Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Moonraker

Pages: 1 ... 56 57 [58] 59 60 ... 73
856
Shares / Re: All things ZA economic outlook
« on: October 10, 2013, 02:44:35 pm »
South Africa to Take 20% Free Stake in New Oil Projects


Quote
“The first 20 percent will be the free carried part by the state,” Shabangu told reporters today in Pretoria, the capital. While the government will be able to increase its interest to 50 percent, it will have to acquire 30 percent at market-related prices, she said.

Quote
Changes to the law “may significantly impact on the ability of investors to continue exploration in South Africa,” Russ Berkoben, president of Exxon’s local unit, told lawmakers in Cape Town on Sept. 11. The government “is sending a message to investors that their high-risk investment will have a much lower reward.”

( Apologies for, more often than not, being the bearer of baaaad news ).

857
Shares / Re: All things ZA economic outlook
« on: October 10, 2013, 02:32:36 pm »
S. Africa Manufacturing Rises at Slowest Pace in 5 Months

Quote
South African manufacturing rose at the slowest pace in five months in August as strikes curbed production in Africa’s biggest economy.

Growth in factory output slowed to 0.2 percent from a revised 5.5 percent in July, Pretoria-based Statistics South Africa said on its website. The median estimate in a Bloomberg survey of 11 economists was 1.2 percent. Output decreased 3.6 percent in the month.

No surprises there.

858
Off topic / NOBama
« on: October 09, 2013, 08:09:37 pm »
Did you know ..   :laugh:


859
Off topic / Warren Buffet quoted ..
« on: October 09, 2013, 09:07:28 am »
I like ..

The market, like the Lord, helps those who help themselves. But, unlike the Lord, the market does not forgive those who know not what they do – Warren Buffett, 1982.

A lot was learned reading these five years of letters. Mr Buffett, as always, also mentions some of his delights, like drinking Cherry cokes, as well as some of his dislikes. He has a general distrust of investment bankers (“don’t ask the barber whether you need a haircut”.) He heavily criticises academics for teaching the efficient market hypothesis and he dislikes Wall Street and its stockbrokers.

(Seen on Sharenet's Newsletter - Seed invesrtments)

860
Shares / Re: Today's Outlook
« on: October 08, 2013, 03:45:04 pm »
Oh boy ! (but I can understand Boehner's stance).

"House Speaker Boehner says we are on path to default based on president's position of not negotiating over the debt limit"


861
Shares / Re: Attacq
« on: October 08, 2013, 03:39:10 pm »
Seems OK, a growth stock paying practically no dividends at all for the first 5 years or so. Basically a long term hold for folks with a 10 year
outlook. Has Rand Hedge qualities which I like (being a ZA and Rand pessimist/bear).
Also I am too old to wait 10 years ..  ;)

The Rand Hedge element ( from Moneyweb )..

Quote
Sirius Real Esate (London listed under code SRE.LN)

One of the reasons many analysts are getting excited about the coming listing of Attacq (formerly Atterbury Investment Holdings) is its international assets. Through the Karoo Investment Fund, it has a 25% interest in German flexible property company Sirius Real Estate.

ClucasGray is however not waiting to access this opportunity through Attacq. It has bought into Sirius directly.

“What really interested us in this business is that after Atterbury bought its 25% it blocked two attempted liquidations by US asset manager Weiss,” Hubbard says. “Because Sirius is trading at about a 50% discount to NAV, Weiss wanted to sell of the assets to realise a profit.

“But Atterbury saw more value in building the business long-term. It spent a lot of money getting rid of the old management company and there has been a big clean up in the business.”

With the counter trading at such a big discount, Hubbard believes Atterbury's intervention will have two big positives in the near future.

“Within two years it could be trading at NAV or even at a premium to NAV like Atterbury's other international vehicle MAS. On top of that, it should soon be able to pay a dividend and we could be looking at a yield just shy of 10% in Euros in the next year or so.”

862
Shares / Re: Today's Outlook
« on: October 07, 2013, 12:58:38 pm »
Looking dangerous ..

Quote
European stocks dropped to their lowest level in almost four weeks as U.S. House Speaker John Boehner ruled out raising the federal government’s debt limit without preconditions. U.S. index futures and Asian shares fell.

