巴菲特下注漢堡王
|
????沃倫?巴菲特終于開始涉足漢堡業(yè)務(wù)。 ????據(jù)《華爾街日?qǐng)?bào)》（WSJ）率先報(bào)道，巴菲特執(zhí)掌的伯克希爾哈撒韋公司（Berkshire Hathaway）已經(jīng)同意在漢堡王（Burger King）計(jì)劃收購(gòu)加拿大咖啡及甜甜圈連鎖商蒂姆霍頓斯（Tim Hortons）的交易中提供融資支持，該筆交易將催生出一家市值總計(jì)約180億美元的連鎖快餐巨頭。預(yù)計(jì)伯克希爾公司不會(huì)以普通股的形式投資合并后的公司，而是與摩根大通（J.P. Morgan Chase）和富國(guó)銀行（Wells Fargo）共同為其提供資金，從而換取支付年度股息的優(yōu)先股。 ????漢堡王的控股股東是巴西私募股權(quán)投資公司3G資本（3G Group）。2013年，巴菲特就曾攜手3G 資本收購(gòu)了番茄醬制造商亨氏（H.J. Heinz Co.）。 ????據(jù)可靠消息來(lái)源透露，早在2010年，3G資本就曾在最初收購(gòu)漢堡王時(shí)嘗試與巴菲特合作，但被巴菲特拒絕【但當(dāng)時(shí)巴菲特已經(jīng)通過(guò)收購(gòu)DQ冰淇淋（Dairy Queen）進(jìn)入快餐行業(yè)】。巴菲特的顧慮在于，漢堡王連續(xù)幾屆首席執(zhí)行官都決策失敗，而麥當(dāng)勞（McDonald’s）的地位似乎難以撼動(dòng)。在被3G資本收購(gòu)后，盡管漢堡王的營(yíng)業(yè)收入逐年下降（很大程度是由于公司削減直營(yíng)店造成），但其利潤(rùn)和稅息折舊及攤銷前利潤(rùn)（EBITDA）雙雙實(shí)現(xiàn)增長(zhǎng)（3G資本以注重削減成本而著稱）。自從2012年6月重新上市至今，公司股價(jià)已經(jīng)上漲了100％以上。 ????不過(guò)，巴菲特這一次的加入，可能會(huì)引爆一只政治火藥桶。 ????漢堡王計(jì)劃在此宗交易之后，將總部從美國(guó)的佛羅里達(dá)州遷到加拿大的安大略省，成為近來(lái)“稅收倒置”（tax inversions）大軍中新的一員，此操作可以使得進(jìn)行收購(gòu)的美國(guó)公司降低稅負(fù)。加拿大的企業(yè)稅率僅為26.5%，而美國(guó)的稅率為35%。漢堡王仍需要就其在美國(guó)境內(nèi)的經(jīng)營(yíng)支付美國(guó)的稅項(xiàng)，但整體而言還是要少于總部設(shè)在邁阿密時(shí)需要向美國(guó)國(guó)稅局繳納的稅款（有意思的是，在此番‘自我倒置’之前，蒂姆霍頓斯是在美國(guó)特拉華州注冊(cè)成立的）。2013年，漢堡王將近44%的營(yíng)業(yè)收入都來(lái)自美國(guó)以外的地區(qū)。 ????呼吁改變稅法以防止此類稅收倒置活動(dòng)的政治壓力主要來(lái)自民主黨。美國(guó)總統(tǒng)奧巴馬已經(jīng)公開譴責(zé)了此類交易。所以，巴菲特入主漢堡王，是會(huì)令民主黨讓步，還是促使共和黨推動(dòng)已經(jīng)啟動(dòng)的改革，且讓我們拭目以待。 ????對(duì)此，巴菲特曾經(jīng)表示，他并不認(rèn)為美國(guó)企業(yè)的稅收負(fù)擔(dān)過(guò)重，但他也確實(shí)看到美國(guó)的稅法存在著不合理的地方，希望各國(guó)的企業(yè)稅收能夠趨于一致。或許他會(huì)辯稱，漢堡王和蒂姆霍頓斯經(jīng)過(guò)合并，會(huì)比各自打拼更具前景，最終可以為美國(guó)貢獻(xiàn)更多的稅收。 ????根據(jù)預(yù)期協(xié)議的條款規(guī)定，漢堡王不能僅因?yàn)槊绹?guó)稅法的變動(dòng)而不執(zhí)行交易。此外，伯克希爾公司預(yù)計(jì)需要就其股息收入全額繳足美國(guó)稅款，無(wú)法享受美國(guó)企業(yè)的優(yōu)先股持有人所享受的股息收入扣減優(yōu)惠。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)） |
????Warren Buffett is finally getting into the burger business. ????Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway has agreed to help finance Burger King’s proposed purchase of Canadian coffee-and-doughnut chain Tim Hortons, which would create an $18 billion quick-serve restaurant behemoth, as first reported by the WSJ. Berkshire is not expected to purchase common stock in the combined company, but instead is helping to finance the deal — alongside J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. and Wells Fargo — in exchange for preferred stock that would pay out an annual dividend. ????Burger King is majority-owned by Brazilian private equity firm 3G Group, with whom Buffett worked last year to purchase ketchup-maker H.J. Heinz Co. ????According to a source familiar with the situation, 3G reached out to Buffett back in 2010 about partnering on its original takeover of Burger King, but he demurred (although he already was in the quick-serve food biz via Berkshire’s ownership of Dairy Queen). Among Buffett’s concerns about Burger King were a succession of failed CEOs and the seeming invincibility of McDonald’s. Since then, Burger King’s revenue has consistently declined during 3G’s ownership (in large part due to its divestiture of company-owned stores), although both its profits and EBITDA have increased (3G is known for its focus on cutting costs). The company’s stock also is up more than 100% since returning to the public markets in June 2012. ????By coming aboard now, however, Buffett may be hopping atop a political powder keg. ????Burger King plans to relocate its headquarters from Florida to Ontario following the deal, making it just the latest in a series of so-called “tax inversions” that allow acquiring U.S. companies to lower their tax bills. Canada’s corporate tax rate is just 26.5%, compared to the U.S. rate of 35%. Burger King still would be required to pay U.S. taxes on U.S. operations, but ultimately would enjoy a lower IRS bill than were it to officially remain in Miami (in a strange twist, Tim Hortons had been incorporated in Delaware before later ‘self-inverting’). Approximately 44% of Burger King’s 2013 revenue came from outside the U.S. ????Most of the political pressure to change tax law to prevent inversions has come from Democrats, with President Obama publicly denouncing such transactions. So it should be interesting to see if Buffett’s participation in Burger King either causes Democrats to back off, or possibly gets Republicans on board with existing reform efforts. ????For his part, Buffett has said that he does not believe U.S. companies are unduly burdened by taxes, but he does see irrationality in the tax code and would prefer more consistency in corporate rates from country to country. Perhaps what he would argue is that Burger King and Tim Hortons will grow larger in the U.S. as a combined company than as separate entities, thus ultimately generating more U.S. tax revenue. ????Under terms of the expected agreement, Burger King cannot walk away just because U.S. tax law changes. Also, Berkshire would be expected to pay U.S. taxes on its dividend income at a full rate, without the dividend received deduction that benefits holders of preferred shares of U.S.-based companies. ????It remains unclear if Tim Hortons has accepted the Burger King offer. |
最新文章