(29-08-2013, 05:19 PM)Boon Wrote: [ -> ]BTW, I do concur with you that Nanfung could still make some good profits if they GO at SGD2.98 - but not at SGD 4.50
Boon san
Allow me to explain why 4.50 is still good price. In the balance sheet, there is this item called deferred tax liability of $367 million related to investment properties. This deferred tax liability is not "real" in the sense that it is there to balance out the future tax payable.
In other words, if the property is sold e.g. Central Plaza, this deferred tax liability becomes part of the gain too...
Orang Kaya san
How come your 3 lots become 300 lots? 8-P
Forterra probably need to keep some money to redevelop huai hai mall.
(29-08-2013, 06:02 PM)HitandRun Wrote: [ -> ] (29-08-2013, 05:19 PM)Boon Wrote: [ -> ]BTW, I do concur with you that Nanfung could still make some good profits if they GO at SGD2.98 - but not at SGD 4.50
Boon san
Allow me to explain why 4.50 is still good price. In the balance sheet, there is this item called deferred tax liability of $367 million related to investment properties. This deferred tax liability is not "real" in the sense that it is there to balance out the future tax payable.
In other words, if the property is sold e.g. Central Plaza, this deferred tax liability becomes part of the gain too...
Orang Kaya san
How come your 3 lots become 300 lots? 8-P
I'd have thought that in your example, when Central Park was sold, the Deferred Tax Liability becomes an actual Tax Expense (Deferred Tax) which eats into the Profit. It's the realisation of selling at NAV (of that asset, which'd been revalued higher previously and resulted in that higher Deferred Tax Liability component) that gives the bigger profits.
So, IMO, looking at NAV and Deferred Tax Liabilities seems like looking at the same thing? Both are the outcome of higher revaluations? They're not realised unless the asset is sold... ideally at revaluation or higher...
PS. I just learnt that
Orang Kaya is not an Orang who loves Kaya ....
When they sold central plaza, the deferred tax liabilities was not gone, just was transferred to the sellers. As the seller inherited the deferred tax liabilities when it bought the PRC company through offshore transaction.
The problem here is that the PRC government does not like this kind of transaction as it is considered tax avoidance. A transaction was done on an investment properties in China, but PRC government can't collect tax on it. See example of Vodafone Vs. India Government over acquisition.
(30-08-2013, 09:43 AM)KopiKat Wrote: [ -> ]I'd have thought that in your example, when Central Park was sold, the Deferred Tax Liability becomes an actual Tax Expense (Deferred Tax) which eats into the Profit. It's the realisation of selling at NAV (of that asset, which'd been revalued higher previously and resulted in that higher Deferred Tax Liability component) that gives the bigger profits.
KopiKat san
Don't take my word for it. Take a look at their computation on 10 April 2013. My computation is just back of the envelope anyhow whack kind...
The Proposed Sale is expected to result in a gain of approximately S$21.47 million on the following basis:
S$ (m)
Sale Consideration 333.47
Less:
Central Plaza Carrying Value 361.98
Estimated Withholding Tax 15.56
Estimated Costs of Sale 7.94
Add:
Reversal of Deferred Tax Liability 73.48
Estimated Gain on Sale 21.47
Good noon Big Boss HitandRun san.
1st time bot *s-chip*. I think u hv done ur homework if not mati catch u for hit and run
(30-08-2013, 12:46 PM)kbl Wrote: [ -> ]I think u hv done ur homework if not mati catch u for hit and run
Orang Kaya san
Like that one ah. Methinks you better contra and take profit quick quick lah.
hello Big Boss HitandRun san.
Patient
(30-08-2013, 01:23 PM)HitandRun Wrote: [ -> ] (30-08-2013, 12:46 PM)kbl Wrote: [ -> ]I think u hv done ur homework if not mati catch u for hit and run
Orang Kaya san
Like that one ah. Methinks you better contra and take profit quick quick lah.
(30-08-2013, 12:46 PM)kbl Wrote: [ -> ]1st time bot *s-chip*.
OMG! I didn't realise that... with the change in ownership + all assets in China... you're not wrong in your classification.... Does Singapore have extradition treaty with HongKongers? I suppose from '97 onwards, they ought to have become Chinese nationals?? In that case, even Li Ka-Shing companies ought to be seen as S-Chips.... *shudders*...
Fortunately (?), Nan Fung has other projects in Singapore. In the worst case, we go stage protest (after getting necessary police permits) outside their office / projects...
