10-05-2016, 01:41 PM
(10-05-2016, 04:59 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: No, that's fundamentally wrong. Every dollar they invest has an after-tax cost of say $0.65, so the tax "incentive" only reduces, not eliminate, the investment cost approximately 1/3. So spending $1 to save $0.35 isn't what we would call an incentive.
Investments are tax advantaged, but the demand and ROI has to be there, and higher taxes raises that ROI which actually deters investments that would otherwise be made.
But you claimed that low interest rates were the reason that we did not see the increase in spending from tax cuts.
If the ROI is not there for a company to make out re-investing their own profits then why would they be borrowing money to re-invest?
