#1 and #2 are OK. #3 makes no sense. The purpose of the tax holiday is to spur investment and create jobs in the US. Giving a dividend so that the shareholders can buy a new Lexus or buy a few more shares of AAPL in their IRA doesn't do anything to accomplish those objectives. Rather, the intent of the tax holiday is for the money to be put into R&D, manufacturing, and other things that create jobs.
No, it makes perfect sense. What you state is the *intent* of the tax holiday. But the previous tax holiday did not have that effect. What I suggest would allow companies like Apple to bring their money home at a discount (no tax on anything going for dividends,) put money in the hands od shareholders where which would allow for reinvestment as they see fit. Making investors happy with dividends is a benefit to the company thats essentially free, taking the sting off repatriating cash for other investments. You could have other provisions for other expenditures, but it would get difficult to regulate and may have perverse incentives and unintended consequences (as almost everything does.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
It's a tax holiday only for the company.
Which is what it's intended to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
If they distribute dividends, the stock holders still have to pay taxes (even if it's in a tax sheltered account, you'll eventually pay taxes).
Not from a Roth or certain other kinds of tax shelters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
If, OTOH, the money is reinvested in growing the company, the stock holder will get their return when they sell the stock - where it will be taxed at capital gains rates. As long as they hold the stock over a year, reinvesting the money creates far less taxes than distributing dividends.
But I am not one who thinks taxes are bad. You see I drive on roads, use the courts, enjoy police protection, need an educated society, live in an economy where I can make money if it is properly regulated, etc. Also my government has obligations and needs taxes to meet them. A government cannot be run in all ways like a business. Unsurpisigly it's aims are far different and more dynamic than those of a business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Heck, even if they don't reinvest and simply put the money in the bank, it would increase the share price - which would again be preferable for the stock holder. It would not accomplish the other objectives (job creation), of course, but distributing dividends is probably the worst thing they could do with the money.
The money is already in a bank. It would make little difference if it were in a bank here, or elsewhere. Only if the money is actually invested or distributed (think spent) will it be of benefit to Apple, the stockholders, or the economy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
That's right - Apple last paid a dividend in 1995. And I suspect that shareholders are not disappointed in their return on investment during that period.
Dividends only make sense if you have nothing better to do with the money. Apple apparently thinks they have better things to do with it.
Fine, you agree I was correct. Apple has payed dividends in the past and will pay dividends in the future.
Yes, I have been happy with my return, but I would also like to receive dividends since the return has been subpar to that of other similar companies considering the far superior growth and value Apple has produced. Look at Apple's P/E compared with say Google or Amazon. I like my investment in Apple, but I'm getting older and will need to sell it some day. I want *all* of the value of my investment back, not just a fraction of it.
(Also, I'm not sure that Taiwan sales are included in "China" sales. Most companies report them separately, but I haven't checked to see if Apple does).
Apple never gives specific information by country in Asia (they only reveal parial information in earnings calls and at special events.) They always group Asia/Pacific together in official documents. Heres a bit from last year's Form 10-K
"Asia-Pacific
Net sales in Asia-Pacific increased $5.1 billion or 160% during 2010 compared to 2009. The significant growth in Asia-Pacific net sales was due mainly to increased iPhone revenue, which was primarily attributable to country and carrier expansion and continued growth from existing carriers. Asia-Pacific net sales were also favorably affected by strong demand for Mac portable and desktop systems and for iPad. Particularly strong year-over-year growth was experienced in China, Korea and Australia. The Asia-Pacific segment represented 13% and 7% of the Company?s total net sales for 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Net sales in Asia-Pacific increased $493 million or 18% during 2009 compared to 2008 reflecting strong growth in sales of iPhone and Mac portable systems, offset partially by a decline in sales of iPods and Mac desktop systems, as well as a strengthening of the U.S. dollar against the Australian dollar and other Asian currencies. Mac net sales and unit sales grew in the Asia-Pacific region by 4% and 17%, respectively, due to increased sales of the MacBook Pro. The Asia-Pacific segment represented approximately 7% of the Company?s total net sales in both 2009 and 2008."
Chinese consumerism is just mindblowing. Over the last 5 years I've witnessed a consumer boom that is staggering. You have to see it to believe it.
