Amazon dumps NYC headquarters and its promised 25,000 jobs

Activists and community members who opposed Amazon's plan to move into Queens rally in celebration of Amazon's decision to pull out of the deal, in the Long Island City neighborhood, on February 14, 2019 in the Queens borough of New York City. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images/AFP)
Updated 15 February 2019
Follow

Amazon dumps NYC headquarters and its promised 25,000 jobs

  • Politicians and activists objected to the nearly $3 billion in tax breaks promised to what is already one of the world’s richest, most powerful companies
  • Objectors said the "extravagant giveaway" wouldn’t provide much direct benefit to most New Yorkers

NEW YORK: Amazon abruptly dropped plans Thursday for a big new headquarters in New York that would have brought 25,000 jobs to the city, reversing course after politicians and activists objected to the nearly $3 billion in tax breaks promised to what is already one of the world’s richest, most powerful companies.
“We are disappointed to have reached this conclusion — we love New York,” the online giant from Seattle said in a blog post announcing its withdrawal.
The stunning move was a serious blow to Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Mayor Bill de Blasio, who had lobbied intensely to land the project, competing against more than 200 other metropolitan areas across the continent that were practically tripping over each other to offer incentives to Amazon in a bidding war the company stoked.
Cuomo lashed out at fellow New York politicians over Amazon’s change of heart, saying the project would have helped diversify the city’s economy, cement its status as an emerging tech hub and generate money for schools, housing and transit.
“A small group (of politicians put their own narrow political interests above their community,” he said.
But Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York City’s new liberal firebrand, exulted over Amazon’s pullout.
“Today was the day a group of dedicated, everyday New Yorkers and their neighbors defeated Amazon’s corporate greed, its worker exploitation, and the power of the richest man in the world,” she tweeted, referring to Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos.
The swift unraveling of the project reflected growing antipathy toward large technology companies among liberals and populists who accuse big business of holding down wages and wielding too much political clout, analysts said.
“This all of a sudden became a perfect test case for all those arguments,” said Joe Parilla, a fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Metropolitan Policy Program.
Amazon ultimately decided it did not want to be drawn into that battle.
Amazon announced in November that it had chosen the Long Island City section of Queens for one of two new headquarters, with the other in Arlington, Virginia. Both would get 25,000 jobs. A third site in Nashville, Tennessee, would get 5,000.
The company planned to spend $2.5 billion building the New York office, choosing the area in part because of its large pool of tech talent. The governor and the mayor had argued that the project would spur economic growth that would pay for the $2.8 billion in state and city incentives many times over.
After Amazon backed out, De Blasio, who according to his press secretary learned of the decision an hour before it was announced, criticized the company for not doing more to try to win over New Yorkers, saying: “You have to be tough to make it in New York City.”
In pulling out, Amazon said it isn’t looking for a replacement location “at this time.” It said it plans to spread the technology jobs that were slated for New York to other offices around the US and Canada, including Chicago, Toronto and Austin, Texas. It will also expand its existing New York offices, which already have about 5,000 employees.
Amazon faced fierce opposition over the tax breaks, with critics complaining that the project was an extravagant giveaway — or worse, a shakedown — and that it wouldn’t provide much direct benefit to most New Yorkers.
The list of grievances against the project grew as the months wore on, with critics complaining about Amazon’s stance on unions and some Long Island City residents fretting that the company’s arrival would drive up rents and other costs.
Opposition to the deal was led in the Democrat-controlled state Senate by Michael Gianaris, the chamber’s No. 2 lawmaker, whose district includes Long Island City. Initially among the politicians who supported bringing an Amazon headquarters to the city, Gianaris did an about-face after the deal was announced, criticizing the secrecy surrounding the negotiations and the generous incentives.
Earlier this month, Gianaris was appointed to a little-known state panel that could have ultimately been asked to approve the subsidies.
The City Council probably would have had to file a lawsuit to scuttle the deal, which was structured to avoid the land use review process that most projects undergo.
In recent weeks, City Council members held hearings at which they grilled Amazon officials about such things as the company’s contract with Immigration and Customs Enforcement to provide facial recognition technology.
One City Council leader tried to get Amazon officials to agree to remain neutral in the face of any potential union drive. But an Amazon executive would not give such a commitment.
A Quinnipiac University poll released in December found New York City voters supported having an Amazon headquarters 57 percent to 26 percent. But they were divided over the incentives: 46 percent in favor, 44 percent against.
Construction industry groups and some local business leaders had urged the public and officials to get behind the plan.
Eric Benaim, a realty executive who gets most of his sales and rentals in Long Island City, had led a petition in support of Amazon, drawing 4,000 signatures.
“I woke up this morning and I had no clue this would happen. Zero. This news is a shock, and I’m devastated,” he said.
Andrew Ousley, a business owner who lives near the proposed site, said he had been considering moving out before Amazon moved in.
“Now that they’re not coming, I’m more likely to stay and see how the neighborhood continues to grow and evolve in a more organic fashion,” he said.