Boehner, the Republicans’ leader in the House of Representatives, continued to demand changes to President Barack Obama’s health-care act before agreeing to extend the borrowing authority. The Treasury has said it will exhaust measures to avoid exceeding the $16.7 trillion debt ceiling on Oct. 17. If that happens, the U.S. will run out of money to pay all of its bills at some point between Oct. 22 and Oct. 31, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

“We are not going to pass a clean debt limit,” Boehner said in an interview on ABC yesterday. “The votes are not in the House to pass a clean debt limit.”
(Source Bloomberg 7/10/2013)

863
Shares / Re: Tax
« on: October 05, 2013, 03:23:36 pm »
Dividends and your tax return

Quote
Local dividends
Although dividends withholding tax will automatically be withheld by the dividend-paying company (unless an exemption applies), the tax obligation remains on the shareholder. Dividend withholding tax is a separate tax and does not form part of the normal income tax calculation. This unfortunately does not mean that the taxpayer can ignore the dividends he or she received in their tax return. The gross dividends receipts (pre-dividend withholding tax) must still be included as part of gross income and as a consequence be included in the tax return.   :wtf:

Local dividends are however still fully exempt from normal income tax and as a consequence the amount of dividends included under gross income will then be excluded again under the exempt-income section.

For local dividends it must therefore be included in the return and the full amount excluded again; in other words it will be merely an in-out situation.

I have already completed my return and have been assessed, but certainly didn't add gross dividends to any
sections on the ITR12.
Provision was only made for 'Local Interest Income' and 'Exempt Local and Foreign Dividends'.
To which section on the ITR12 one is supposed to add gross dividends ?

If added to 'Local Interest Income', I would be fully taxed on the gross dividends at my marginal tax rate without
being able to deduct them again as they will not be deducted by showing them under 'Exempt Local and Foreign
Dividends' - they will merely be ignored as amounts considered non-taxable.
Rather confusing as no provision is made for this as far as I can see looking at my ITR12.

864
Off topic / Re: The shutdown in US.
« on: October 03, 2013, 09:15:54 am »
Demise of Daddy State -The Netherlands can no longer afford its welfare state

Yup, as alluded to in my previous post, that's what happens to welfare states (all of Europe) i.e. both socialism and democracy are failures. We should strive to be like Singapore, which is run by technocrats who know what is best for the country and to hell with populism aka pandering to the masses in order to secure their votes.

865
Shares / Re: Living off Dividends.
« on: October 03, 2013, 08:48:32 am »
Both my wife and I get audited regularly. I think it might be due to us not having medical aid and them wanting to ensure that the expenses we declare as deductions are aboveboard. We also make donations to SPCA for which we receive a donations tax receipt so that we can deduct them from taxable income. I suppose they also want to verify that. Never had a problem with shares though. In short SARS trusts no one, except maybe gcr.  ;)

866
Shares / Re: Living off Dividends.
« on: October 02, 2013, 06:53:41 pm »
Quote from: Orca on October 02, 2013, 06:25:18 pm
I have always used the weighted average method and not FIFO. This now gets confusing as now I understand it as like this:

The shares that I add to the other two stocks will have a "zero" date and the older shares in those stocks will still be 1.5 years old.
This will stuff up my weighted ave method. I can't now change to the FIFO method.
No, all it means is that FIFO will apply to your shares when you use weighted average. Nothing to do with changing to FIFO.
Quote
The identification rules in the Eighth Schedule are used for purposes of determining the base cost of shares for CGT purposes while the section 9C identification rule is used only for purposes of determining the holding period of shares that have been disposed of. On the question of non-alignment, while CGT allows for the weighted-average method in calculating the base cost of shares, this method cannot be applied for purposes of determining the time period for which shares were held because it disregards specific dates of acquisition and disposal. Consequently it will be necessary for a taxpayer who uses the specific-identification method or the weighted-average method to determine the base cost of shares for CGT purposes to also maintain a record of purchases and sales of shares on the FIFO basis in order to apply section 9C.

Quote
The first-in-first-out method must be used to determine the length of time you held shares you have disposed of.65 This method is merely for the purpose of applying section 9C and does not affect any identification method you have adopted for determining the base cost of your shares for CGT purposes. Thus if you adopted the weighted-average method for CGT purposes you must continue to use that method for determining the base cost of your shares. The first-in-first-out method will merely be used to determine whether any shares you sold were held for at least three years.
Quote
Where the taxpayer holds identical shares in the same company which were acquired by the taxpayer on different dates and the taxpayer has disposed of any of those shares, the taxpayer shall for the purposes of this section be deemed to have disposed of the shares held by the taxpayer for the longest period of time

I have merely repeated what I posted before.  :-X

867
Shares / Re: Living off Dividends.
« on: October 02, 2013, 05:29:04 pm »
Quote from: Orca on October 02, 2013, 05:08:06 pm
As the 3 stocks were not yet held for 3 years, selling a portion of one to add to the other 2 would be revenue on the sell portion.

Yes, but see yossarians closing paragraph.

Quote from: Orca on October 02, 2013, 05:08:06 pm
Due to the fact that I'm still holding the same 3 stocks should not reset the date to zero.

They won't because FIFO comes into play if you have used weighted average to determine the base costs.

