雅虎為何放棄分拆阿里股權(quán)
|
相關(guān)文章： 梅耶爾承認(rèn)雅虎遇到挑戰(zhàn)復(fù)興大計(jì)前景渺茫 ? 雅虎不會(huì)再考慮將阿里巴巴的股權(quán)分拆成為一家獨(dú)立公司，而是考慮有關(guān)其門(mén)戶(hù)業(yè)務(wù)的其他交易選項(xiàng)。至于其搜索引擎和門(mén)戶(hù)頻道在內(nèi)的核心資產(chǎn)，到底是變賣(mài)還是分拆成一家獨(dú)立運(yùn)營(yíng)和上市的公司，目前不得而知。CNBC報(bào)道了上述消息。 在分析師看來(lái)，雅虎剝離中國(guó)阿里巴巴股份的想法極可能實(shí)現(xiàn)不了。原因也許很充分。 12月4日，證券公司SunTrust Robinson Humphrey分析師鮑勃?佩克就曾表示，雅虎董事會(huì)“可能”決定“暫緩”實(shí)施剝離阿里巴巴股份的計(jì)劃。佩克在其報(bào)告中指出，雅虎或許會(huì)在董事會(huì)議上做出這樣的決定。而且說(shuō)到底，其中的原因可能是包括搜索和廣告在內(nèi)的雅虎核心業(yè)務(wù)引起了更大的興趣，而且股東也擔(dān)心剝離可能帶來(lái)稅務(wù)負(fù)擔(dān)。 “我們認(rèn)為雅虎董事會(huì)可能基于對(duì)該公司有利的新消息來(lái)調(diào)整決策?！迸蹇怂f(shuō)的新消息是指，最近有報(bào)道稱(chēng)幾家公司正在和雅虎接觸，目的是收購(gòu)其核心業(yè)務(wù)。 標(biāo)準(zhǔn)普爾股票分析師斯科特?凱斯勒接受《財(cái)富》雜志采訪時(shí)表示，他也認(rèn)為雅虎董事會(huì)應(yīng)該擱置上述剝離計(jì)劃，原因是“時(shí)機(jī)不對(duì)”。 雅虎拒絕就剝離計(jì)劃發(fā)表評(píng)論。該公司今年1月份曾宣布，打算剝離持有的阿里巴巴15%的股份。雅虎當(dāng)時(shí)表示，這是充分實(shí)現(xiàn)這些股份的市場(chǎng)價(jià)值的理想途徑。更重要的是，這是一個(gè)零稅務(wù)解決方案。 2005年，雅虎斥資10億美元收購(gòu)了阿里巴巴四成股權(quán)，同時(shí)移交了雅虎中國(guó)的控制權(quán)。2012年，阿里巴巴用價(jià)值76億美元的現(xiàn)金和股票購(gòu)回了大約20%股份。隨后，雅虎不斷拋售阿里的股份，目前持股比例已降至15%。按阿里巴巴2069億美元的市值計(jì)算，這些股票的價(jià)值約為300億美元。 凱斯勒認(rèn)為，“在超過(guò)五年的時(shí)間里”，雅虎一直在評(píng)估讓阿里股份充分兌現(xiàn)價(jià)值的途徑，但雅虎的問(wèn)題自始至終都在于拋售300億美元的阿里巴巴股票后，可能需要向美國(guó)國(guó)稅局繳納大約100億美元的資本利得稅。 因而，雅虎才會(huì)在今年1月份提出一個(gè)無(wú)需納稅的方案。根據(jù)該方案，雅虎將把這300億美元的阿里股份剝離為一家公司，雅虎目前將其稱(chēng)為Aabaco。在繼續(xù)持有阿里股票的同時(shí)，Aabaco還可以上市，并以手中的阿里股票為基礎(chǔ)籌集數(shù)十億美元資金。凱斯勒指出，期待阿里巴巴股票升值的投資者會(huì)對(duì)這筆投資感興趣。 然而，按照美國(guó)目前的法規(guī)，要?jiǎng)冸x這批股份又避免納稅，Aabaco必須經(jīng)營(yíng)某項(xiàng)業(yè)務(wù)。雅虎1月份曾說(shuō)，這將是“雅虎的一項(xiàng)傳統(tǒng)副業(yè)”，不屬于核心業(yè)務(wù)。 但投資者和分析師一直懷疑這次剝離行動(dòng)能否真的實(shí)現(xiàn)零稅負(fù)。 今年9月份，雅虎自己似乎也對(duì)這種可能性產(chǎn)生了顧慮。該公司發(fā)布公告稱(chēng)，它已請(qǐng)求國(guó)稅局在專(zhuān)屬信件中予以認(rèn)定，實(shí)際上就是認(rèn)可剝離計(jì)劃并保證今后雅虎無(wú)需為此納稅。國(guó)稅局拒絕了雅虎的請(qǐng)求，并在近一周后就這份股份剝離計(jì)劃正式頒布了“不認(rèn)定”政策。國(guó)稅局還說(shuō)，它將研究雅虎剝離阿里巴巴股權(quán)的方案，并有可能推出新規(guī)來(lái)彌補(bǔ)稅收漏洞。 隨后，雅虎向投資者發(fā)布公告稱(chēng)，該公司正在推進(jìn)剝離計(jì)劃。公告指出，包括外部律師事務(wù)所Skadden，Arps，Slate，Meagher &Flom LLP and Affiliates在內(nèi)，雅虎的顧問(wèn)認(rèn)為他們不會(huì)因此納稅，并引述國(guó)稅局官員的話說(shuō)，就算修訂后的法規(guī)獲得通過(guò)，也只適用于新的股份剝離行動(dòng)，已經(jīng)開(kāi)始的剝離不會(huì)受到影響。 但問(wèn)題依然存在。雖然相信雅虎仔細(xì)考量了各種方案，而且有理由信任其律師事務(wù)所（該事務(wù)所的一位前國(guó)稅局律師寫(xiě)了一份100頁(yè)的報(bào)告，解釋了為什么按照目前規(guī)定本次剝離無(wú)需納稅），但凱斯勒仍認(rèn)為，無(wú)法確定雅虎最后是否會(huì)被征稅。 他表示：“問(wèn)題就在于這個(gè)‘不一定’上。國(guó)稅局有可能在今后幾年內(nèi)將本次剝離認(rèn)定為應(yīng)稅行為，進(jìn)而征收100億美元的稅款。雅虎不為此繳稅是有可能實(shí)現(xiàn)的，但另一方面，國(guó)稅局按兵不動(dòng)表明，情況并不像雅虎所認(rèn)為的那么明朗?！?/p> 此外，有消息稱(chēng)雅虎可能轉(zhuǎn)讓核心業(yè)務(wù)，這或許是該公司董事會(huì)決定暫緩剝離阿里股份的另一個(gè)因素。 12月初，不斷有報(bào)道稱(chēng)雅虎董事會(huì)正在考慮出售媒體、電子郵件和廣告業(yè)務(wù)的可能性。這些報(bào)道提到了一些潛在收購(gòu)方，包括Verizon和InterActive等。雅虎核心業(yè)務(wù)對(duì)理想買(mǎi)家的報(bào)價(jià)可能達(dá)到80億美元。對(duì)股東來(lái)說(shuō)，非常重要的一點(diǎn)也許在于，轉(zhuǎn)讓核心業(yè)務(wù)后，雅虎就成了一家沒(méi)有核心業(yè)務(wù)的公司。這種情況無(wú)疑和剝離阿里股份成立一家沒(méi)有核心業(yè)務(wù)的公司就一樣了，更何況，雅虎現(xiàn)有核心業(yè)務(wù)表現(xiàn)也不佳。不過(guò)，這樣還是消除了最終需要繳納大量稅款的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，因?yàn)榘⒗锇桶偷墓煞輰⒌玫奖Ａ?，因而不?huì)成為轉(zhuǎn)讓的一部分。 在雅虎主要投資人杰弗里?史密斯看來(lái)，這種情況對(duì)雅虎來(lái)說(shuō)很理想。史密斯同時(shí)也是私募基金公司Starboard Value的首席執(zhí)行官，他是最直言不諱的雅虎批評(píng)者之一。 史密斯指出：“外界對(duì)雅虎的核心業(yè)務(wù)很感興趣，而將阿里股份剝離到Aabaco，雅虎能扭虧的希望卻遙遙無(wú)期，帶有不確定性和不可接受的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。此外，股東也非常支持公司放棄剝離計(jì)劃并轉(zhuǎn)讓核心業(yè)務(wù)。”史密斯分析道，“有鑒于此，對(duì)股東來(lái)說(shuō)最好的結(jié)果顯然是董事會(huì)立即放棄剝離方案，轉(zhuǎn)而通過(guò)競(jìng)標(biāo)，以盡可能高的價(jià)格出售頗有價(jià)值的核心業(yè)務(wù)。雅虎董事會(huì)必須認(rèn)識(shí)到，他們要對(duì)股東負(fù)責(zé)，要妥善地為股東創(chuàng)造價(jià)值?！?/p> 不過(guò)，幾個(gè)月來(lái)雅虎一直承受著剝離計(jì)劃帶來(lái)的沖擊，而且一直沒(méi)有退縮。現(xiàn)在，核心資產(chǎn)有了轉(zhuǎn)讓可能，而剝離阿里股份也許會(huì)產(chǎn)生占其現(xiàn)值三分之一的巨額稅負(fù)。面對(duì)阻力，雅虎需要再次決定是否進(jìn)行剝離。 只不過(guò)，這次的阻力要比以前大得多，反對(duì)之聲也要響亮得多。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)） 譯者：Charlie 校對(duì)：詹妮 |
