[nickflood]

What the other person meant, I think, is that when you buy services from the companies, those companies then pay a 20% tax on profit to the state, additionally, all the salaries they pay to people also end up ta ed at 30-40%, so much of the labor cost will be returned to the state and only raw materials won't (but if they are sourced locally, the suppliers will also contribute some taxes). Don't know the exact division between labor and materials, but my armchair guess would be that 20% of the cost of factory will end up as tax paid to the state.

[qeternity]

I know what they meant.

That doesn’t mean you can just argue a point without any sort of justification.

[laingc]

I think GP is prefectly well aware of what was meant, and their point still stands - you need to do a lot of careful analysis to actually claim any ROI for these kinds of government handouts, and the burden of proof is very firmly on those claiming the benefits. The history of these things is overwhelmingly that in the final tally, actual benefits fall far short of break even.

[ImprobableTruth]

I don't feel comfortable with people just claiming that there's a positive ROI, but I feel the same about claiming "usually the ROI doesn’t materialize for the State" without anything to back it up.

>The history of these things is overwhelmingly that in the final tally, actual benefits fall far short of break even.

Do you have some source for this?