Archives for November 2012

November 2012 - Page 4 of 20 - Money Morning - Only the News You Can Profit From

2013 Dividend Stock Forecast: The Road to True Wealth Starts Here

If you listen to the press, Taxmageddon is going to be a "nightmare" for dividend stocks.

There's only one problem with this scary story: It isn't true.

Of course, I'll be the first one to tell you I'm not in favor of higher taxes on dividends.

And it is true that if we fall off the "fiscal cliff" taxes on dividends will revert to the full income tax rate of each individual taxpayer.

For the top taxpayers that means the top rate on dividends will rise from 15% to 43.4% if dividends become fully taxable again.

However, that's not as bad as it sounds, which is why I believe dividend stocks will remain the place to be in 2013.

Here's why.

First institutional holders of dividend stocks are taxed at their own rate so they did not benefit from the 2003 cut in dividend taxes. That means they won't suffer from a new increase.

And even among individual investors, many have their investments in IRAs or 401(k )s or other tax- deferred accounts. These holders will continue to receive dividends that won't be immediately taxed.

As for those on more modest incomes, perhaps being retired and living mostly on their dividend income, they will pay taxes only at 15%, 25% or 28%.

These are the thresholds which have been indexed for inflation since 2001, meaning the vast majority of tax payers will never get close to the 43.4% figure that makes for great scary headlines.

But it's not just all about tax rates. There are other reasons why savvy investors should continue to invest in dividend stocks in 2013.

One of them is Barack Obama…

To continue reading, please click here...

The Brewing Shale Gas Energy Boom That Nobody is Talking About

While folks back in the U.S. were sitting down to Thanksgiving dinner, I was making my way back to Frankfurt, Germany from Warsaw, Poland.

My discussions in the Polish capital were with the PGNiG, the national state-run gas company and the government's designated partner in all domestic drilling operations.

Unlike my German conversations, there is considerable optimism these days that the energy picture in Poland is about to change in a major way-thanks to shale gas.

Poland must overcome a serious of challenges, which, of course, were the reasons for our meetings. And despite the upbeat tenor of everybody involved, significant concerns have emerged.

On the positive side, Polish officials have committed to a rapid development of unconventional gas. In addition, no domestic opposition to drilling exists, at least not yet.

Unlike back in Germany, nascent environmental movements have neither the political clout nor the apparent interest in making this an issue.

Polish operations are currently in a very early stage, which may be the reason for the lack of opposition. Only a few test wells have been drilled (less than 15 in all), and none are near residential populations.

For that matter, PGNiG is preparing to start its first horizontal drilling operation. The test wells thus far have all been spud by foreign companies.

However, it is now clear that the "rapid" ramp up foreseen by the authorities in the central government is not working out as anticipated back at the well sites.

For one thing, the initial wells have either come in dry or produced disappointing gas flows. For another, the national gas company is under considerable pressure to produce positive results in what is becoming a very challenging technical environment.

The former result is hardly surprising. There remains insufficient geology and preliminary field prospecting. The locations of shale deposits are well known. The country has no less than five very promising basins. But Mother Nature has an irritating habit of indifferently placing hydrocarbons in those basins.

That requires initial evaluations before the expensive proposition of sinking exploratory wells commences. Thus far, the few wells attempted have been positioned with little more than rudimentary data and guesswork. The poor initial results, therefore, reflect such considerations more than anything else.

There seems little doubt that there are considerable reserves, but finding where they are remains a major undertaking.

Here challenges exist that are not a problem back in the United States.

But solving them could lead to huge breakthroughs for companies in the U.S. and energy investors alike.

To continue reading, please click here...

What Raising Taxes on the Rich Really Does for the U.S. Economy

“Economic patriotism” – have you heard of it?

It’s part of U.S. President Barack Obama’s plan to fix the U.S. economy, which includes asking the richest American taxpayers to fork over more money.

But has President Obama done the math?

Taxing the rich will bring us $80 billion, far short of the annual federal deficit of $1 trillion.

Money Morning Chief Investment Strategist Keith Fitz-Gerald joined FOX Business Network’s “Varney & Co.” last week to discuss the flawed logic and resulting frustration of touting “taxing the rich” as the way to solve our economic problems. Check out this dynamic interview with Fitz-Gerald.

Read More…

How to Prepare for Recession 2013

U.S. President Barack Obama recently met with congressional leaders in attempts to carve out a way to avoid falling off the quickly approaching fiscal cliff.

If no deal is reached, President Obama and scores of economists warn, the U.S. is destined to plummet into a recession in 2013.