Yahoo has reversed its decision to spin off its huge stake in Chinese e-commerce giant Alibaba into a separate company and is instead considering selling its core business, according to CNBC. Yahoo’s hopes of spinning off its stake in China-based e-commerce giant Alibaba are in serious jeopardy, according to analysts. And there may be good reason for that. Bob Peck, an analyst at SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, wrote in a note on Dec 4 that Yahoo’sboard will “l(fā)ikely” make the decision to “pause” its proposed plan to spin off the company’s Alibaba shares. In the note, Peck said that the decision, which could be made this week during the company’s board meetings, may ultimately come down to growing interest in Yahoo’s core business, including its search and advertising operations, as well as shareholder concerns over a possible tax liability related to the spin-off. “We think the board will adapt its decisions to new information that avails itself,” Peck wrote, pointing to recent news of several companies reportedly circling Yahoo in hopes of acquiring its core business. Scott Kessler, equity analyst at Standard & Poor’s, told Fortune in an interview that he agrees Yahoo’s board should scuttle plans for a spin-off, saying that the “timing is inopportune.” Yahoo, which declined to comment on its plans, announced its plan to spin off its stake in Alibaba in January. The move was touted by the company as an ideal way to get full market value out of its 15% stake in Alibaba. Most importantly, it was a tax-free solution. Yahoo acquired a 40% stake in Alibaba in 2005 for $1 billion and control over Yahoo China. In 2012, Alibaba paid Yahoo $7.6 billion in cash and stock to buy back approximately 20% of its shares. Yahoo has since divested yet more shares in Alibaba, bringing its current stake to 15%, or approximately $30 billion, based on the e-commerce giant’s $206.9 billion market cap. According to Kessler, “for the better part of a decade” Yahoo has been evaluating ways to get its full value out of Alibaba. Yahoo’s issue, however, has long been that selling off $30 billion in Alibaba stock would result in what Kessler believes, could be an approximate $10 billion capital gains tax bill from the Internal Revenue Service. Yahoo’s January announcement provided a way forward without paying taxes. The plan would see Yahoo spin off its $30 billion stake in Alibaba into a company it’s currently calling Aabaco. While Aabaco would retain ownership in Alibaba, the company would be public and raise billions of dollars based on that stake. Investors, according to Kessler, would be investing in Alibaba’s value, in the hopes that it would rise. But in order for the spin-off to be tax-free under current U.S. regulations, the company must have an operating segment. Yahoo said in January that the operating segment would be “a legacy, ancillary Yahoo business,” not part of the company’s core operation. Speculation among investors and analysts, however, continues over whether the spin-off would indeed be tax-free. In September, Yahoo—seemingly concerned about the possibility itself—announced that it had requested