Possibly. Unless the tax code gave them incentive to cut costs elsewhere instead. I would guess such incentive to be logical, given the problem they're trying to solve.

In any case, one of the big premises of the article is that hiring less is happening anyway and contributing to the need for a basic livable income. So, that's a bit circular.

And, of course, that's just one of many potential cost-cutting measures.

Good thing we've got BI then, so we're no longer slaves to making any move at all because it might cost someone a shit minimum wage job.