According to Jonathan Stempel and Jennifer Ablan of Reuters: “Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc. on Friday said quarterly profit rose nearly 51 percent on a solid performance in insurance and by many of its other businesses, as well as gains from investments and derivatives.”
They further report that, “Net income increased to $4.89 billion, or $2,977 per Class A share, from $3.25 billion, or $1,966 per share, a year earlier.” And that: “Book value per share, Buffett's preferred measure of growth, increased 5.5 percent from year end to $120,525 per Class A share, and Berkshire's cash stake grew over that period to $49.09 billion from $46.99 billion.”
I mention this because Warren Buffett’s one of my favorite subjects in regard to not only how government subtly buys support from high-profile figures, but also that even when you’re the third richest person in the world you can still be bought if the price is right. In Buffet’s case, if my memory serves, he was quietly given sweetheart deals in preferred bank stocks, which may be why he continually promotes raising taxes on the “rich,” whom he claims don’t pay enough.
Seeing Berkshire’s results today, however, made me look back for articles I recall on the subject of Buffet and taxes, and found one from 08/29/11 in the Huffington Post, as follows: “Berkshire Hathaway, the eighth-largest pubic company in the world according to Forbes, openly admits to still owing taxes for years 2002 through 2004 and 2005 through 2009, according to the New York Post. The company says it expects to "resolve all adjustments proposed by the US Internal Revenue Service" within the next year.”
The piece goes on to say that, “But The Post doesn't focus on the issue of a major corporation not paying its correct amount in taxes in a timely manner. Instead, the newspaper criticizes Buffett's position that America's rich should be taxed at a higher rate, taking issue with Buffett's claim that he gave 17 percent of his income to the government in 2010. The Post contends that since the majority of his income comes from dividends and capital games -- taxed indirectly through the corporate income tax -- "his effective rate would really be well north of 40 percent for a big chunk of his income."
And then the article concludes in a manner that I absolutely agree with, which is why I looked the subject up in the first place: "And if [Buffett's] firm wants to keep its tax bill low, well, that’s its right," The Post editors write. "But it would be nice if this 'pro-tax-hike' tycoon were a bit more honest about it."
So, here we have another example of those who continually comment on what’s right for others, while performing completely differently themselves, which is something I find incredibly repulsive. Because, I don’t give a good GD what Warren Buffet does in regard to his own or his businesses taxes and couldn’t care less about his beliefs and compunctions. My only desire is that whatever the case is, he simply keep his mouth shut about it.
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
No comments:
Post a Comment