or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Apple CEO Tim Cook declines RSU dividends worth over $75M
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple CEO Tim Cook declines RSU dividends worth over $75M - Page 2

post #41 of 64

Sort of reminds me of some old guy that only took $1/yr salary. Just can't bet on these people that don't take all they possibly can -- I would personally like to believe that the million shares he got at becoming CEO was fair and didn't need to be padded where as others might have cried foul.

post #42 of 64

The "old guy" takes his in stock since he pays less tax on it as capital gains. Nice to have the option.

 

Poorer folk have to pay regular income taxes, making them... well...  poorer! lol.gif

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #43 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

The "old guy" takes his in stock since he pays less tax on it as capital gains. Nice to have the option.

Poorer folk have to pay regular income taxes, making them... well...  poorer! lol.gif

As usual, you're wrong.

If you take $1 M in salary or $1 M in stock, it's still classified as income. A stock grant is taxed just as if you were paid in cash. You're going to be taxed at the marginal tax rate either way.

Now, the GAINS on that stock are taxed at capital gains rates, but there is absolutely no difference between:
a. Receiving $1 M in stock
and
b. Receiving $1 M in cash and immediately buying $1 M in stock.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #44 of 64

I guess we will never find out what Tim Cook's real motivations are. But nevertheless, if it was out of some philosophical reasoning that he has more than enough money, and there is no need for any more, then I think his philosophy is misplaced.

 

I would rather Tim did one of the following:

- Use the $75 million to buy Macs and iPads to be given to children around the world who cannot afford to buy a Mac or an iPad.

- Establish some sort of scholarship so that under privileged kids can also get a first class education.

- Establish a VC fund that will invest in startups that have innovative ideas around Apple products, and that will make difference to quality of life for the disabled (hearing/vision impaired, movement impaired, etc).

 

or something else like that.

 

If Apple was a struggling company, or not so successful company, then his giving up the $75 million has some meaning and might help Apple. But in this case, it will not even impact Apple's cash balances at the second decimal - so why bother!

post #45 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by macarena View Post

I guess we will never find out what Tim Cook's real motivations are. But nevertheless, if it was out of some philosophical reasoning that he has more than enough money, and there is no need for any more, then I think his philosophy is misplaced.

I would rather Tim did one of the following:
- Use the $75 million to buy Macs and iPads to be given to children around the world who cannot afford to buy a Mac or an iPad.
- Establish some sort of scholarship so that under privileged kids can also get a first class education.
- Establish a VC fund that will invest in startups that have innovative ideas around Apple products, and that will make difference to quality of life for the disabled (hearing/vision impaired, movement impaired, etc).

or something else like that.

If Apple was a struggling company, or not so successful company, then his giving up the $75 million has some meaning and might help Apple. But in this case, it will not even impact Apple's cash balances at the second decimal - so why bother!

While your suggestions are good ones, I suspect that he didn't do so because his attention is focused internally. He wants to show the rest of the employees that he's on their side and is not simply out to enrich himself. Donating the money to charity would have accomplished some of that, but too many people have this misguided notion that you somehow benefit yourself if you give money to charity.

In any event, the message is clearly targeted toward his relationship with the other employees - and this goes along with the other story about him having lunch with the employees and with the new policy on charitable donations. He's trying to morph Apple into a nicer, more communal organization and wants to make it clear that the Jobs days of abuse from management are gone for good.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #46 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


As usual, you're wrong.
If you take $1 M in salary or $1 M in stock, it's still classified as income. A stock grant is taxed just as if you were paid in cash. You're going to be taxed at the marginal tax rate either way.
Now, the GAINS on that stock are taxed at capital gains rates, but there is absolutely no difference between:
a. Receiving $1 M in stock
and
b. Receiving $1 M in cash and immediately buying $1 M in stock.

...Yeah other than the tax liabilities, being paid in stock or paid in cash are exactly the same. Thank you sir.

 

I've no doubt that someday you'll help clarify a point or assist someone in better understanding without trying to insult them at the same time. But at least you're consistent.


