Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (12) | Ignore Thread Prev | Next
Author: Tode Three stars, 500 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 210442  
Subject: Re: Dinner with Warren Last Night Redux Date: 2/13/2006 11:17 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
>if the government's share is worth 34x its annual take, does that not imply that the shareholders' share is worth the same multiple of annual after-tax earnings?<

<<I don't think so... The government can take it's share in cash and still expect next year's payment to be greater. This is true because the rest of us don't take our share in cash, but reinvest it for the benefit of all-including the government.>>

Interesting brainteaser. It still seems to me that if you assume Berkshire's pre-tax earnings are growing at a certain rate forever, and apply a perpetuity formula to get the multiplier, the same multiplier ought to apply to the government 35% share and Berkshire's 65% share. Both pieces continue to grow at the same rate forever. Each year the government's take increases, but so does Berkshire's at the exact same rate. So I would still argue that the multiplier "ought to be" the same for both pieces.

Now when you introduce the double taxation issue at the shareholder level, you add another moving part that complicates the analysis. Perhaps WEB would say the double taxation means that a lower multiple ought to be applied to the after-tax earnings of the corporation, because the only way shareholders can get access to the cash is buy getting a dividend or selling shares, both taxed at a maximum of 15% at today's rates. But then what do you do with taxpayers in a lower bracket, or with shares held in an IRA which eventually will get taxed at regular rates when distributions are taken from the IRA. Are you going to say that the value of a Berkshire share varies from one person to the next, and also depends on the type of account in which the shares are owned. That would really open a can of worms.

Anyway, enough of this theoretical stuff. If anybody wants to buy some BRK shares for 34x earnings, shoot me an email.


Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post  
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (12) | Ignore Thread Prev | Next

Announcements

2013 Feste Award Voting Begins!
Who will win the 2013 Feste Award? Vote now for the Fool that most exemplifies the Fool Community mission of Learning Together!
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Post of the Day:
Tax Strategies

TMFPMarti-Feeling Good
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
Community Home
Speak Your Mind, Start Your Blog, Rate Your Stocks

Community Team Fools - who are those TMF's?
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and "#1 Media Company to Work For" (BusinessInsider 2011)! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.
Advertisement