Comment

Comment by AnthonyMouse

> Share buybacks allow companies to reward executives directly as their compensation is tied to stock price. If we started not doing that, the priorities might shift, but those executives like things the way they are.

This isn't right but it's adjacent.

Executives don't need buybacks to get whatever compensation. Their compensation is negotiated and you can write the contract to make it whatever.

However, paying dividends is a taxable event, which means shareholders don't like it. You have to pay the tax on the dividend immediately instead of when you sell the shares, even if you just use the money to buy more shares. Buybacks don't work like that unless you're the one who sells your shares in the buyback. Which you can be if you'd rather have the money immediately (and pay the tax) than de facto increase your holdings in the company.

If transferring money to shareholders as dividends forces them to realize taxable gains before they want to then they'd prefer the company keep the money and invest it in something internally instead. Buybacks give them away around that.

But that's not necessarily bad. The shareholders (the ones who sold their shares) get the money instead and then invest it in something else, ideally a different company so that the existing large company doesn't get even bigger.

Also, when the company keeps the money, it doesn't have to use it for R&D at all. Companies often use it to acquire other companies, which is the worst.

You don't really want a tax incentive to make big companies bigger.

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton