The Other R&D Boom  

A blog about business and economics.
May 30 2013 9:40 AM

Corporate America's Engaged on an R&D Boom—Repurchases and Dividends

163207759
NEW YORK, NY - MARCH 06: Traders work on the floor of The New York Stock Exchange on March 6, 2013 in New York City.

Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images

Joshua Brown has an entertaining post about the R&D boom in corporate America. Not research and development, but repurchases and dividends. It turns out that a huge share of growth in earnings per share over the past few years has come about through a change in the denominator—the use of earnings to repurchase shares—rather than growth in earnings.

His take is this means a trickle-down recovery:

Clearly, the name of the game is enrichment for the wealthiest households and corporate executives because all of this will someday trickle-down like hard rain - mani-pedis, Michael Kors shopping sprees, Tesla Model S waiting lists, Barney's binges etc. This is so hip hop, the one percent is making it rain on the 3 percent and Diddy's in the hot tup spraying champagne in his own face while the camera lingers in slo-mo.
Advertisement

It is worth emphasizing, however, that in principle there's nothing wrong with corporate America disgorging the cash. One way profits can turn into innovation is for a firm (say, Google) to take its search products and invest them in autonomous car research. But another way profits can turn into innovation is for a profitable firm in a boring sector (say, Safeway) to take its supermarket profits and disgorge them to wealthy shareholders, who then invest their money in capital-hungry innovative startups. This second dynamic is why, in theory, it's better to have a progressive consumption tax that's levied on Barneys binges than a progressive tax on investment income. You want to encourage the dividends and capital gains to be recirculated back into the investment system.

And in fact the orthodox view is more or less that it's better for companies to disgorge the cash and then have capital be reallocated by efficient financial markets than for CEOs to keep control of the cash and direct it at their personal enthusiasms.

My view is that this is mistaken and the focus on "efficiency" ignores the real importance of fundamental innovation. But you wouldn't want to push the heterodox view too far. If investors never got their money back on anything, you'd have very little investment. It seems to me that if you want to really understand the merits or lack thereof of the current R&D boom, you really need to look at specific firms and sectors. I hate to see a company like Apple increasing its repurchases, but Apple really seems like it could and should be doing cool stuff with its money and if it can't think of anything cool to do, it could always be nice and pay those Chinese factory workers more. But there are lots of perfectly good companies in boring stable industries where the prospects for amazing innovation are just legitimately bleak. If your firm has no real expertise in promising markets, then running your company as well as you can and using repurchases to keep earnings per share on a growth path seems very smart.

Matthew Yglesias is the executive editor of Vox and author of The Rent Is Too Damn High.

TODAY IN SLATE

Politics

Don’t Worry, Obama Isn’t Sending U.S. Troops to Fight ISIS

But the next president might. 

The Extraordinary Amicus Brief That Attempts to Explain the Wu-Tang Clan to the Supreme Court Justices

Amazon Is Officially a Gadget Company. Here Are Its Six New Devices.

The Human Need to Find Connections in Everything

It’s the source of creativity and delusions. It can harm us more than it helps us.

How Much Should You Loathe NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell?

Here are the facts.

Altered State

The Plight of the Pre-Legalization Marijuana Offender

What should happen to weed users and dealers busted before the stuff was legal?

Surprise! The Women Hired to Fix the NFL Think the NFL Is Just Great.

You Shouldn’t Spank Anyone but Your Consensual Sex Partner

Moneybox
Sept. 17 2014 5:10 PM The Most Awkward Scenario in Which a Man Can Hold a Door for a Woman
  News & Politics
Weigel
Sept. 17 2014 7:03 PM Once Again, a Climate Policy Hearing Descends Into Absurdity
  Business
Business Insider
Sept. 17 2014 1:36 PM Nate Silver Versus Princeton Professor: Who Has the Right Models?
  Life
Outward
Sept. 17 2014 6:53 PM LGBTQ Luminaries Honored With MacArthur “Genius” Fellowships
  Double X
The XX Factor
Sept. 17 2014 6:14 PM Today in Gender Gaps: Biking
  Slate Plus
Slate Fare
Sept. 17 2014 9:37 AM Is Slate Too Liberal?  A members-only open thread.
  Arts
Brow Beat
Sept. 17 2014 8:25 PM A New Song and Music Video From Angel Olsen, Indie’s Next Big Thing
  Technology
Future Tense
Sept. 17 2014 7:23 PM MIT Researchers Are Using Smartphones to Interact With Other Screens
  Health & Science
Bad Astronomy
Sept. 17 2014 11:18 AM A Bridge Across the Sky
  Sports
Sports Nut
Sept. 15 2014 9:05 PM Giving Up on Goodell How the NFL lost the trust of its most loyal reporters.