|
Politics aside, I still find the financial response interesting and given the common dislike of math some of these issue will not get the focus it deserves.
So, we have BP planning to sell $30 billion in assets when they don't really need to. So why are they doing it?
One, they can off-set capital gains against the losses they report. They can end up with paper losses but "cash-flow profits". This reduces tax burden.
Two, they make the sale in 2010 before Congress passes any capital gains tax increases or let the Bush tax cuts expire. So if they owe taxes they pay less.
Three, given the losses they can off-set and/or the lower capital gains taxes - for simplification assuming about a 33% rate or a third of the profits - if they sell $30 billion in assets that cost them $20 billion, that $10 billion dollar gain on the sale, this year, could mean up to $3.3 in cash for BP, simply based on timing. Not bad for 2 minutes of thought by a CEO.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."
|