ABSTRACT
In times of economic instability, business activities that provide long-term, high-paying jobs are highly valued by both the public and private sectors. Business headquarters (HQ) activities fit this profile well. Communities that possess corporate HQ tend to place a high priority on retaining the HQ they already host and on efforts to attract new HQ. Examples of municipalities seeking to attract HQ activity can be found across North America. The regional repercussions of HQ relocation by Boeing (from Seattle to Chicago), AT&T (from New York to San Antonio and then San Antonio to Dallas), and Imperial Oil (from Toronto to Calgary) underline the significance of interurban transfers of corporate power, especially among the most elite of corporations. Governments at multiple levels often play a key role in influencing HQ location decisions. For example, in 2002 the City Council of Fort Worth, Texas, approved up to $96 million in tax incentives in an effort to help the electronics retailer, RadioShack, establish a new HQ campus and stay in the city. Furthermore, in the midst of the 2008-2010 recession, Fort Worth’s city government provided a new round of $10.7 million in tax rebates to again keep RadioShack from pursuing possible relocation options (Lee, 2010). Such initiatives are not rare (Jean, 2013). HQ are widely viewed as key regional assets and generators of economic activity (Card, Hallock, & Moretti, 2010).
