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 : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (157499)	5/29/2003 9:27:03 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

OK, Buffet's not quite talking about the plan that passed - all he's only talking about eliminating ALL taxes on dividends, a fantasy he dreamed up to try to make a case for opposing something quite different. And he doesn't even get his arithmetic right. He seems to think that getting a $310 million dividend from his company is equivalent to a $310 million tax cut that could have been used to give $1000 to 310k families. But simple math errors aside, he also forgets that for Berkshire to pay out a billion of dividends, they must first earn something north of $1.6 billion of taxable income and pay more than a $600 million of taxes. The income is not tax-free at all - it's just no longer taxed at twice the rate of any other kind of income. Your 3% number is meaningless, bugman. Had he set up his insurance/investment holding company years ago as a limited partnership or any other kind of pass-through entity, it would pay no income taxes at all, but he would, regardless of whether he actually received a dividend or not. Why should one form of business legal entity be double taxed and others not? Be honest, skeeter. Don't spin it, just say it - Buffett is wrong.