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.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Art Bechhoefer who wrote (31111)	1/13/2003 12:06:50 PM
From: rkral	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 196564

Art & Tom, OT .. QCOM is not a "dividend stock". That makes the dividend discussion off-topic, from my point of view. Of course, Ramsey's view is the only one that counts. <g> Ron

To: Art Bechhoefer who wrote (31111)	1/13/2003 12:53:08 PM
From: Jim Mullens	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196564

Art/ Tom- Regarding Qualcomm and the Tax Plan. (Ramsey- hope you let this discussion continue because I believe it has a direct bearing on Qualcomm share price and cash flow uses, which we’re all concerned with) Art, you wrote- 1. >>Those individuals or institutions that own the stock either in deferred tax or tax-free accounts would not really benefit, and that's quite a large number of shares.<< As I mentioned in a prior post, these folks (me included) benefit INDIRECTLY as this plan should stimulate investor demand to buy stocks, which should result in share price appreciation. Secondly, the plan is rather quite clever in that it benefits the stock markets with both the perception and reality of eliminating the double taxation of dividends without costing the government as much tax revenue as perceived because as you say those with IRA, 401ks,etc would not receive a tax break. It “kills two birds with one stone” so to speak. 2. >>> A company should have the right to decide on whether to pay dividends, invest more in growth, or, a third alternative you didn't mention, buy back shares.<<< The new tax plan doesn’t change this (IMO) 3. >>the proposal would DISCOURAGE individual investors from owning interest bearing securities, like corporate bonds, because this income would remain taxable. . This would reduce the market for bonds of all types, including municipal bonds, and thereby increase the cost of borrowing for corporations AND municipalities. When you look at all these distortions, you begin to see why the proposal is half baked. <<<< I believe It merely levels the playing field somewhat, putting companies on the same level as municipal governmental agencies in the capital markets. Further, It would improve the balance sheet and credit ratings by encouraging the firm to use equity rather than debt in their business expansion, etc. needs. IMO, it’s rather a clever plan.