I've seen it, otherwise I wouldn't have believed it either. A lot of outsiders look at statistics such as avg income, etc. to assess purchasing power. But purchasing power alone doesn't tell the whole story - what they're missing is what I like to call purchasing ambition.
All you have to do is visit any mall here. Forget about the shoppers - what's telling is the number of workers at the mall shops using an iPhone 4. These young workers most likely make around 500-600 US/month at most. The iPhone 4 here starts at $750 US for the 16GB model. You do the math. You may find this hard to comprehend, but I'm not making this up. Keep in mind that these workers do make sacrifices. They could be living 6-8 to an apartment, paying only around $50-60 US/month in rent each. They will cheap out on food (you can save a lot of money here by not eating out and/or eating simple foods). They are most likely still single and don't have significant family obligations (aside from sending a few hundred RMB to their parents each month).
Another anecdote, I have a friend in Shanghai. He's got 5 years of work experience, working in IT. He takes in around $30k US/year (this is about avg here for the industry and # years experience). He recently bought a brand new Audi A4, a car that starts at over $45k US here. Granted this is not typical - most young (male) professionals in large cities here are trying to save up to buy a $300-500k US apartment (nothing special, just a "regular" 2 bedroom that's only somewhat out in the sticks), as owning an apartment here is usually a pre-requisite for marriage. (My friend was lucky enough to have purchased his apartment several years ago, when housing prices were much lower).
Most folks making what my friend makes would buy something a bit more modest like a Passat or an Accord, these cars start at $35k US.
And by the way, most of these car puchases are paid for in cash - auto financing is not popular here yet (is it any wonder that all of the major automakers are trying to grab a slice of the China pie?).
It doesn't come as a surprise to me at all that Apple is doing so well here.
The Hong Kong IFC Mall store and Shanghai Nanjing Dong Lu store (Shanghai's 3rd) opened on the same day, and the Nanjing Dong Lu store rang-up more than 10,000 sales in the first weekend, including a new MacBook Pro for my wife.
Quite a surprise in today's Apple news. China has denied Apple the use of the iPad moniker there. Seems another company has laid claim to it and Chinese courts agree. There will bee no Apple iPads sold in China, forcing them to come up with a different name if they wish to sell it, or ante-up a good amount of cash to convince the owner to part with it.
Comments
#1 and #2 are OK. #3 makes no sense. The purpose of the tax holiday is to spur investment and create jobs in the US. Giving a dividend so that the shareholders can buy a new Lexus or buy a few more shares of AAPL in their IRA doesn't do anything to accomplish those objectives. Rather, the intent of the tax holiday is for the money to be put into R&D, manufacturing, and other things that create jobs.
No, it makes perfect sense. What you state is the *intent* of the tax holiday. But the previous tax holiday did not have that effect. What I suggest would allow companies like Apple to bring their money home at a discount (no tax on anything going for dividends,) put money in the hands od shareholders where which would allow for reinvestment as they see fit. Making investors happy with dividends is a benefit to the company thats essentially free, taking the sting off repatriating cash for other investments. You could have other provisions for other expenditures, but it would get difficult to regulate and may have perverse incentives and unintended consequences (as almost everything does.)
It's a tax holiday only for the company.
Which is what it's intended to be.
If they distribute dividends, the stock holders still have to pay taxes (even if it's in a tax sheltered account, you'll eventually pay taxes).
Not from a Roth or certain other kinds of tax shelters.
If, OTOH, the money is reinvested in growing the company, the stock holder will get their return when they sell the stock - where it will be taxed at capital gains rates. As long as they hold the stock over a year, reinvesting the money creates far less taxes than distributing dividends.
But I am not one who thinks taxes are bad. You see I drive on roads, use the courts, enjoy police protection, need an educated society, live in an economy where I can make money if it is properly regulated, etc. Also my government has obligations and needs taxes to meet them. A government cannot be run in all ways like a business. Unsurpisigly it's aims are far different and more dynamic than those of a business.
Heck, even if they don't reinvest and simply put the money in the bank, it would increase the share price - which would again be preferable for the stock holder. It would not accomplish the other objectives (job creation), of course, but distributing dividends is probably the worst thing they could do with the money.
