OnlyInCalifornia
Southern California/Vegas
Yes it is better you clown.
Let's say the effective tax rate for a business is 50%.
If a business makes $100M and gives nothing away, they'd pay $50M in taxes and take home $50M. If they decide to give $10M to charity, then they're taxed on $90M, so they pay $45M in taxes and take home $45M...even though they pay less taxes they take home less money! The write off helps alleviate some of their tax burden, but it doesn't make giving away money better, financially, than just keeping.
Now, granted, we have a bracketed tax structure in this country, so the effective tax rate would also decrease, so they'd take home a little more than that $45M, but it would still be less than that $50M they'd take home by giving nothing away.
It is only better to give it away if they don't actually give it away or they write off expenses they'd incur even if there was no tax benefit.
No it fukking isnt and your apples to oranges example is comical. Especially considering Jay-z and Beyonce pay taxes in various states, where tax obligations are different, and factor in. Not to mention you seem to think it's a flat tax across the board and have no concept of how deducations/write offs work.
Why do you think you know better than businesses that do this on a regular basis?