> They have accepted tax breaks or other financial benefits from cities tied to specific headcounts or jobs created
I don't think that's how tax cuts work. No matter the incentives, it's cheaper to not have office space than to have office space and get some write off. I doubt some city is saying "For every $100 of office expenses, we'll give you $200 of tax credits". If anything, companies track days worked from home so they don't have to pay as much city taxes
> They are locked into longer term leases or own the building outright and want to make use of their sunk costs
You can always sublease and many do. There are also variable expenses (insurance, maintenance, etc)
> They found that (on average?) remote employees are less productive
This is my belief
> They want to encourage employees to find another employer
Maybe, as a filtering mechanism. Kind of like soft layoffs, but its very risky.
> It's a control/showing-off thing
Also very risky because you just piss people off and pay to do it.
I don't think that's how tax cuts work. No matter the incentives, it's cheaper to not have office space than to have office space and get some write off. I doubt some city is saying "For every $100 of office expenses, we'll give you $200 of tax credits". If anything, companies track days worked from home so they don't have to pay as much city taxes
> They are locked into longer term leases or own the building outright and want to make use of their sunk costs
You can always sublease and many do. There are also variable expenses (insurance, maintenance, etc)
> They found that (on average?) remote employees are less productive
This is my belief
> They want to encourage employees to find another employer
Maybe, as a filtering mechanism. Kind of like soft layoffs, but its very risky.
> It's a control/showing-off thing
Also very risky because you just piss people off and pay to do it.