Outside the Box: Chuck Schumer and Bernie Sanders, a ban on share buybacks is plain stupid

This post was originally published on this site

In today’s edition of “People Are Saying Stupid Things About Stock Buybacks,” I want to talk about the Chuck Schumer and Bernie Sanders proposal to ban stock buybacks. Here it is in case you want to become a little bit dumber.

Snark aside, I found the op-ed kinda lazy. Their proposal can be boiled down to:

“Share buybacks are manipulative ways to enrich CEOs and avoid having to pay workers higher wages so if firms are going to engage in this behavior then they also need to raise wages.”

First, a stock buyback is just a low-risk way of allocating capital for firms that are uncertain about the return on investment of higher wages and R&D. When firms earns excess profit, they don’t necessarily know what to do with the money. They can engage in high-risk allocations (like R&D, paying employees, etc) or they can engage in low-risk allocations (like dividends, buybacks. etc).

For firms that are performing well and earning excess profits, dividends and buybacks are a low-risk way of saying “let’s return this money to shareholders because we don’t have a high-probability high ROI idea for it.”

This doesn’t mean the firm doesn’t want to pay employees higher wages or invest in R&D. It just means the firm is performing well and it doesn’t want to take any unnecessary risks that might put the firm AND all of its employees at risk. This is prudent and better than sitting on the profits and doing nothing, or worse, investing it in employees and R&D, earning a negative ROI and risking the firm’s future.

Second, someone needs to destroy this idea that buybacks are necessarily incentivizing short-termism and manipulating the stock market. If these ideas were right, then buybacks would be bad for firms in the long term. And if buybacks were bad for firms in the long term, then their stocks would underperform in the long term.

But data show the opposite is true. Firms that buy back shares tend to outperform or at least match the S&P 500’s SPX, -0.22% performance over the long term. This makes sense because a critique of buybacks is really just a critique of firms for making excess profit. (See Yook and O’Shaughnessy)

Of course, it’s easy for the rest of us to look at Corporate America and say “why do they buy back stock when they could easily pay people more or invest in R&D!?!?!”

The simple answer is those are difficult decisions with uncertain outcomes. Paying a dividend or repurchasing shares is a low-risk decision with a fairly certain outcome. And let’s be honest, if the rest of us really knew how to better allocate that capital, then we’d be putting our own capital to work and helping to put these supposedly bad-decision-making firms out of business. The truth is none of us knows how to allocate that excess capital better than the firms themselves.

More importantly, this general idea to ban buybacks is silly. After all, if a company is allowed to issue stock, then why shouldn’t it be allowed to retire stock? It makes no sense to say that a firm that issues a de-facto liability cannot retire that liability if it wants to. If any entity should have the legal ability to retire liabilities, surely the liability issuer itself should be the one to have that right!

Specifically on the Schumer/Sanders plan, what do they think will happen if you ban buybacks and dividends? Do they really think firms will automatically start taking more risk? Of course not. They will most likely just buy other low-risk assets or leave the cash as it is. Nothing will change except now the firms will likely retain all of their profits and then people will complain about too much cash on corporate balance sheets.

Lastly, Schumer and Sanders are really criticizing firms for retaining too much profit and not paying higher wages. This is a reasonable criticism and there are reasonable ways to combat those problems that don’t involve an indirect and inefficient means of attacking the problem. For instance, they could raise the minimum wage or raise corporate taxes. I’ve long advocated for a change in the treatment of dividends and capital gains so that capital gains taxes are truly long-term (at least 5 years). This would not only tackle the concern about short-termism, but would also treat secondary markets for what they are — a place where ordinary income is earned and “investments” are rarely made. There’s no need for another set of regulations attacking a problem that can more directly be attacked.

Look, I am not saying that all of the critiques of buybacks are wrong. There are decent arguments against buybacks that offset employee based compensation as well as debt-fueled buybacks. But there is nothing inherently evil or manipulative about buybacks. They are essentially just prudent ways for firms to allocate capital that they don’t know what to do with.

If politicians understood this, they wouldn’t come up with silly solutions to problems that are easily solved with more direct policy proposals.

Cullen Roche is the author of the Pragmatic Capitalism blog, where this column first appeared. Follow him on Twitter @cullenroche.

Be Sociable, Share!

Related Posts


MarketTamer is not an investment advisor and is not registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. Further, owners, employees, agents or representatives of MarketTamer are not acting as investment advisors and might not be registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or the Financial Industry Regulatory.

This company makes no representations or warranties concerning the products, practices or procedures of any company or entity mentioned or recommended in this email, and makes no representations or warranties concerning said company or entity’s compliance with applicable laws and regulations, including, but not limited to, regulations promulgated by the SEC or the CFTC. The sender of this email may receive a portion of the proceeds from the sale of any products or services offered by a company or entity mentioned or recommended in this email. The recipient of this email assumes responsibility for conducting its own due diligence on the aforementioned company or entity and assumes full responsibility, and releases the sender from liability, for any purchase or order made from any company or entity mentioned or recommended in this email.

The content on any of MarketTamer websites, products or communication is for educational purposes only. Nothing in its products, services, or communications shall be construed as a solicitation and/or recommendation to buy or sell a security. Trading stocks, options and other securities involves risk. The risk of loss in trading securities can be substantial. The risk involved with trading stocks, options and other securities is not suitable for all investors. Prior to buying or selling an option, an investor must evaluate his/her own personal financial situation and consider all relevant risk factors. See: Characteristics and Risks of Standardized Options. The www.MarketTamer.com educational training program and software services are provided to improve financial understanding.

The information presented in this site is not intended to be used as the sole basis of any investment decisions, nor should it be construed as advice designed to meet the investment needs of any particular investor. Nothing in our research constitutes legal, accounting or tax advice or individually tailored investment advice. Our research is prepared for general circulation and has been prepared without regard to the individual financial circumstances and objectives of persons who receive or obtain access to it. Our research is based on sources that we believe to be reliable. However, we do not make any representation or warranty, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy of our research, the completeness, or correctness or make any guarantee or other promise as to any results that may be obtained from using our research. To the maximum extent permitted by law, neither we, any of our affiliates, nor any other person, shall have any liability whatsoever to any person for any loss or expense, whether direct, indirect, consequential, incidental or otherwise, arising from or relating in any way to any use of or reliance on our research or the information contained therein. Some discussions contain forward looking statements which are based on current expectations and differences can be expected. All of our research, including the estimates, opinions and information contained therein, reflects our judgment as of the publication or other dissemination date of the research and is subject to change without notice. Further, we expressly disclaim any responsibility to update such research. Investing involves substantial risk. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results, and a loss of original capital may occur. No one receiving or accessing our research should make any investment decision without first consulting his or her own personal financial advisor and conducting his or her own research and due diligence, including carefully reviewing any applicable prospectuses, press releases, reports and other public filings of the issuer of any securities being considered. None of the information presented should be construed as an offer to sell or buy any particular security. As always, use your best judgment when investing.