Edited by Gatorguy - 5/25/12 at 9:31am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #47 of 64

*Grumble*

......Stupid new forum software.


Edited by bigdaddyp - 5/25/12 at 11:22am
Crying? No, I am not crying. I am sweating through my eyes.
Reply
Crying? No, I am not crying. I am sweating through my eyes.
Reply
post #48 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

...Yeah other than the tax liabilities, being paid in stock or paid in cash are exactly the same. Thank you sir.

I've no doubt that someday you'll help clarify a point or assist someone in better understanding without trying to insult them at the same time. But at least you're consistent.

You've managed to continue your history of never getting anything right.

EVEN CONSIDERING TAX CONSEQUENCES, being paid in stock and cash are the same.

If you receive cash and immediately buy stock, it's identical to receiving stock. The tax consequences are the same.

If you receive stock and immediately sell it, it's identical to receiving cash. The tax consequences are the same.

If you receive stock and hold onto it, the tax consequences for that transaction are exactly the same as if you received cash.


Your statement ("The "old guy" takes his in stock since he pays less tax on it as capital gains.") is absolutely, totally, completely, 100% false. As usual.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #49 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

...Yeah other than the tax liabilities, being paid in stock or paid in cash are exactly the same. Thank you sir.

 

I've no doubt that someday you'll help clarify a point or assist someone in better understanding without trying to insult them at the same time. But at least you're consistent.

So what is the difference in the tax liabilities between being paid in cash or stock?

Crying? No, I am not crying. I am sweating through my eyes.
Reply
Crying? No, I am not crying. I am sweating through my eyes.
Reply
post #50 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigdaddyp View Post

So what is the difference in the tax liabilities between being paid in cash or stock?

IMO you should get advice on that from your tax advisor rather than a random internet guylol.gif. If you don't have one or just simply curious, this is a generalized explanation. IANATA

http://www.ehow.com/about_7475249_tax-company-stock-lieu-cash.html


Edited by Gatorguy - 5/25/12 at 3:25pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #51 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

My sources tell me it is proof Apple is making a tv.

 

They are actually using a series of little 5" screens glued together to make a foldable 50" TV screen. Very cutting edge. 

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #52 of 64

I'm surprised people here can not realize what the simple answer to "what's going on here".


As usual, humans overcomplicate these matters and run amuck with ridiculous "reasonings". 

He's not taking it obviously because being that under Steve Jobs, Apple was "anti-Dividend", and under Tim Cook, they quickly issue a Dividend, it can appear as if they're "going behind Steve's back", per-se. Tim not taking his share is him proving that he has no personal motive by doing this, and is doing it as he feels it's what's best for the company and it's share holders.

post #53 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

IMO you should get advice on that from your tax advisor rather than a random internet guy:lol: . If you don't have one or just simply curious, this is a generalized explanation. IANATA
http://www.ehow.com/about_7475249_tax-company-stock-lieu-cash.html

People should certainly not take tax advice from people like Gatorguy who don't know what they're talking about.

BTW, the link you provided says:
"The IRS views compensation in stock -- even it cannot be easily sold -- as income and expects to collect taxes on this income event." and "The IRS expects you to report earnings on your taxes as ordinary income whether the compensation is in the form of cash or even company stock. "

That's exactly what I've been saying all along and the exact opposite of what you said:
"The "old guy" takes his in stock since he pays less tax on it as capital gains. Nice to have the option."

So your own link proves that you don't know what you're talking about.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #54 of 64

Oh geesh, I just feel terrible now, having realized I'd make a poor tax attorney.lol.gif

 

For the record, according to my link there appear to be definite tax considerations if stock is taken in lieu of cash, and it says much more than you apparently took note of, but to repeat IANATA. That's what I pay accountants and an advisor to take care of. I doubt anyone intends to take tax advice from either one of us anyway.


Edited by Gatorguy - 5/25/12 at 6:53pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #55 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzilla View Post

I'm surprised people here can not realize what the simple answer to "what's going on here".


As usual, humans overcomplicate these matters and run amuck with ridiculous "reasonings". 

