Dodgers aren't taking revenue sharing as a profit though, they are typically taking it as a loss. They almost always give considerably more to the revenue sharing pool than the ~$200m they get back.
They make up for it with their remaining 52% and the 50% ownership they have in their network deal. Which, as the system is set up to be, is the way it should be for every team. Revenue sharing proceeds are meant to cover or add to your teams payroll. The remainder of teams TV deals that aren't added to the pool on top of ownership in the network, ticket sales, merch, concessions, etc are the profit they're supposed to pocket each year.
And to reference the above grievance filed by the MLBPA on the Pirates from Criznit, they did that because the Pirates conveniently reported a profit that matched their revenue sharing receipt the same year they cut payroll.
But yes, the MLBPA wants teams to spend, they also want the typical big spenders not hesitant to spend more, where the tax aspect becomes tricky for them to agree to anything.