>>So, here's the plan-
>>when the dems take over, leave the corporate tax rates where they are, soak the billionaires for enough to reinstate the state and local tax deductions.
>>If the dems don't take over - I don't see how that party can continue to exist.

Those tax cuts are due to expire in 2022. Whoever is in power will be brave indeed not to perpetuate them if current trends continue. I wonder how Trump will be thought of at that stage?

The irony is that state incentives are a combination of corporate welfare, stand-over tactics and market corruption. For a start, corporates should not be subsidized to do that which makes sense in ordinary course of business. If a corp needs a campus, then it needs a campus. Somewhere. And if it doesn't make economic sense to establish a campus without a subsidy, then it's a recipe for tears to establish something that survives only by suckling at the state teat. If it does make sense but it's a better market choice to set up in state A versus state B, then for B to issue a subsidy to warp the equation, corrupts the market and risks a subsidy war, with the corp playing states off against other to buy a proposition that the corp has to do anyway!

If the corp is taking a risk, it may make more sense for state to subsidize- but why not in exchange for a share of the proposition, in normal market style rather than corporate welfare. By this measure, all the $B for Tesla and other corps eventually translates to control if the corporate flounders, or a bumper windfall if the corp thrives.

It's interesting that those most likely to thunder disapproval of welfare for the poor, often are equally loud approving of corporate welfare for themselves or their funders.