G7 countries to release oil reserves as IEA agrees to largest ever market intervention

Updated 11 March 2026
Follow

G7 countries to release oil reserves as IEA agrees to largest ever market intervention

  • IEA recommends release of 400 million barrels

RIYADH: Germany, Japan and Austria will release part of their oil reserves after the International Energy Agency recommended the release of 400 million barrels of oil ‌from stockpiles, the largest ‌such move in IEA ​history.

In a statement, IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol said the flow of oil, gas and other commodities through the Strait of Hormuz have all but stopped, leading global energy supply to fall by around 20 percent.

Ahead of the confirmation of the move — a larger intervention than the 182.7 million barrels that were released in 2022 by in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — several countries began setting out plans to bring their reserves into play as countries grapple with ​soaring crude prices amid ​the US-Israeli war with Iran. 

Birol said: “I can now announce that IEA countries have decided to launch the largest ever release of emergency oil stocks in our agency's history. 

“IEA countries will be making 400 million barrels of oil available to the market to offset the supply lost through the effective closure of the strait.

“This is a major action aiming to alleviate the immediate impacts of the disruption in markets.”

Germany’s Economy ⁠Minister ​Katherina Reiche ⁠confirmed on Wednesday her government plans to limit petrol price increases at filling stations to once a day and to introduce more stringent antitrust regulation of the sector.

She did not ⁠give an exact timing for ‌those measures, but added that ‌the US and ​Japan would be the ‌largest contributors to the release of the ‌oil reserves.

The US has not confirmed it would do so, but its Interior Secretary Doug Burgum told Fox News on Wednesday that “these are the kinds of moments that these reserves are used for.”

The announcements did not stop oil prices rising, with Brent crude up 3.26 percent to $90.66 a barrel at 4:29 p.m Saudi time, and West Texas Intermediate up 3.12 percent to $86.05. Both were some way below the $119 a barrel seen earlier in the week.

“The situation regarding oil supplies is tense, as the Strait of Hormuz is currently virtually impassable,” Germany’s Reiche said.

“We will comply with this request and ‌contribute our share, because Germany stands behind the IEA’s most important principle: mutual ⁠solidarity,” Reiche ⁠said about the IEA’s request.

According to a statement by Reiche’s ministry, Germany will contribute 2.64 million tonnes of oil. This corresponds to 19.51 million barrels.

Reiche stressed there was no supply shortage in the country, which has a legally mandated reserve of oil and oil products intended to cover 90 days’ demand.

South Korea will release 22.46 million ​barrels of oil, which represents 5.6 percent of the total IEA ask, the ⁠country's industry ministry said.

“The government will consult with the IEA ⁠secretariat on details, such ‌as ‌the ​timing ‌and amount, from ‌the perspective of national interests in accordance with domestic conditions,” ‌the ministry said in a statement.

The ⁠ministry ⁠said it would continue to coordinate closely with major countries in responding to high oil prices to minimise any domestic ​impact.

Austrian Economy Minister Wolfgang Hattmannsdorfer said his country was releasing part of the emergency oil reserve and extending the national strategic gas reserve, adding: “One thing is clear: in a crisis, there must be no crisis winners at the expense of commuters and businesses.”

Acting ahead of the IEA move, G7 ​member Japan announced plans to release 15 days' worth of ‌private-sector oil reserves and one month's worth of state oil reserves.

“Rather than wait for formal IEA approval ‌of a coordinated international reserve release, Japan will act first to ease global energy market supply and demand, releasing reserves as early as the 16th of this month,” Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi said in a broadcast statement.

Following a meeting with the IEA on Wednesday, G7 energy ministers said: “In principle, we support the implementation of proactive measures to address the situation, including the use of strategic reserves.”

All IEA member countries are required to keep 90 days’ worth of their nation’s oil use in reserve in case of global disruption.