Money Morning Global Investing Strategist Martin Hutchinson cautions that even if lawmakers avoid the fiscal cliff by the most likely scenario of raising taxes on wealthy Americans while leaving the majority of the budget deficit status quo, the short-term outlook for the health of the U.S. economy is far from rosy.

"U.S. economic growth has been held back in the last few years by the blizzard of regulations coming out of Washington, and there's reason to believe there is an especially heavy storm of them in the next few months, having been held up before the election," said Hutchinson.

And despite the easy monetary policies of Fed Chief Ben Bernanke, and the latest round of QE3 (dubbed QE Forever), "the U.S. economy is not going back to robust growth in 2013," Hutchinson added. Creating more money, he said, will just increase inflation.

"In the long run, a recession is coming," Hutchinson warns.

Three Dividend-Paying Stocks Likely to Increase Payout

One reason investors are scared silly over fiscal cliff 2013 is the potential tax hike that will affect investing in dividend-paying stocks.

If Congress doesn't act the rate on dividends will revert to the ordinary income rate, which tops out at 39.6%, after it was lowered to 15% during the George W. Bush administration.

"It's a foregone conclusion the rates are going up — it's just a matter of how high they go," Todd Lowenstein, a money manager with HighMark Capital Management Inc. told Bloomberg News.

But history shows dumping dividend-paying stocks because of higher tax rates is a losing game.

Even if tax rates go up, investors will fatten their wallets on companies that raise dividends because the money compounds over time, essentially paying interest on the interest.

And right now, there are plenty of good reasons for corporations to reward investors with higher payouts.

Why Dividend-Paying Stocks Will Increase Payout

Companies are sitting on $3 trillion of cash and can create badly needed goodwill by showing they're attuned to investor concerns about higher taxes, according to HighMark's Lowenstein.

Plus, if corporate tax rates climb, companies may want to increase their dividend payouts instead of paying more taxes on interest from that cash.

And it's about time, based on the miserly way companies have been treating investors.
Companies in the S&P 500 paid a paltry 27% of earnings to investors in dividends last year, according to research from Goldman Sachs Group Inc(NYSE: GS). Over the past 50 years, the payout ratio has rarely dropped below 40%.

In fact, the best companies are committed to boosting their dividends in even the worst economic times. Many of them are so predictable that you can narrow it down to the very day they'll pay dividends and, in some cases, even the size of the increase.

Three Dividend-Paying Stocks Likely to Pay More

Here are three companies with long track records that will almost certainly raise their dividends in the near future:

To continue reading, please click here...

Hewlett-Packard (NYSE: HPQ) is a Lawyer's Dream

After alleging last Tuesday that it had been defrauded by the management of takeover target Autonomy, resulting in a $8.8 billion write down, Hewlett-Packard Company (NYSE: HPQ) itself came under scrutiny by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

According to Businessweek, "The FBI, responding to an inquiry by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, is looking into Hewlett-Packard Co.'s allegations of accounting improprieties at its Autonomy Corp. unit, a person familiar with the matter said."

Autonomy founder and former CEO, Mike Lynch has angrily denied HP's allegations.

"HP came in with about 300 people, crawled over everything and you know what? They found nothing. And you know why? There was nothing to find," Lynch said in a television interview with The Telegraph. "What actually happened is that they mismanaged Autonomy and in doing that have destroyed a lot of shareholder value.'"

In the meantime, Hewlett-Packard CEO Meg Whitman and the rest of the board are trying to distance themselves from the decision to acquire Autonomy. Instead they're blaming former CEO Leo Apotheker and his strategy of moving HP toward becoming less dependent upon hardware and more dependent upon software for its revenue.

HP's advisors in the deal, notably auditing firm Deloitte, are scrambling to shed any responsibility for the alleged fraudulent accounts.

Deloitte, which had audited Autonomy's books for most of a decade issued a statement Wednesday saying, "Deloitte categorically denies that it had any knowledge of any accounting misrepresentations in Autonomy's financial statements."

The Deloitte statement continued, "Deloitte was not engaged by HP, or by Autonomy, to provide any due diligence in relation to the acquisition of Autonomy."

To continue reading, please click here...

SEC Chief Mary Schapiro Steps Down, Elisse Walter Steps In

Mary Schapiro, chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, announced she will step down Dec. 14 following a strenuous four years as SEC chief.

Schapiro was appointed head of the SEC by U.S. President Barack Obama in 2008, just one month after the Bernie Madoff scandal emerged, and she officially took office in 2009 at the peak of the financial crisis.

Her departure was not a surprise, as over the past year she had told fellow staff members how exhausted she was and that she hoped to leave after the elections.

Schapiro was the first woman to be permanent chairman of the SEC, and her four years were arguably the toughest stretch any SEC chief has faced.

