Not sure to what degree, but I would say yes taxpayers are. There is an incentive for these guys to sell cheap or why wouldn't they do so for the guys who are in to them for thousands of dollars in tools or been a customer for 10 plus years? Depending on your state...tax dollars for education are even distruibuted in a manner that supports the state universities and students about 3-5 times as much as those at community colleges who will stay in your area and state. Those college bowl games, culinary programs, trips, scholarships awarded to out of state students, and so forth all cost and use the funding available. If there were no incentives to do so, and anyone had cash in hand..why wouldn't they sell it to anyone for the same price if they are still making money?
Marketing... selling a small collection of tools to community college or high school kids with the hope that catching them at their "impressionable" stage, will hook them into being life-long Snap On/Matco/Etc customers. The ones whom spend tens' of thousands of dollars over their life.
While they're certainly not taking a loss on the tools, by cutting out the major salesmen commissions, setting up online auto-purchase practices, etc. They can afford to sell them at a discount, possibly even at cost, as the real aim is marketing; obtaining future customers with brand loyalty. It's a different distribution channel, that has a different cost of business. I still don't see there being any tax payer subsidies.
While you could certainly argue that the tool truck companies would have more customers at a lower price point, like those offered by that form of distribution channel. They'd also lose their essential team of professional salesmen, tool truck dealers. That model wouldn't allow them to regularly visit shops, perform warranty repairs, allow weekly payments, and most importantly of all from a corporate perspective... be salesmen.