Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

NEW YORK (TheStreet) - Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A_) may have avoided about $400 million in taxes by exiting its long-time stake in Graham Holdings (GHC_) - formerly known as The Washington Post Company - through an asset swap with the company that will add Miami-based TV station WPLG and hundreds of millions in cash to Berkshire's coffers. Wednesday's transaction also may also break new ground in how large investors structure deals to avoid taxes on their investment gains.

Berkshire's deal with Graham Holdings is structured in a way that may allow the Warren Buffett-run conglomerate to exit a multi-decade investment in Graham Holdings without paying any capital gains tax, Robert Willens, an independent tax expert, said in a Friday telephone interview.

And Berkshire certainly gained from its Graham Holdings investment.

The cost-basis for Berkshire's 1,727,765 million shares was $11 million, Warren Buffett said in Berkshire's 2000 annual letter to shareholders. Now, Berkshire is seeking to exit Graham Holdings at a value in excess of $1.1 billion.

Applying a 38 percent tax rate (federal plus state and local taxes) would bring Berkshire to about $400 million in tax liability, Willens said. The swap orchestrated between Berkshire and Graham Holdings, however, is likely to reduce Berkshire's tax liability to $0.

D1B wrote:He pays more income tax in 30 minutes than you will pay your whole life.

You're envious.

Baldy wrote:

D1B wrote:He pays more income tax in 30 minutes than you will pay your whole life.

You're envious.

But is that really his "fair share"?

Chizzang wrote:So this is a thread about Tax laws..?
or about a guy following the present tax laws to the letter and we don't like that..?

I don't get it... what are his tax lawyers supposed to do re-write the law
I think we've established many times our corporate tax loop holes are many and wide and built to keep the elite wealthy happy

D1B wrote:He pays more income tax in 30 minutes than you will pay your whole life.

You're envious.

danefan wrote:

Chizzang wrote:So this is a thread about Tax laws..?
or about a guy following the present tax laws to the letter and we don't like that..?

I don't get it... what are his tax lawyers supposed to do re-write the law
I think we've established many times our corporate tax loop holes are many and wide and built to keep the elite wealthy happy

Bingo.

The man is using an existing law to his advantage. And this isn't a tax avoidance play. Its a tax deferral strategy. The built-in gain in the share he has today will just be transferred to a different asset which if he sold would generate a gain and a tax. There is no "step-up in basis."

Pwns wrote:

danefan wrote:
Bingo.

The man is using an existing law to his advantage. And this isn't a tax avoidance play. Its a tax deferral strategy. The built-in gain in the share he has today will just be transferred to a different asset which if he sold would generate a gain and a tax. There is no "step-up in basis."

It's not a question of whether or not Buffet is a hypocrite than whether or not he is doing something illegal.

Chizzang wrote:So this is a thread about Tax laws..?
or about a guy following the present tax laws to the letter and we don't like that..?

I don't get it... what are his tax lawyers supposed to do re-write the law
I think we've established many times our corporate tax loop holes are many and wide and built to keep the elite wealthy happy

HI54UNI wrote:

Chizzang wrote:So this is a thread about Tax laws..?
or about a guy following the present tax laws to the letter and we don't like that..?

I don't get it... what are his tax lawyers supposed to do re-write the law
I think we've established many times our corporate tax loop holes are many and wide and built to keep the elite wealthy happy

I agree. But Warren doesn't have to choose to use the tax law to his advantage. He could gladly pay more as he advocates.

And remember this the next time you hear about "subsidies" to oil companies for using the tax laws in their favor.

danefan wrote:

HI54UNI wrote:
I agree. But Warren doesn't have to choose to use the tax law to his advantage. He could gladly pay more as he advocates.

And remember this the next time you hear about "subsidies" to oil companies for using the tax laws in their favor.

No sane person would fault a company for using a tax law to their advantage. What we do fault is the creation and continued existence of such a law.

HI54UNI wrote:

danefan wrote:
No sane person would fault a company for using a tax law to their advantage. What we do fault is the creation and continued existence of such a law.

