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. The east side does have potential...and I have always thought Washington Scare should become an outlet mall. Anyone remember how popular Eastgate was? Well, Indy has no outlet malls, we have to go to Edinburgh for the deep discounts and I don't understand why. Jim is right. We need a few good eastsiders interested in actually making some noise and trying to change the commerce, culture and stereotypes of the East side. Irvington is very progressive and making great strides, why can't the far east side ride on their coat tails to make some changes?

  2. Boston.com has an article from 2010 where they talk about how Interactions moved to Massachusetts in the year prior. http://www.boston.com/business/technology/innoeco/2010/07/interactions_banks_63_million.html The article includes a link back to that Inside Indiana Business press release I linked to earlier, snarkily noting, "Guess this 2006 plan to create 200-plus new jobs in Indiana didn't exactly work out."

  3. I live on the east side and I have read all your comments. a local paper just did an article on Washington square mall with just as many comments and concerns. I am not sure if they are still around, but there was an east side coalition with good intentions to do good things on the east side. And there is a facebook post that called my eastside indy with many old members of the eastside who voice concerns about the east side of the city. We need to come together and not just complain and moan, but come up with actual concrete solutions, because what Dal said is very very true- the eastside could be a goldmine in the right hands. But if anyone is going damn, and change things, it is us eastside residents

  4. Please go back re-read your economics text book and the fine print on the February 2014 CBO report. A minimum wage increase has never resulted in a net job loss...

  5. The GOP at the Statehouse is more interested in PR to keep their majority, than using it to get anything good actually done. The State continues its downward spiral.

ADVERTISEMENT