The money is already in a bank. It would make little difference if it were in a bank here, or elsewhere. Only if the money is actually invested or distributed (think spent) will it be of benefit to Apple, the stockholders, or the economy.
That's right - Apple last paid a dividend in 1995. And I suspect that shareholders are not disappointed in their return on investment during that period.
Dividends only make sense if you have nothing better to do with the money. Apple apparently thinks they have better things to do with it.
Fine, you agree I was correct. Apple has payed dividends in the past and will pay dividends in the future.
Yes, I have been happy with my return, but I would also like to receive dividends since the return has been subpar to that of other similar companies considering the far superior growth and value Apple has produced. Look at Apple's P/E compared with say Google or Amazon. I like my investment in Apple, but I'm getting older and will need to sell it some day. I want *all* of the value of my investment back, not just a fraction of it.
(Also, I'm not sure that Taiwan sales are included in "China" sales. Most companies report them separately, but I haven't checked to see if Apple does).
Apple never gives specific information by country in Asia (they only reveal parial information in earnings calls and at special events.) They always group Asia/Pacific together in official documents. Heres a bit from last year's Form 10-K
"Asia-Pacific
Net sales in Asia-Pacific increased $5.1 billion or 160% during 2010 compared to 2009. The significant growth in Asia-Pacific net sales was due mainly to increased iPhone revenue, which was primarily attributable to country and carrier expansion and continued growth from existing carriers. Asia-Pacific net sales were also favorably affected by strong demand for Mac portable and desktop systems and for iPad. Particularly strong year-over-year growth was experienced in China, Korea and Australia. The Asia-Pacific segment represented 13% and 7% of the Company?s total net sales for 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Net sales in Asia-Pacific increased $493 million or 18% during 2009 compared to 2008 reflecting strong growth in sales of iPhone and Mac portable systems, offset partially by a decline in sales of iPods and Mac desktop systems, as well as a strengthening of the U.S. dollar against the Australian dollar and other Asian currencies. Mac net sales and unit sales grew in the Asia-Pacific region by 4% and 17%, respectively, due to increased sales of the MacBook Pro. The Asia-Pacific segment represented approximately 7% of the Company?s total net sales in both 2009 and 2008."
Chinese consumerism is just mindblowing. Over the last 5 years I've witnessed a consumer boom that is staggering. You have to see it to believe it.
I've seen it, otherwise I wouldn't have believed it either. A lot of outsiders look at statistics such as avg income, etc. to assess purchasing power. But purchasing power alone doesn't tell the whole story - what they're missing is what I like to call purchasing ambition.
All you have to do is visit any mall here. Forget about the shoppers - what's telling is the number of workers at the mall shops using an iPhone 4. These young workers most likely make around 500-600 US/month at most. The iPhone 4 here starts at $750 US for the 16GB model. You do the math. You may find this hard to comprehend, but I'm not making this up. Keep in mind that these workers do make sacrifices. They could be living 6-8 to an apartment, paying only around $50-60 US/month in rent each. They will cheap out on food (you can save a lot of money here by not eating out and/or eating simple foods). They are most likely still single and don't have significant family obligations (aside from sending a few hundred RMB to their parents each month).
Another anecdote, I have a friend in Shanghai. He's got 5 years of work experience, working in IT. He takes in around $30k US/year (this is about avg here for the industry and # years experience). He recently bought a brand new Audi A4, a car that starts at over $45k US here. Granted this is not typical - most young (male) professionals in large cities here are trying to save up to buy a $300-500k US apartment (nothing special, just a "regular" 2 bedroom that's only somewhat out in the sticks), as owning an apartment here is usually a pre-requisite for marriage. (My friend was lucky enough to have purchased his apartment several years ago, when housing prices were much lower).
Most folks making what my friend makes would buy something a bit more modest like a Passat or an Accord, these cars start at $35k US.
And by the way, most of these car puchases are paid for in cash - auto financing is not popular here yet (is it any wonder that all of the major automakers are trying to grab a slice of the China pie?).
It doesn't come as a surprise to me at all that Apple is doing so well here.
http://ca.reuters.com/article/techno...7B519320111206