"tax thing is a nightmare" suggests that you don't know your cost basis, which means that it would be a nightmare whenever you finally sell. Probably should find that out. Sometime in the future, I'll bet capital gains tax will be increased, so in the long run, you'll save money if you just pay the tax and start over with present value as cost basis. Shareholders who might share your concern and vote against the merger will be a tiny fraction of the total. The big boys aren't worried about capital gains. If you want to avoid this "nightmare" you should figure out your cost basis, go ahead and sell while you can, and maybe sell something you're holding in the red to offset.
That's true. You pay no taxes on a 401K until you take withdrawals. Those are taxed as ordinary income.
"AGN will not off PFE share holders a premium. Instead, PFE will sell their shares to AGN for a premium" Do you read what you've written before you hit Post?
No, I think the deal will still have PFE shareholders receiving new company shares equal in value to closing value on last day of PFE pre-merger. There will not be a premium paid to PFE shareholders. But, for tax purposes, they will still be liable for a capital gain if their PFE cost basis is less than the value of the new shares. In other words, still an inversion.
I thought your question was theoretical and baseless until I saw an article saying that having AGN acquire PFE is under consideration. I haven't seen any hard information on the tax consequences, but in my opinion it will make no difference. PFE shareholders will still receive replacement shares in the new company on a 1:1 ratio, and will still be liable for the same capital gain. The cost basis in the new company shares will be whatever they are worth on the day they are issued. Again, just my opinion.
That's not the way it works, if I understand your statement. After the merger, PFE will cease to exist and AGN will cease to exist. The merged company will issue stock shares to replace those of the former companies. Shareholders of the former companies will receive shares in the new company, on a 1:1 basis for PFE shareholders, on perhaps a 6:1 or 7:1 basis for AGN shareholders. PFE is not going to issue more shares of anything. The new company will do the issuing, and the market cap will reflect the combined market caps of PFE and AGN at some premium to present cap.
Maybe you should try harder to understand how companies are valued in the investment world. "DEFINITION of 'Goodwill': An intangible asset that arises as a result of the acquisition of one company by another for a premium value. The value of a company’s brand name, solid customer base, good customer relations, good employee relations and any patents or proprietary technology represent goodwill. Goodwill is considered an intangible asset because it is not a physical asset like buildings or equipment. The goodwill account can be found in the assets portion of a company's balance sheet."
wart has developed an alter ego, pen name chicagocoin. Wart posts his usual nonsense, then as chicagocoin writes complimentary messages to himself telling himself how smart he is, then tells his alter ego how smart HE is, and back and forth. Most people have imaginary friends during childhood. This looks like a case of severely arrested development. And he thinks we're fooled. That's just sad.
I'm retired and invest long term for income. I'm considering taking a new position in UTG, and I found this statement in the announcement of the rights offering: "The investment objective of the Fund is to provide a high level of income and total return consisting primarily of tax-advantaged dividend income and capital appreciation." Can anybody tell me what is meant by "tax-advantaged" relative to this fund? Thanks in advance.
Yes, it's only up 10% in the past month. What a pitiful performance. At that rate it will take a full 10 months to double, and only be up 120% in a whole year. You should probably sell both your shares and invest in something more exciting.
Tried to comment that you must have taken a loss, but looking more closely at WTW, realized that if you got in around the $4, you made a very nice profit. In either case, welcome to the RF board, glad to see new posters showing interest. BTW, if you were willing to buy WTW at $4, you are a braver investor than I.
"Total revenue (net of interest expense) came in at $1.33 billion in the quarter, lagging the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $1.35 billion. However, revenues increased 1.1% on a year-over-year basis." This is the source I was referring to when I said it missed on estimates of revenues.
Thanks for your thoughtful response, and congratulations on your success. I agree that many of the fundamentals make RF look like a good value investment in this price range.
Don't understand market response to report. Missed on consensus estimates for revenues and earnings, expenses higher than forecast, and that seems to be viewed as a BUY signal. Maybe the performance is being viewed as positive, relative to the sector and given the lack of a rate hike. I would have thought it would take a $0.02 beat to cause this response. Shows how little I know.
I think it started to fall apart when jrwhiterabbit left the board. She kept us in line and provided unique insights. I think she still visits and reads the board occasionally, but doesn't care to post. Can't blame her.
"done with this board of losers. never ever met such a group of judgmental pricks like this lot. self righteous sons of bee-chez, fork you all..... "
With all due respect to those who make a different choice, I'm keeping the person who posted the above statement on IGNORE.
From wart, May 26: "done with this board of losers. never ever met such a group of judgmental pricks like this lot. self righteous sons of bee-chez, fork you all..... "
Why would anybody, anywhere, pay attention to someone who (a) doesn't keep his word, and (b) spews juvenile obscenities?
Fool us twice, shame on us. That's not going to happen.
Your subject line is farcical, your reasoning is specious, and your conclusions are just absurd. First, the Federal Reserve both can and will raise rates, when its analysis of the state of the economy justifies doing so. At present, employment is still too unstable to argue for a rate increase. Second, the doomsday apocalypse you forecast when the FR raise rates is way over the top. Yes, there will be consequences, just as there will be consequences if it postpones raising rates for too long. But the consequences will settle down and the world economy will adjust. And third, management of monetary policy by the FR is both quite different from "government intervention" and far from a "bad idea." The economic turmoil of the past half-decade would have been far worse without timely and aggressive action by the Federal Reserve. If you want an example of a "bad idea," consider your decision to break your vow to not visit the RF board.
I'll name three. JNJ, which I would recommend for any long term investor. SON I started acquiring about 10 years ago, and until the present downturn, had doubled in value. And five years ago, bought ABT, which spun off ABBV, and together they have increased by about 80%. All three have steadily increased dividends. In today's market, I would be happy to increase my position, but at my age, I have other priorities. My income is sufficient, and I'm building a cash pile to safeguard against health problems and long term care possibilities.
I'm going to have to start wearing a neck brace if this keeps up. I think a rate increase by the Fed would remove a lot of uncertainty and calm things down, and I think the economy has strengthened enough to justify it. But, you know that old joke about "Put 10 economists in a room and you'll get 10 different opinions. Or 11, if one of them went to Harvard."