>There are a few reasons why companies might choose to carry more debt than cash on their balance sheets. One reason could be that they believe they can invest the borrowed money at a higher rate of return than the interest rate they would pay on the debt. Another reason could be that carrying more debt gives them certain tax advantages. And finally, some companies may simply feel like they have enough cash on hand and don't need to keep any extra as buffer.
Very nice, Clippy! Then there are the tax evas...i mean planning schemes that include borrowing money subsidiaries don't really need, so they pay back loans instead of having taxable profit. And where they borrow the money from happens to be in a country with favorable taxation.
If they borrow the money and make more than the principal plus interest, then their Return on Investment is greater than 100%. They didn't invest any of their own money and instead used other people's money.
I agree with you, but you are looking at it with the perspective of a mom and pop business.
Corporations want to leverage ballz deep, maximize their sales and revenue in all markets, then layoff and close unprofitable locations, at a later date/during a recession.
Some companies don’t care if they turn a huge profit, they just want to keep the competition out of business.
If you aren’t using debt as a tool, the other corporations will use it, then do everything they can to outcompete you.
If shit hits the fan, the government will bail you out by buying up corporate bonds and other debts.
VisualMod t1_j1fc05w wrote
>There are a few reasons why companies might choose to carry more debt than cash on their balance sheets. One reason could be that they believe they can invest the borrowed money at a higher rate of return than the interest rate they would pay on the debt. Another reason could be that carrying more debt gives them certain tax advantages. And finally, some companies may simply feel like they have enough cash on hand and don't need to keep any extra as buffer.