The biggest U.S. companies on the S&P 500 spent more than $1 trillion on stock buybacks and dividends in 2024

Core Insights - The five largest corporations by market cap—Microsoft, Nvidia, Apple, Amazon, and Alphabet—have a combined market value exceeding $16 trillion and generate billions in annual profits, contributing tens of billions in taxes [2][3] - Over the past five years, these companies have spent more than $1 trillion on stock buybacks and dividends, significantly outpacing their federal tax payments during the same period [3][6] - In 2024, the entire S&P 500 spent nearly $1.6 trillion on stock buybacks and dividends, which is three times the total income of the poorest 27 million U.S. households, estimated at $498 billion [4] Shareholder Payouts - There has been an unprecedented level of shareholder payouts in recent years, which includes both dividends and stock buybacks [4][5] - Oxfam's analysis indicates that funds allocated for shareholder payouts could have been used for internal investments, such as increasing worker wages or enhancing sustainability [6] Corporate Tax Trends - Corporate taxes have declined since the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, reducing effective tax rates for large corporations from an average of 22% to 12.8% [7] - If the five largest companies had paid taxes at pre-TCJA rates, they would have contributed an additional $168 billion in taxes over the past five years [7] Economic Inequality - The current trend of shareholder payouts disproportionately benefits the top 1% and wealthy executives, while the bottom half of the U.S. population holds only 1% of the stock market [8][9] - Tax savings from corporations are not being reinvested into workers or consumers but are instead directed towards enriching shareholders and executives [9] Potential for Policy Change - There is an opportunity for policymakers to address these trends through measures such as taxing or banning buybacks, capping dividends, and reforming the corporate tax code [10] - The analysis highlights that corporations can drive inequality, but also indicates the possibility for change through policy interventions [10]