Samsung Ditches New Jersey For Texas, Costing Garden State 1,000 Jobs (nj.com)
- Reference: 0183595198
- News link: https://slashdot.org/story/26/06/04/0540213/samsung-ditches-new-jersey-for-texas-costing-garden-state-1000-jobs
- Source link: https://www.nj.com/business/2026/06/tech-giant-leaving-nj-and-taking-1000-jobs-with-it.html
> Samsung is pulling up stakes in New Jersey and heading to Texas, a move that [2]could leave roughly 1,000 Garden State workers facing a stark choice : relocate or risk losing their jobs. The South Korean tech giant [3]confirmed this week that it will move its US headquarters from Englewood Cliffs, NJ, to its existing campus in Plano, Texas, marking a stunning reversal less than a year after it celebrated the opening of a new headquarters in Bergen County. The relocation is expected to be completed by the end of the year, according to company statements.
"Samsung Electronics America Inc. is undergoing a business transformation designed to better position our organization for long-term growth and future success. As part of this effort, we are relocating our U.S. headquarters from New Jersey to our existing campus in Plano, Texas, building on our 30-year presence in the state," said Samsung in a statement emailed to NJ.com on Tuesday.
"As part of this strategy, we will be optimizing parts of the organization to ensure our roles and functions align to key business priorities. We recognize such adjustments will have an impact on our people and we will be providing support to those affected," it continued.
[1] https://slashdot.org/~schwit1
[2] https://www.nj.com/business/2026/06/tech-giant-leaving-nj-and-taking-1000-jobs-with-it.html
[3] https://x.com/SamMobiles/status/2061759573284077677
The race to the bottom has begun (Score:5, Insightful)
Low taxes, low responsibility, low worker protection standards are always welcome by senior management.
Too bad they leave only scorched earth in their wake.
Re: (Score:2)
More likely Trump made another "offer" that wasn't to be refused.
Re: (Score:2)
Interestingly, here in Germany Samsung (and many other Korean companies) are located around Frankfurt/Main, a quite expensive location for the most part.
Re: (Score:2)
Texas is one hour off from New Jersey (UTC-6 vs. UTC-5). If the time difference from Korea is the best argument you have for moving HQ, you've done something wrong.
Less fleeing and more consolidation (Score:3)
Rutgers had an interesting breakdown for the reasons: [1]https://bloustein.rutgers.edu/... [rutgers.edu]
Higher costs and regulations are certainly a factor, but Samsung already has operations in Texas. It makes sense to consolidate those in these uncertain times.
[1] https://bloustein.rutgers.edu/these-factors-may-have-affected-samsungs-choice-to-leave-nj-for-texas/
And (Score:2)
Texas gets just a little bit shittier than it already was.
Good for business owners, bad for employees (Score:2)
Good for business owners, bad for employees. For remote-first companies itâ(TM)s not a problem but for in-person jobs like these in a lot of cases folks will not want to relocate to Texas.
Off topic, but relevant to why they do this (Score:3)
Samsung is run by the most short sited, greedy people. Not surprising they abandoned NJ for an immediate benefit. I love their products, but they are literally destroying South Korea.
They created an internconnected network ownership system (company A owns 50% of company B that owns 50 of company A) that controls 15-23% of South Korean economy. They do so with a strong company-first culture, where the employees go out with their boss drinking on Friday night. At one point all night sessions were mandatory.
For some reason, people that go out drinking with their boss every Friday night never get married or have children. (Wow, who could figure that out....)
While South Korea does have mandatory child leave rules, no one USES them because if you do, you are seen as disloyal to the company and do not get promoted.
Their population is expected to be cut in half over the next 60 years. This will also mean that they will not have enough working young people to support the older generation, all within a decade.
Good news is that real estate prices should drop like a stone.
The main cause appears to be the idea of loyalty to the company and not to the family. Everyone puts their work first to the point that they do not have children.
(Note, the expense of raising a child does affect this trend as well, but the statistics show the problem is not married people refusing to have kids but instead people NOT getting married).
Samsung does make good products, but their culture is destroying their country.
Samsung and Exxon fleeing New Jersey (Score:2)
Samsung has has a location in Austin for 30 years. They are moving with their eyes open. Exxon has many locations in Texas. Same, same.
Everyone is moving to TX or FL (Score:2, Insightful)
The suffocating regulations and sky high taxes (with nothing to show for it) are pushing everyone away.
Re: (Score:3)
Enjoy the race to the bottom. Industrial pollution on industrial scale, company towns, no rights. The usa was there once, and going back isn't necessarily progress.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Where is all this pollution and company town and no rights?
Re: (Score:2)
> Where is all this pollution and company town and no rights?
Boca Cica?
Re: (Score:3)
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starbase,_Texas
Re: Everyone is moving to TX or FL (Score:1)
Have you ever been?
Re: Everyone is moving to TX or FL (Score:3)
I'm preparing to leave California because what you're describing is exactly the status quo in this state, where in my experience, it isn't in either Texas or Florida. Go look at where the dirtiest cities in the country are all concentrated, and you'll see what I mean.
