7c div - 15.5% income return @ $0.45 per share, page-29

Hotfire,

I was holding at that same time almost the same number of shares as you. There are two things here I think. One, perhaps your accountant did not understand the full workings of the Bamford case. This is what AJA referred to and announced the same. It was not a private ruling. This is no sleight on your accountant. It is extremely confusing and has to do with present entitlement of income.

Here is what my statement looked like roughly:

I'll use my statement figures to show you what I mean:

At the time I was holding about 74000 units. I received a distribution of 5 cpu or about $3700 for the half year.
Taxable income was about $7,600 as per AJA statment.

Foreign Income Tax Offets of about $1040. Net cash distribution of about $6600. Now because of the Bamford Case the net cash distribution is in fact a "net cash distribution". In actuality my net cash was the 5 cpu x number of units just like with everyone else.

Yes you paid tax on $7202 or whatever it was. Your complaint is that you did not receive this amount. Well let's say you earn $1000 per week gross. We both know I would only get $700. There is tax withheld. In this case, due to cash flow they used the bamford case as a shield so they diod not have to distribute all taxable income which they did not have and they also avoided issuing scrip as a distribution.

.....Anyway, this "$7600" had tax credits of about 13.5% or 1040. So I received 3696.5 and had to pay some percentage more tax. Well that's life. It did not make AJA any less attractive an investment in my view.

Anything like this tax offset is fine by me. I am holding AJA in my superfund too and this in effect means my distributions are almost free of a tax burden.