If that's the policy goal would it not be much easier to just build programs to support startups and entrepreneurs?
Remember you are talking about denying a CEO the ability to decide whether to invest or not invest in additional production capacity and instead assigning this task to the government. The CEO has more information about his own company than the government, which means that the government is not capable of making this decision. The government is also insulated from the consequences of making the wrong decision, if a company loses revenue or even shuts down the government is not directly affected.
I elaborated a little on an alternative proposal for increasing investment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20665196
I think the only thing similar to planned economy here is that you're shifting tax burden and resources invested from larger companies to smaller companies. The idea being that small companies are a beneficial resource because they contribute more directly and locally to their economies.
You could argue that this is a distortion but I think it's a long way from a planned economy.
If it is in the US, my intuition is that it wouldn't be very good.