Treveria Share Discussion Threads

[norbert dentressangle] 12/1/2010 22:21

But why re-distribute cash at all, I'm struggling to grasp what could be gained from undermining liquidity

[miamisteve] 12/1/2010 17:28

More so they state that the 4c is prudent and that they intend to make further payments.

SP fell from 20cent to 10cent which suggested that the market was pricing in that all the money earmarked for special dividends was going to be absorbed by tax liability.

[norbert dentressangle] 12/1/2010 17:10

nickcduk, looks like I could've got it right for once back in November!

They wouldn't be proposing any dividend if they didn't still have surplus cash, it must be a positive sign

[miamisteve] 12/1/2010 16:28

Seems like some manoveuring prior to the EGM on the 20th to gain shareholder support.

Either way EGM should clear some of the uncertainty.

[nickcduk] 12/1/2010 16:15

The tax issue didn't apply to all the portfolios. It only pertained to a couple.

[miamisteve] 12/1/2010 15:18

4¢ a share interim dividend - I'd guess that means that the potential tax liability is less than previously feared at around 35m euro.

[norbert dentressangle] 15/11/2009 13:33

Interesting stuff here guys.

Regarding owning below 95% of the different subsidiary companies, have they passed this threshhold in all or just one of them? Could it be that the liability is only due on a proportion of the portfolio?

Wishful thinking here but trying to remain positive!!

[m1keg] 13/11/2009 17:58

This transfer tax is not due until you own a very large percentage of the shares in a company. You can see in the financial reports how this looks to have been avoided in the past by only owning up to 94.9% (if I have remembered correctly) of all the different subsidiary companies. Looks like somebody took the wrong decision/advice and went over this threshhold.

How much of this value cascades up the parent company could be calculated by somebody with the specialist knowledge though I'm amazed this information is not put in the public domain by the company as a matter of course. Knowing about something is always better than worrying about the unknown.

[davep4] 13/11/2009 16:47

So it is property transfer tax that may or may not be due: Transfer of German property is subject to a transfer tax (Grunderwerbsteuer) – equivalent of
stamp duty. Effective 1 January 2007 this tax is no longer set at federal level and comes under
authority of local governments. While most states and cities have so far kept the transfer tax at
the previous rate of 3.5% (of the purchase price), Berlin has increased the rate to 4.5%. Transfer
tax is generally paid by the buyer.

[norbert dentressangle] 12/11/2009 15:07

erstwhile2, I've nicked this part of one of the press releases post RNS

"Treveria says that the tax liability may have been triggered by the restructuring undertaken following the demise of Dawnay Day Group. Treveria does have enough cash to pay the tax but the payment will determine how much cash can be distributed."

I've asked the board what the liability is and they can't reveal it, but the above paragraph would definitely imply that the liability is less than 60m

[norbert dentressangle] 12/11/2009 12:48

davep4, I think that the fact they've shelved divi-ing out the 60m is a clear indicator that the tax wont be ring fenced, sadly.

[davep4] 12/11/2009 09:28

The point is that when they restructured they crystallised a tax charge. Note the last part of the first sentence of the RNS "during which it received specific taxation and separate legal advice." I would imagine that their "advisers" will be sweating over potential litigation regarding negligent advice. Also note the liability is in a subsidiary and therefore maybe ring fenced. I will continue to hold as the shares have already taken the hit, ouch!

[mallorca 90] 12/11/2009 08:11

Oh Dear

Cannot believe anybody these days.

[salver2] 11/11/2009 23:34

im not sure why they dropped so severely-the management is so poor here they were buying back their undervalued shares at prices 8 or 9 times higher than the present price -they kept on telling us the german economy was robust -another lie-if there is negligent advice they should be able to claim it back on insurance-this lost nearly half its value-theres obviously something there not telling us

[davep4] 11/11/2009 20:47

Now valued at the amount that was going to distributed. Let's hope the tax liability is ring fenced, in any event I bet there will be litigation to recover any tax crystallised due to negligent advice!

[lbo] 11/11/2009 20:06

Its one disaster after another with this company. What is they say about fools and their money?

Treveria tax shock

[norbert dentressangle] 11/11/2009 18:08

Cheers Kenny.

Certain things don't add up, ie 60m of surplus cash to be distributed suddenly become part of the 'cash pot' again. If it was surplus then surely it can't be touched, no?

Secondly, huge institution buying, and director buys too. Surely they would've known of a tax liability prior to restructuring, wouldn't they?

[kenny] 11/11/2009 16:22

I am not a holder but suggest potential buyers exercise extreme caution - it may look cheap but prove not to be. Quantum of the tax liability on the restructuring could easly wipe out NAV.

[norbert dentressangle] 11/11/2009 15:31

I'm in further, 50% loss in a day is way overblown, IMO

[johnsoho] 11/11/2009 11:03

I'm out...good luck to all holders

[trawl] 11/11/2009 10:48

while its early and this seems very negative
the stmt says they received specific and seperate legal advice
does mean they will be taking action for compensation
if so this could take some time

[trawl] 11/11/2009 10:38

definitly not what was wanted