He's not taking it obviously because being that under Steve Jobs, Apple was "anti-Dividend", and under Tim Cook, they quickly issue a Dividend, it can appear as if they're "going behind Steve's back", per-se. Tim not taking his share is him proving that he has no personal motive by doing this, and is doing it as he feels it's what's best for the company and it's share holders.

Exactly what I was thinking; it's a conflict of interest thing. And he doesn't need the money. 

post #56 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Oh geesh, I just feel terrible now, having realized I'd make a poor tax attorney.lol.gif

Yeah, we're still trying to figure out exactly what subject you DO know about (other than shilling for Google, of course).
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #57 of 64

Jr, it's really not a requirement that you be pompous and rude with every post. With all the dishonesty you've shown the past couple of days and were called out on I'm a bit surprised you didn't learn anything from it.

 

I'll be happy to post the links to them if you can't recall or insist it didn't happen. Courtesy is returned in kind.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #58 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Jr, it's really not a requirement that you be pompous and rude with every post. With all the dishonesty you've shown the past couple of days and were called out on I'm a bit surprised you didn't learn anything from it.

I'll be happy to post the links to them if you can't recall or insist it didn't happen. Courtesy is returned in kind.

You have a strange way of saying "I was wrong when I claimed that Cook would save money on taxes by taking stock rather than cash".
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #59 of 64

You just couldn't help yourself, could you? I was wrong, specifically in my example why someone might take stock rather than cash. BTW, contrary to your claim I never said Cook would save money by taking stock rather than cash. In fact never said anything about Cook at all. As least try to be accurate.

 

Perhaps you could take the time to do the same with these posts of yours from just this week, which weren't simply misspoken, but IMO intentionally dishonest, and which you've never acknowledged as false, dishonest and/or disingenuous. You just bolt from the conversation rather than admitting to your errors or worse, purposeful deceit.

 

http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/150261/rumor-google-asus-to-release-joint-7-inch-tablet-in-july/40#post_2115235

 

http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/150257/apple-says-doj-lawsuit-fundamentally-flawed-could-harm-consumers/80#post_2115032

 

 
 
 
As I said, courtesy will be answered in kind. You should try it as it makes the forums more pleasant for all of us. Lying to your fellow forum members and casual visitors, liberally sprinkled with personal insults,  doesn't get you respect which is what it appears you're begging for.

Edited by Gatorguy - 5/26/12 at 9:04am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #60 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Perhaps you could take the time to do the same with these posts of yours from just this week, which weren't simply misspoken, but IMO intentionally dishonest, and which you've never acknowledged as false, dishonest and/or disingenuous. You just bolt from the conversation rather than admitting to your errors or worse, purposeful deceit.

Sorry, but none of those show any dishonesty.

But that's your MO. When you look like an idiot, spread lies about other people.

The fact is that every post of yours comes across as a Google shill.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #61 of 64

Just the reply I expected. You've never been wrong yet.

 

Forum members are perfectly capable of reading and deciding for themselves. Despite requests for citations (several) or response to claims you were being you being disingenous you wouldn't either:

 

1. Acknowledge your errors or

2. Supply proof you were correct.

 

Just like I wrote you ditched the threads instead, avoiding an answer rather than admit to anything wrong. Well done.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #62 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Forum members are perfectly capable of reading and deciding for themselves.

Yep. And that's why quite a few posters have said that you sound like a Google shill.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #63 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Forum members are perfectly capable of reading and deciding for themselves..

Yes, they are. They have. Move along.
post #64 of 64

Steve would have paid a dividend. He wouldn't have had a choice. In terms of shareholder value, Apple's cash hoard was being a drag. Apple was probably earning less than 1% on their cash hoard. If Apple paid a dividend, a shareholder could buy stock in another company and generate a much greater return on it. 

 

There's also the issue of share creep. A lot of people at Apple have received options grants. When they exercise these options, those are new shares on the market. That will reduce the share price due to share creep. By doing a stock buyback, Apple can combat share creep. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › Apple CEO Tim Cook declines RSU dividends worth over $75M