Indy job recovery still underway

June 18, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

On the surface, it appears that the economic recovery took a small step backward in the Indianapolis metro area in May. Dig deeper, an Indiana University researcher says, and the infantile recovery still seems to be cooking.

Matt Kinghorn of the Indiana Business Research Center in the Kelley School of Business allows that the region had 4,600 fewer jobs in May than a year earlier, when the economy was still in decline. The figures were released today.

But the Indianapolis area looked good in May compared to April this year, Kinghorn adds. Only one other April-to-May transition in the past decade saw a larger increase than the 13,500 additional jobs posted this year.

Tracking Indianapolis from month to month is tricky because the government doesn't adjust the figures for seasonal fluctuations. However, he notes, even after accounting for the seasonal increase in such jobs as construction and the once-a-decade influx of census workers, Indianapolis still generated jobs. Not many, but some.

An encouraging sign is the increase in temporary workers, often a sign companies are ramping up production. Some firms hire temps to avoid committing to full-time workers until the economy firms up enough to justify the risk.

“It’s cautious optimism,” Kinghorn says. “We need to wait a little longer before we can say Indianapolis has turned a corner.”

What are your thoughts?

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Accountant using Knowledge and Resources to get the ball rolling!!!
    The Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment (HIRE) Act of 2010 (H.R. 2847) is a law in the 111th United States Congress to provide payroll tax breaks and incentives for businesses to hire unemployed workers. Often characterized as a "jobs bill,"[1][2][3] the Democrats in Congress insist that it is only one piece of a broader job creation legislative agenda, along with the Travel Promotion Act and other bills. The Senate passed the bill on February 24, 2010 by a vote of 70-28. The House of Representatives followed on March 4, 2010, passing an amended version (in compliance with new pay-as-you-go rules) by a vote of 217-201. On March 17, the Senate agreed to the House's amendment by a vote of 68-29, and sent the bill to President Barack Obama, who signed the bill on March 18, 2010.[4]

    Employers are eligible for a payroll tax credit when the employer hires certain new employees after February 3, 2010, and before January 1, 2011.[5] In order to take the payroll tax credit, the employee must have either been unemployed for at least 60 days prior to hire or worked fewer than 40 hours for another employer during the previous 60 days.[6] Employers do not pay the employer portion of social security tax, which is 6.2 percent, on wages paid to eligible new hires.[5] In addition, employers receive a general business income tax break if the employer continues to employee the new hire for at least 52 weeks.[5] The tax break is the lesser of $1,000 or 6.2 percent of wages paid to the new employee during the 52-week period.[5] Household employers are ineligible for both tax benefits, as are new employees who are related to the employer.[7] Also ineligible are employees who earn more than $106,000 per year and employees who displace a current employee, unless the first employee resigned or was terminated for cause.[8] Employers may claim the credit after an eligible employee signs a statement affirming their previous unemployed status, such as Form W-11.[9][10]

    The Act also extends the $250,000 deduction limit under section 179 through 2010,[11] authorizes $20 billion for highway and transit projects,[12] and makes reforms to municipal bonds.[1]

    In order to offset the costs of the Act, there will be a 30 percent withholding tax on income from U.S. financial assets held by foreign banks who have not agreed to disclose their American account holders' balances, receipts, and withdrawals.[2] Owners of these foreign-held assets on their tax returns if they are worth more than $50,000.[2] Individuals who do not disclose these assets will be subject to a 40 percent penalty.[2] The Act also closes a tax loophole that investors had used to avoid paying any taxes on dividends by converting them into dividend equivalents.[13]

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Kent's done a good job of putting together some good guests, intelligence and irreverence without the inane chatter of the other two shows. JMV is unlistenable, mostly because he doesn't do his homework and depends on non-sports stuff to keep HIM interested. Query and Shultz is a bit better, but lack of prep in their show certainly is evident. Sterling obviously workes harder than the other shows. We shall see if there is any way for a third signal with very little successful recent history to make it. I always say you have to give a show two years to grow into what it will become...

  2. Lafayette Square, Washington Square should be turned into office parks with office buildings, conversion, no access to the public at all. They should not be shopping malls and should be under tight security and used for professional offices instead of havens for crime. Their only useage is to do this or tear them down and replace them with high rise office parks with secured parking lots so that the crime in the areas is not allowed in. These are prime properties, but must be reused for other uses, professional office conversions with no loitering and no shopping makes sense, otherwise they have become hangouts long ago for gangs, groups of people who have no intent of spending money, and are only there for trouble and possibly crime, shoplifting, etc. I worked summers at SuperX Drugs in Lafayette Square in the 1970s and even then the shrinkage from shoplifting was 10-15 percent. No sense having shopping malls in these areas, they earn no revenue, attract crime, and are a blight on the city. All malls that are not of use should be repurposed or torn down by the city, condemned. One possibility would be to repourpose them as inside college campuses or as community centers, but then again, if the community is high crime, why bother.

  3. Straight No Chaser

  4. Seems the biggest use of TIF is for pet projects that improve Quality Of Life, allegedly, but they ignore other QOL issues that are of a more important and urgent nature. Keep it transparent and try not to get in ready, fire, Aim! mode. You do realize that business the Mayor said might be interested is probably going to want TIF too?

  5. Gary, I'm in complete agreement. The private entity should be required to pay IPL, and, if City parking meters are involved, the parking meter company. I was just pointing out how the poorly-structured parking meter deal affected the car share deal.

ADVERTISEMENT