$1.5 trillion tax cut had no major impact on business spending

Reuters ^ | January 28, 2019 | Staff

[C19fan]

The Trump administration's $1.5 trillion tax cut package appeared to have no major impact on businesses' capital investment or hiring plans, according to a survey released a year after the biggest overhaul of the tax code in more than 30 years.

The National Association of Business Economics' quarterly business conditions poll, published on Monday, found that while some companies reported accelerating investments because of lower corporate taxes, 84 percent of respondents said they had not changed plans. That compares to 81 percent in the previous survey published in October.

[C19fan]

I knew that from Day 1 the proponents of this massive cut in corporate taxes were lying about it would provide a boom in hiring and investment. I have zero faith in today's corporate leaders. They are only concerned about stock buy backs. I could tell you personally at my Fortune 500 company, a minuscule amount of the tax windfall went to workers, a bigger slice went to the company's charitable foundation, and 99% went into stock buy backs.

[Kazan]

So, it was just mere coincidence that the unemployment is the lowest its been in 50 years? Or is that result of cutting back billions in regulations?

[Paladin2]

Did you sell them your stock?

[C19fan]

The cutback in regulation is a lot more bang for the buck.

[Parmy]

This is baloney. My son works for a bank. The tax cuts have had a tremendous effect on their bottom line and what they have been able to do to increase saving interest rates.

[Jim Robinson]

Complete and total b/s.

[BushCountry]

We’re a small company and we hired 20 more employees and bought another company with 22 employees. We grown by over 40% and the boss claims it is due to the business climate and tax cuts. They’re full of it. The tax cuts had a tremendous impact.

[BushCountry]

Another numbers don’t lie, liars use numbers article.

[gubamyster]

Yeah, nobody hired anybody. That’s why the unemployment is at an all time low & more people are entering the workforce.

[SmokingJoe]

Total, unadulterated crap. Fake news at it’s best.

[Raycpa]

A more biased source is not possible:

By Ben Leubsdorf
Aug 22, 2016 7:00 am ET
4 COMMENTS
A majority of business economists in a new survey said Hillary Clinton is the best choice to oversee the U.S. economy as president.

Her Republican rival, Donald Trump, didn’t even come in second.
https://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2016/08/22/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-or-gary-johnson-u-s-business-economists-have-a-strong-preference/

[savedbygrace]

They don’t let you see the full results unless you’re a member of the National Association of Business Economics org.

But it’s just a poll. Meaningless.

[Mr. Mohasky]

I work for a private company, and every single employee received $1,000 bonus directly attributable to the tax cut. This was in addition to our annual and quarterly bonus’.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

With a membership of 3,000 and a Cast of Socialist Characters at the helm, this DC ‘Non-Profit’ is not going to put me into Panic Mode about our economy based on their ‘findings.’ More Trump-Bashing inside The Beltway, IMHO. ;)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Association_for_Business_Economics

[C19fan]

I received a similar amount then I checked the company’s SEC filings and that amount was a pittance compared to the total tax benefit the company received. The company gave twice as much money to its foundation than to the employees.

[Tell It Right]

The people who tell you the tax cuts aren’t related to the awesome business investment and job numbers are the same people who “connect the dots” between global warming and blizzards. :)

[Cincinnatus.45-70]

Well, if Rooters says it, it has to be true.

[Raycpa]

If the company is not paying you what you are worth then get another job. You should not consider that your pay is based on the tax rate of the company you work for but rather the value of your work in the market place.

If you find the value to be too low then its up to you to improve your value and your marketability.

[econjack]

I'm not buying this at all. First, the full effect of the tax cuts will only happen to capital investment if business feels the cuts are permanent. The Pelosi noise factor makes business investment less vigorous that it would be otherwise. Once business is convinced the cuts are permanent, watch what happens to growth. Second, was the question actually framed as not having a "major impact" on actual business spending, or was it framed on planned business spending? Big difference, since it takes time for planned capital expenditures to occur.

Also, the statement minuscule amount of the tax windfall went to workers implies that it should have. Really? Why? Historically, labor's share of GDP has remained remarkably stable for the past 80 years, over many major tax cuts, so why should it change now? Measured differently, lower unemployment means a lot of that extra income ended up in the hands of more workers, which means somebody is hiring people which means aggregate payments to labor is rising. However, expecting the percentages to change is unlikely.

[M Kehoe]

Hi.

“quarterly business conditions poll, “

A poll, but not a 10Q. And by now a 10k.

Rock and roll.

5.56mm