No, I work for a very smart company which is representative of most other companies. Any company that needed a tax break in order to expand their business is pretty much destined to fail. Nothing was stopping them from borrowing the money last year at low interest rates to expand. It's interesting to hear you use the terms "deserve", "hate" and "punishment ". You seem to be very emotionally invested in this argument, which is likely why your position is so poor. We have already learned that this style of taxation yields very poor returns . We have seen it numerous times. Putting the deficit spending argument aside, if you were convinced that borrowing 1.5 trillion dollars and dumping it into the economy is the way to go, you are much better off putting it into the hands of the poor and lower middle class, who would spend nearly all of it, recycling it back into the economy, kicking up demand, which is the real driver for investment and job creation, increasing tax revenue, and probably most important of all, expanding the middle class. We currently have a trove of millennials who could pay off their student loans and almost assuredly immediately purchase home. Why the right insists on devolving into a feudal system remains a mystery.
That's what Obama did during the Great Recession. He inherited the wars, the lost tax revenues from the Financial Collapse and the GR, but propping up the poor and unemployed was a big driver he was responsible for towards increasing the deficit in the hundreds of millions. The stock market and pro-business Cons hated that he did that...calling it a waste of money while complaining historic deficits. This was all while the optics of bread lines were whisked away through food stamps and EBT cards despite having numbers of beneficiaries greater in proportion than the Great Depression. Notice how they're cheering deficit increases now when it's their turn in line, and the run up in stocks indicates no worries or fears of financial instability from it. You could argue a factor to the run up is partly through fears that the government will inflate away their runaway debt and asset classes are a better hedge against it.
These companies are flush with cash and yet they still don't invest in the US or increase wages. You are lying. The only reason wages increase is because of a shortage of labor.
The problem with your logic is that you are comparing a fortune 500 company to small businesses. Perhaps these small businesses can take low interest loans to pay their employees better, offer (better) benefits, or hire new employees while never increasing their revenue. I have admitted as much that large corps will simply pocket the money. What you are unwilling to accept is that small businesses can use the break. You instead think they should take loans. I have also stated that I dont completely agree with the tax bill. I dont think its terrible. I dont think its great. I wanted to see more deductions cut like SALT taxes. My opinion is if a person needs a tax break in the form of deductions they should lower their living standards. Its not the poor people who are the ones writing off massive amounts of deductions. What we have learned is that each party blames the negative events on the other and take credit for the positive. What we have always known is that well off people tend to do well during the good times and bad times. This isn't luck. These are people who know how to take advantage of the current market. We can sit around and debate over passed legislation or one can spend their energies on how to take advantage of the new law. Some people are highly opinionated black/white and others see grey. I am fortunate that I work for a small company. I can express my opinion and be heard. I have gone years with no raise or bonus and no benefits because we were on of those companies who were 'destined' to fail. Instead of failing, we sucked it up and stuck it out instead of subjecting ourselves to the massive corporations where employees are just a number. If I get laid off, I know the reason. If I dont get a raise or bonus, I know the reason. I know its not some guy in an office upstairs who was told to cut 35 million from overhead just to suit investors.
One thing I'll say in favor of the tax cuts: tax rates are a factor in investment cases. The lower tax rate will result in higher IRRs and more investment cases will beat their required hurdle rates. So I would expect to see more investment to result.
There's some tricky accounting here considering most of these companies are global. Wouldn't you want to invest in capital in a hire tax market so you can realize a bigger tax break? In terms of expanding markets - yes that makes more sense to maximize your profits in low-tax markets. But the US is a very mature market and for most established companies, growth doesn't happen much in the US - the incentive to invest overseas is more about market share growth, lowering labor costs, and minimizing import duties vs. avoiding tax bills.
