded it's not just about taxes. There's also a prestige factor with moving to London.

Again, not true, at all. There is no "prestige" whatsoever to domicile decisions. Fancy companies are often domiciled in dirt-poor Caribbean countries for tax/liability reasons.

And in any case, the UK is not a more "prestigious" location than the U.S. You are comparing two first world nations. This is a pure tax move.

[davewindsor]

Again, not true, at all. There is no "prestige" whatsoever to domicile decisions. Fancy companies are often domiciled in dirt-poor Caribbean countries for tax/liability reasons.

And in any case, the UK is not a more "prestigious" location than the U.S. You are comparing two first world nations. This is a pure tax move.

If fancy companies are often domiciled in dirt-poor Caribbean countries, why is FCA moving to London like many other companies? Your logic doesn't even make sense.

When did I say London is more prestigious than Manhattan? It's like comparing Oxford University to Harvard University in the educational world. They're both way up there in the top two in prestige as financial centers, though there's a lot of articles out there that the stricter visa requirements to work in Manhattan by foreigners vs. London doesn't make it more desirable for global companies to operate in Manhattan than London. Think about it. Which center is easier for Fiat's inner circle from Italy to work in--London or Manhattan?

The move from Auburn Hills is not a pure tax move as I've explained again and again and again, but you refuse to listen.

[douglasm]

But again, the thing people keep forgetting is that it is NOT a move from Auburn Hills, it's a move from Amsterdam.