If taxes disappeared tomorrow, would workers actually see more money—or would companies just keep the difference?
Billionaire entrepreneur and Cost Plus Drugs co-founder Mark Cuban says that question misses the bigger point. In a 2019 GQ video where he answered fan questions, Cuban focused on something else entirely: who owns the company before the money ever shows up.
The premise sounds fair, but he says it’s flawed
The question put to Cuban was straightforward. If his tax rate dropped to zero, would he give that extra money to employees?
“I’ll tell you exactly what I would do,” he said.
Don’t Miss:
“If taxes went to zero, and I don’t think that’s a good idea, but if taxes did go to zero, I would invest in the company to make it as big and profitable,” Cuban said. “So stinking profitable, that because the employees are owners, whenever I got paid, they would get paid too.”
His answer shifts the focus. It is not about handing out money after profits are made. It is about structuring the business so employees are already tied to those profits.
Broadcast.com turned ownership into real money
Cuban pointed to a deal he knows well.
“If you remember what I said about Broadcast.com, when we sold the company, out of 330 employees, 300 own shares of stock and became millionaires,” he said.
When Yahoo acquired Broadcast.com for $5.7 billion, about 91% of employees held equity. That meant the payout reached far beyond leadership.
Trending: Think you’re saving enough for your kids? You might be dangerously off — see why
Cuban has said those employees did not just see gains on paper. Along with stock value, he made sure payouts included real cash tied to the sale. At the time, giving that many employees ownership was not common. It drew criticism. It also created hundreds of millionaires.
It wasn’t just one company, he says he did it every time
Cuban’s example did not stop with Broadcast.com.
“In every business I’ve sold, I’ve paid out bonuses to every employee that was there more than a year,” he wrote in a post on X in 2024.
That expands the pattern. The approach was not tied to one moment or one company. Across multiple businesses, he said employees who stayed shared in the outcome when those companies were sold.
It lines up with what he described in the GQ interview. Ownership during the build. Payouts when value is realized.
