So, Trump took a 10% stake in Intel, in exchange for releasing almost 9 billion dollars of subsidies without requiring Intel to meet various milestones.

Is this bad?

Let me tell you a story. Once upon a time the US government gave loans to both Solyndra and Tesla. Without those loans, neither company would have had a chance. Solyndra (solar panels) went bankrupt and people screamed that the US government shouldn’t have subsidized it. Tesla made bank and paid back the loan.

Loans or subsidies without an equity stake, mean that the government is exposed to the downside (loss of all the money loaned) without being exposed to the upside. Imagine if the US had taken a ten percent stake in Tesla? Even if it sold it off over time, it would have made huge bank. Just like being a VC, the government could take equity stakes in a lot of companies that are startups or trying for turnarounds. Even if most fail, if a few succeed big-time, then they will more than make their money back.

Now in the old days this wasn’t necessary. Why? Because there were high taxes on companies and rich people. If a company got rich because the government helped, the government was going to get its money back. But with effective corporate tax rates so low and so much legal tax avoidance, in many cases corporate tax rates are effectively zero. So if the government is going to help a firm directly, it needs another way to benefit from the upside and not just take on the downside risk.

So, for once, Trump has done the right thing and in a way that isn’t a complete fuck-up. This policy should be expanded. (Next we’ll discuss why the $100,000 B1 Visa scheme won’t work, and how it could be done right.)

***

I appreciate everyone who donates or subscribes to keep this site (and Ian) running. Readership is up over 40% this year, and I’m very grateful. If you want to help the blog, please share the articles you like and if you can afford it, and like the content, please Subscribe or donate.