a “private letter” from the IRS, effectively endorsing the deal and ensuring it would not face a tax liability at some point in the future. The IRS declined, and nearly a week later, issued a formal “no-rule” policy on the Alibaba spin-off. The agency also said that it would study the type of transaction Yahoo would use to spin off Alibaba, and potentially release new regulations to block the loophole. Yahoo followed that with a statement to investors saying that it was pushing ahead with the spin-off. The company argued that its advisors, including the outside law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, had said it would not face a tax liability. The company also cited a comment made by an IRS official saying the modified rules, if passed, would impact only new spin-offs and not those that are already in process. Still, questions remain. While Kessler is certain that Yahoo carefully evaluated its options and has reason to trust its law firm (the firm issued a 100-page letter penned by a former IRS attorney explaining why, under current regulations, the spin-off is not taxable), he says it’s impossible to know for sure if Yahoo will eventually be slapped with a tax bill. “The problem is there is no certainty here,” he says. “The IRS could, in a couple of years, deem the transaction taxable and want $10 billion in taxes. It’s possible Yahoo would not need to face tax liabilities, but on the other hand, the IRS’ inaction suggests it’s not quite as clear as Yahoo thinks.” There’s another wrinkle that may be giving the board pause: talk of a possible sale of Yahoo’s core business. This week, reports have been swirling that Yahoo’s board is exploring the possibility of selling Yahoo media properties, e-mail, and advertising businesses. Several potential suitors have been identified, including Verizon, InterActive Corp., and others. Yahoo’s core business could fetch as much as $8 billion to the right buyer. Perhaps most importantly for shareholders, a sale of Yahoo’s core business would create the same scenario as the spin off—a company without the poor-performing core operation—but eliminate the risk of eventually facing a massive tax liability, since Alibaba would stay within the current company and therefore not be part of any transaction. It’s a scenario that Jeffrey Smith, CEO of Starboard Value, a major investor in Yahoo and one of its most outspoken critics, says is ideal for the company. “Given the strong interest in an acquisition of Yahoo’s core business, the uncertainty and unacceptable risk around both the plan to spin Aabaco, the eternal, elusive hope for a public turn-around, and the strong support from shareholders to abandon the proposed spin and sell the core business, clearly the best outcome for shareholders would be for Yahoo’s board to immediately abandon the spin and commence a competitive process to sell its valuable core business at the highest price possible,” Smith says. “It is imperative for Yahoo’s board to understand its fiduciary responsibility is to the shareholders and act as proper stewards of shareholder value.” Still, Yahoo has faced backlash over the spin-off for months and has not backed down. Now faced with the prospect of selling its core business and the possibility of eventually facing a tax liability that would effectively amount to one-third its current value, the company will again need to decide whether to move forward with the spin off in the face of opposition. Only this time, the opposition is much bigger and much louder. |