Actually worse, because the only "race to the bottom" I've seen is California's plan to capture more tax revenue for more social services that it already can't afford. How is that a good idea when the fact that the people who bring in by far th
Re: (Score:2)
If everyone paid more in taxes, we wouldn't have to be nickel and dimed for all the piecemeal options that the government (or life) forces people to have - healthcare, insurances, etc.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You presume that taxes are spent wisely. The reality is that more taxes simple mean more for bureaucrats to squander. Consider the state of California which spends increasingly more money on homelessness to poorer results. The bureaucrats don't make more by actually fixing anything and have no incentive to solve the problem they were tasked with and by taking the problem entirely under the wing of government they eliminate any chance of a competitive market forming or even charitable organizations from prov
IF we elected leaders who could succeed ... (Score:2)
> If everyone paid more in taxes, we wouldn't have to be nickel and dimed for all the piecemeal options that the government (or life) forces people to have - healthcare, insurances, etc.
If we elected leaders won could succeed in building things or fixing things, it we measured politicians by accomplishments rather than by posturing and having good intentions, we could fix things with the tax money already being spent and not need to raise more taxes.
Spending is not the problem, Other countries spend less and have better results because there is accountability.
Gavin Newsom failed in his promises as major. Then ran for governor and won, and failed in his promises as governor. Now he is
Re: (Score:2)
I'm for some taxes on the rich instead of nearly no taxes for the rich. That's the compromise I'm willing to accept, but for some people that's not good enough.
With an inability to print its own money, states need revenue in order to provide services to its people. Often the services are an obligation under the state constitution (such as California's education budget).
But ultimately my income tax here isn't the issue. Even the property tax isn't too bad, because it's fixed at a very low rate. It's that the
Re:Everyone is moving to TX or FL (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, that is the messaging. It's not the reality, but it is what what you all tell each other. Posted from the poor unpopulated state of California... with it's puny $4T+ GDP
Re: (Score:2)
I'm curious, what is the reality? These companies are moving to Texas and Florida for *some* reason. If not for less regulation, what is it?
Re: (Score:2)
Whatever the reasons are, they certainly won't benefit employees or residents.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe there's a mix. More jobs in those states, do benefit employees. Of course, those who lost jobs in the original state, did not benefit. So the benefits and costs are not evenly distributed.
My curiosity is what OP thought was the motivation if not less regulation.
Re: (Score:2)
Judges. Texas is a very 'might makes right' state, judges and other officials are very friendly to corporations and affluent individuals, so people and companies that do not like the legal system protecting other people from them have been flocking there.
Re: (Score:2)
Consolidation. They see the US as a shrinking market. And they are probably right. Just my guess.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
And, still... even with $4T GDP, they can't afford to fund anything, do anything about drugs (you can exchange your used needles for clean ones for free, so you can shoot up drugs without reusing one! Maybe make it harder for druggies to get their hands on needles :-) ), fix the homeless issue, maybe spread the wealth to poorer states.
Re: (Score:2)
I know you'd love to just let people without money die of disease in camps, but until that's not so unpopular programs that significantly reduce the spread of HIV and others are still a win for taxpayers.
Re: (Score:2)
Common sense: get rid of the drugs, and they don't need needles! There, problem solved.
Re: (Score:2)
Texas is in the top 20 states for violent crime. Florida is 31. (from whatever source [1]this [wikipedia.org] used)
I'd argue that Mississippi and New Hampshire have better gun laws than Texas (and Florida is not even worth considering), and both have far less violent crime than either.
Although I value fresh air, ocean breeze, coastal hiking, fresh produce, cool music scene, and more over gun laws for places I prefer to live. So as long as I can afford to live on the central coast, I'm going to stay here.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_violent_crime_rate#Rate_by_crime
Re: (Score:2)
> Texas is in the top 20 states for violent crime. Florida is 31.
New Jersey has a better (lower) crime rate than either of these states. But I don't think Samsung is moving its headquarters because of crime rates.
If it were about corporate tax rate, they'd move to South Dakota or Wyoming (0% corporate tax rate), although I will point out many companies hardly pay anything in corporate taxes (https://itep.org/88-profitable-corporations-paid-zero-income-tax-in-2025/) and usually even less in state taxes.
If it were about quality of life, they'd move to the Netherlands o
Re: (Score:3)
It's also that Texas has basically no worker protections at all, so anything scummy you want to do with your employees you can do. Too hot? You can force them to keep working. If they drop dead, well, a token amount.
You want to lay off half the workforce? Go right ahead, you don't have to do anything about it or even give any money. Just toss their ass onto the sidewalk and be done with it.
You know, got to avoid the whole situation that happened in Korea.
Re: (Score:3)
If that were true then why don't they move to somewhere like India?
Re: (Score:2)
There is no employment-at-will in India. If companies prefer to follow the law in India (Which a lot of them don't) You have to have a specific reason to fire them (Just Cause).
It's not regulations (Score:2, Insightful)
They're getting ready for mass firings. California and New Jersey both have rules about how you do that. You can still do it, but it's gonna show up in the press and you can't cheat people out of unemployment insurance or agreed upon severance.
Also you have to report the mass firings. Texas lets you sweep them under the rug.
I'm saying don't move. You'll be fired in a year.
You can't race to the bottom
Re: (Score:2)
Poverty and lower cost of living has more to do with it. Manufacturers trying to minimize labor costs will go to so-called shithole countries to save money.
Research, engineering, science based businesses will also go where people can be hired cheaply, but if an insufficient number are available they will go where people with education and experience live.