Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : Conseco Insurance (CNO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mr. Aloha who wrote (1782)	7/12/2000 4:48:02 PM
From: donjuan_demarco	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 4155

The journalists goofed. Clearly the language in the 8K refers to the excise tax on excess golden parachute payments under section 4999: Message 14023640 The journalists just assumed it was the income tax. One of them even asked an accountant who said yes, CNC is liable for the income tax. Basically, the formula in the 8K says figure out the total tax without the excise tax, and figure out the tax with the excise tax, and CNC pays the difference. The fact that the media made this mistake makes me wonder how many other mistakes they make. PS: I am a tax lawyer, which is why I caught it.

To: Mr. Aloha who wrote (1782)	7/12/2000 4:52:25 PM
From: Tunica Albuginea	Respond to of 4155

Aloha, Wall Street Journal article: I couldn't care less if it was 45 mill before or after taxes. I am only interested in Wendt's proven abilitu to produce 10+ baggers Message 14031509 20 mill, 45 mill, 70 mill, it doesn't matter cheers TA Message #1782 from Mr. Aloha at Jul 12, 2000 1:48 PM Thanks... Then why do all the articles say it's after-tax $45 million to Wendt, and costing CNC about twice as much? I'm confused...