Quote
(6) Where the taxpayer holds identical shares in the same company which were acquired by the taxpayer on different dates and the taxpayer has disposed of any of those shares, the taxpayer shall for the purposes of this section be deemed to have disposed of the shares held by the taxpayer for the longest period of time

Section 9C(6) deals with the situation in which a taxpayer has acquired identical shares in the same company on various dates and disposes of some of them. It then becomes necessary to identify which shares have been disposed of in order to determine whether they have been held for the qualifying three-year period. For this purpose section 9C(6) prescribes the “first-in-first-out” method (FIFO).
This rule is not in conflict with the identification rules under paragraph 32 of the Eighth Schedule used for CGT purposes for determining the base cost of identical assets. Paragraph 32 permits the use of the specific-identification method, the FIFO method or the weighted-average method. While it is appreciated that two different identification rules may apply for the same set of shares, the rules serve different purposes and need not be aligned. The identification rules in the Eighth Schedule are used for purposes of determining the base cost of shares for CGT purposes while the section 9C identification rule is used only for purposes of determining the holding period of shares that have been disposed of. On the question of non-alignment, while CGT allows for the weighted-average method in calculating the base cost of shares, this method cannot be applied for purposes of determining the time period for which shares were held because it disregards specific dates of acquisition and disposal. Consequently it will be necessary for a taxpayer who uses the specific-identification method or the weighted-average method to determine the base cost of shares for CGT purposes to also maintain a record of purchases and sales of shares on the FIFO basis in order to apply section 9C.

868
Off topic / The shutdown in US.
« on: October 02, 2013, 09:40:19 am »
In first day of U.S. shutdown, no sign how it will end

I think this impasse is more serious than the markets are interpreting it, and if it drags on till Oct 17th, being the date when the debt ceiling would need to be raised, there will surely be a 'correction' of crash proportions.
That might be a buying opportunity.

(As an aside, the Republicans are quite right, the Affordable Health Care Plan is certainly not affordable, just like our crappy NHI. Socialism simply does not work - witness Europe. With socialism, come election time, political parties fall over themselves/outdo each other to please and appease the masses without giving any thought as to the consequences of taking on more and more debt, burdening entrepreneurs (the damn capitalists), with higher taxes and more red tape, while pandering to the masses in order to get their uninformed votes. It's called populism.
You know, capitalists have a tough time, they borrow funds - money - to start some venture. Then they need to be able to pay the interest on their borrowings. The risks to success are huge, costs need to be controlled - yes labour is a bloody fixed cost, fixed meaning you can't control it - the socialists don't fully grasp this, they also don't realise that, by nature, everyone is a capitalist.)

Rant over.

Will wait to see how the 'shutdown' plays out before making any purchase decisions. 

869
Shares / Re: Tax
« on: October 01, 2013, 02:55:26 pm »
Quote from: Bundu on October 01, 2013, 02:28:17 pm
"same kind and quality" - I wonder how that can be determined?  :o
I'm sure you won't even get two analysts to agree on that
$9.7
The expression ‘share of the same kind and of the same or equivalent quality’ refers to substantially identical shares in the same company.
Thus a shareholder who held a class A ordinary share in ABC Ltd (a listed company) that was forcibly acquired under s 311 of the Companies Act 61 of 1973, who wishes to take advantage of para 42A, must replace that share with a class A ordinary share in ABC Ltd. In the event that the particular class of share is no longer in issue, the share would have to be replaced with one bearing substantially identical rights
In other words, unless what I have highlighted is the case, it must be the same share.

870
Shares / Re: Tax
« on: October 01, 2013, 01:56:34 pm »
I think Orca found it under Chapter 9 of the Comprehensive guide to CGT which you can get from SARS site.

In a nutshell, form the guide:-

Mark buys 500 shares of Effe Ltd listed on a recognised exchange for R10 000 and sells them on 20 February 2002 for R3 000. On 1 April 2002, he buys 500 shares of Effe Ltd for R3 200

Result:
Since the shares were repurchased within 45 days of loss-sale date, para 42 applies. Mark cannot claim his R7 000 loss. Instead, he must adjust his base cost for the ‘repurchased’ shares. The base cost under para 42(1)(a) and (b) for his ‘new’ shares will be R3 200 (the actual cost) plus R7 000 (the held-over loss), therefore R10 200.
Mark would also be affected by this paragraph if he had purchased his ‘new’ shares on 24 January 2002 and then made the loss sale on 20 February 2002. On the other hand, if Mark had waited and repurchased the 500 shares 46 days after the sale, para 42 would not apply and the R7 000 capital loss would be allowable. The base cost of the 500 shares repurchased would equal the cost actually incurred.



Edit: Must be the same share, not share X and then purchase share Y

Pages: 1 ... 56 57 [58] 59 60 ... 73