I agree. But must people also don't advocate for higher taxes while using every loophole they can find or get Congress to create for them.

danefan wrote:

HI54UNI wrote:
I agree. But must people also don't advocate for higher taxes while using every loophole they can find or get Congress to create for them.

Just about everything that advocates for tax reform uses every tax advantage in the book.

Chizzang wrote:

danefan wrote:
Just about everything that advocates for tax reform uses every tax advantage in the book.

I'm enjoying these guys (Baldy and team) arguing out of both side of their mouth

D1B wrote:He pays more income tax in 30 minutes than you will pay your whole life.

You're envious.

danefan wrote:

HI54UNI wrote:
I agree. But must people also don't advocate for higher taxes while using every loophole they can find or get Congress to create for them.

Just about everyone that advocates for tax reform uses every tax advantage in the book.

Baldy wrote:

danefan wrote:
Just about everyone that advocates for tax reform uses every tax advantage in the book.

It doesn't make them any less of a hypocrite.

Baldy wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
I'm enjoying these guys (Baldy and team) arguing out of both side of their mouth

Oh Chizzy...
It's no different than when you whine and snivel about the "subsidies" "big oil" or the "MIC" receive in comparison. The only difference is that those guys aren't the hypocrites fighting the pay your "fair share" battle.

Chizzang wrote:

Baldy wrote:

Oh Chizzy...
It's no different than when you whine and snivel about the "subsidies" "big oil" or the "MIC" receive in comparison. The only difference is that those guys aren't the hypocrites fighting the pay your "fair share" battle.

Um... Oh Bald One
I have repeated (over and over) and I see I have to say it again (and probably again later)
We don't have a tax revenue problem in this country - we have a spending problem

And I've NEVER complained about corporations taking advantage of OUR tax loopholes

What I've complained about is why they get them and I (Citizen Chizzang) do not get as many loopholes
That's a HUGE difference and far too subtle for your conservative nugget to grasp apparently



You're the hypocrite here Baldy (but I'm enjoying watching you try to nuzzle out of it)

Grizalltheway wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
Um... Oh Bald One
I have repeated (over and over) and I see I have to say it again (and probably again later)
We don't have a tax revenue problem in this country - we have a spending problem

And I've NEVER complained about corporations taking advantage of OUR tax loopholes

What I've complained about is why they get them and I (Citizen Chizzang) do not get as many loopholes
That's a HUGE difference and far too subtle for your conservative nugget to grasp apparently



You're the hypocrite here Baldy (but I'm enjoying watching you try to nuzzle out of it)

I thought you'd already incorporated?

Chizzang wrote:

Baldy wrote:

Oh Chizzy...
It's no different than when you whine and snivel about the "subsidies" "big oil" or the "MIC" receive in comparison. The only difference is that those guys aren't the hypocrites fighting the pay your "fair share" battle.

Um... Oh Bald One
I have repeated (over and over) and I see I have to say it again (and probably again later)
We don't have a tax revenue problem in this country - we have a spending problem

And I've NEVER complained about corporations taking advantage of OUR tax loopholes

What I've complained about is why they get them and I (Citizen Chizzang) do not get as many loopholes
That's a HUGE difference and far too subtle for your conservative nugget to grasp apparently



You're the hypocrite here Baldy (but I'm enjoying watching you try to nuzzle out of it)

Chizzang wrote: I would like to point out that I am an advocate for the elimination of all energy subsidies, breaks, loopholes, incentives, and what have you, from oil and natural gas to wind and solar alike — because they all serve niche interests, distort free market signals, and further encumber our tax code.

What Liberals (such as myself) always conveniently neglect to mention about the attractive idea of eliminating oil company tax breaks - is that without an accompanying decrease in across-the-board rates, it’s really just a dysfunctional way of hiking taxes.... (am I right) Which is of course the goal

Liberals (such as myself) don’t want revenue neutrality
Secretly we want more revenue to pay for big-government stuff
and if anybody is honestly convinced that those (effective) tax hikes would come from the fat cats ill gotten gains rather than the backs of everyday consumers (which is, I might add, is everybody) they’re simply delusional...

That's why I say:
Gas should be $8 bucks a gallon