Again, you’re fixated on a single dimension.
Keeping people employed with quality jobs is a hard problem to solve.
People demand jobs. And demand them from elected officials to “fix this”, even though they have little to do with creating efficient, viable businesses.
So lost tax revenue from the business. Balanced against a larger, working class that pays taxes.
Depending on the terms and needs of the community, there’s a threshold where the deal will always make sense.
Your rich investor who gains a little bit more due to tax evasion of the company they invested in gives you nothing most of the time because they just reinvest it elsewhere and even if he buys one more yacht with it, they are so few, that their impact on the job market is negligible.
Now the fact that the company which does not pay the taxes for the infrastructure they freely use to generate their revenue can go to a politician and tell him: "give me taxpayer money/let me pay less tax or I go to the county next door" does not have anything to do with employment. It's a hole in national law. If there would be no politician who's allowed to throw money at those already wealthy companies, they would have null leverage, the subsidies would go to those who really need it, the companies would have to pay their taxes (you can't outsource everything) and the mass of citizens would profit from more money in their pocket, a properly maintained infrastructure and money the state has in emergencies like we're witnessing today.
Your "single dimension" view on the situation is the old prayer those who steal taxpayer money/not pay for what they use have told us for years. It's a ridiculously shitty story nobody buys, so please get a dimension.
Your business uses the state financed infrastructure to exist. Just like your employers do.
Not paying for those contributions is anti social behaviour.