"When Mary agreed to serve nearly four years ago, she was fully aware of the difficulties facing the SEC and our economy as a whole," President Obama said in a statement. "But she accepted the challenge, and today, the SEC is stronger and our financial system is safer and better able to serve the American people – thanks in large part to Mary's hard work."

To continue reading, please click here...

Warren Buffett's Minimum Tax Rate Proposal

In his op-ed in today's The New York Times, billionaire investor Warren Buffett reiterated his case for higher taxes on the wealthiest Americans, calling for a minimum tax rate of 30% on people making more than $1 million a year and 35% for those making more than $10 million a year.

After pointing out that no one, with the possible exception of Grover Norquist, ever turned down a good investment opportunity because the tax rate on the capital gain would be too high, Buffett argued, "So let's forget about the rich and ultrarich going on strike and stuffing their ample funds under their mattresses if – gasp – capital gains rates and ordinary income rates are increased. The ultrarich, including me, will forever pursue investment opportunities."

Imposing a minimum tax rate on high incomes, "…will block the efforts of lobbyists, lawyers and contribution-hungry legislators to keep the ultrarich paying rates well below those incurred by people with income just a tiny fraction of ours," Buffett said. "Only a minimum tax on very high incomes will prevent the stated tax rate from being eviscerated by these warriors for the wealthy."

While Buffett was unsparing in his criticism of those earning the highest incomes, he also suggested modifications to President Obama's plan to raise taxes on incomes over $250,000. "I support President Obama's proposal to eliminate the Bush tax cuts for high-income taxpayers," Buffett wrote. "However, I prefer a cutoff point somewhat above $250,000 – maybe $500,000 or so," recognizing that, in some parts of the country (not Omaha), $250,000 barely covers a middle-class lifestyle.

To continue reading, please click here...

This New Fiscal Cliff Report Issues $200 Billion Warning

A fresh fiscal cliff report from the White House today (Monday) has predicted that falling off the cliff will deliver a damaging blow to U.S. consumer spending.

The report from the White House's National Economic Council and Council of Economic Advisers cautioned that consumers will rein in spending next year to the tune of some $200 billion should Congress let taxes increase for middle class American families come 2013.

"American consumers are the bedrock of our economy, driving more than two-thirds of the overall rise in real GDP over 13 consecutive quarters of economic recovery since the middle of 2009. And as we approach the holiday season, which accounts for close to one-fifth of industry sales, retailers can't afford the threat of tax increases on middle-class families," the report stressed.

The report is the latest ammo that U.S. President Barack Obama is using to sway lawmakers to go along with his plan to extend tax cuts for American families making less than $250,000 a year, while raising tax rates on the wealthiest 1%, which Republicans vehemently oppose.

"The president has called on Congress to act now on extending income tax cuts for 98% of American families and not hold the middle-class and our economy hostage over a disagreement on tax cuts for households over $250,000 per year. The Senate has passed this bill and the president is ready to sign it," the report read.

With the Dec. 31 fiscal cliff deadline quickly approaching, Democrats and Republicans continue to butt heads over tax issues, as well as government spending and entitlement expenditures. If the two sides don't come to some kind of deal and we fall over the fiscal cliff, a 2013 recession is likely.

To continue reading, please click here...

What 4 More Years Of Obama Means For Your Money

In this special report, each of Money Morning's top investing experts tell you exactly how they see the next four years playing out… what danger's lie ahead… and how you should best position your portfolio to protect and profit.

Time to Go "Glocal"

The $600 billion fiscal cliff we've warned you about has never gone away. It's been marginalized by the campaign, but it has never disappeared. It is, bar none, the single- biggest issue facing our country at the moment.

But President Obama's re-election means a lame duck president and a lame duck Congress. Rather than a grand solution, expect more grandstanding and another game of kick the can down the road.

Generally speaking, the markets are going to be very choppy in the near term. Fully half the traders on Wall Street woke up on the wrong side of the proverbial bed the day after the election and they're going to have to adjust their bets accordingly.

The most stable, defensive and, ironically, opportunistic choices will remain large, super cap stocks. I call them "glocals." These are companies like MCD, Procter and Gamble, General Electric, ABB, Raytheon and Vodaphone. All of them are global brands and have the experience needed to manage real growth despite challenging economic conditions around the world. Most typically pay high income that offsets the risk of ownership and are therefore far more stable than non-dividend paying alternatives.

Small cap stocks are just the opposite. Unless there is something especially compelling about them, like a truly unique patent or a new long- term government contract, the volatility will be more than most investors are prepared to accept. Most pay no income whatsoever so they're a crap shoot in today's environment.