Yes, the tax statement will show foreign tax paid, and you can credit it against total taxes due in the USA. I've seen that on my Matthews statements over the years, and maybe Seafarer. But I was trying to say that I do not believe that "foreign tax paid" as it appears on the tax statement necessarily means you've paid all that's due "on that score," already. (Like getting "qualified" or "non-qualified" domestic dividends. Whatever that means.)

@Tampabay

Tampabay
10:18AM Flag
I think its more of a matter of having too much Cash on hand for profitable companies, and innovative ways to make money with the cash, Why not find ways to give back to Company Owners, the share holders, Bay backs are one (easy) way to do this...

One of my takeaways from the paper's arguments is that the corporate mentality that has driven a significant portion of the buybacks has been too short term in its nature. Investments in labor (including additional technical training and other education for existing workers) and capital may take many years to fully provide a payback....particularly when the economy is struggling. But, if that part of the equation gets short changed in order to goose the stock price in the current quarter, the overall economy including the wages of its workers suffers in the long run. I am inclined to think some of that has been going on in recent years.

Another thought, How many Middle Class people buy Stocks (invest).... last I read it was less than 10%, How many Care or want to?
In fact how many well educated Americans even Know how to go about buying stocks?
Guarantee, myself as a well educated, young successful businessman with plenty of disposal money didn't have a clue....finally after years of fooling around with mutual fund companies and buying IRAs out of tax necessity.. I educated myself....
Middle Class Doesn't do that....buying stocks....so I guess they don't benefit....
all my guessing

"In terms of types of financial wealth, the top one percent of households have 35% of all privately held stock, 64.4% of financial securities, and 62.4% of business equity. The top ten percent have 81% to 94% of stocks, bonds, trust funds, and business equity, and almost 80% of non-home real estate."
http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
Also:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100780163
http://www.salon.com/2013/09/19/stock_ownership_who_benefits_partner/

Another thought, How many Middle Class people buy Stocks (invest).... last I read it was less than 10%, How many Care or want to?
In fact how many well educated Americans even Know how to go about buying stocks?
Guarantee, myself as a well educated, young successful businessman with plenty of disposal money didn't have a clue....finally after years of fooling around with mutual fund companies and buying IRAs out of tax necessity.. I educated myself....
Middle Class Doesn't do that....buying stocks....so I guess they don't benefit....
all my guessing

William Lazonick writes that "Stock buybacks are an important explanation for both the concentration of income among the richest households and the disappearance of middle-class employment opportunities in the United States over the past three decades. Over this period, corporate resource-allocation at many, if not most, major U.S. business corporations has transitioned from “retain-and-reinvest” to “downsize-and-distribute” ". Toward the end of the paper, Lazonick further states "Senior executives who are willing to waste hundreds of millions or billions of dollars annually on buybacks are likely to lose the judgmental capacity to comprehend the types of investments in organization and technology that are required to remain innovative in their industries."
Rex Nutting comments on the paper at this link where he says "Share buybacks encourage executives to loot companies, stall innovation and depress wages":
marketwatch.com/story/how-the-stock-market-destroyed-the-middle-class-2015-04-24?dist=beforebell
Here is a link to a summary of the paper and to its full pdf version ("Stock buybacks: From retain-and reinvest to downsize-and-distribute"):
brookings.edu/research/papers/2015/04/17-stock-buybacks-lazonick
It is my impression share buybacks have been a key driver of US equity market performance in recent years. I am not sure that trend can be sustained in a positive way over the next several years. This may be worth thinking about since it impacts our portfolios.

The $20M is in DSL - all a single position.
As Junkster pointed out, this is a muni bond, not a corporate. Aside from that, there are other differences from what Gundlach was talking about. He specifically mentioned a flood of maturities in the 2018 time frame. He felt that this would create a problem both in price (lots of new bonds coming on the market to replace the old ones) and defaults (not having the cash flow to deal with higher coupon bonds?).
PR bonds, in contrast, are generally (still) long term maturing in the 2030s and now 2040s. In particular, the series in DSL mature in 2035. PR is having problems servicing its current debt, but it won't have to deal with rolling over its bonds for many years.
PR bonds are unique in another way. They were recently downgraded to junk (the only "state" bonds to be so graded, so they're in a class by themselves). As a result, funds dumped them (as did many other investors), and they have already been badly punished in the market. As Junkster's link pointed out, they're trading at all-time lows. I have a small portfolio of individual munis, and I watch the PR bond prices drop even as all other muni prices (from BBB to AA) rise.
Not wishing to sound like a Pollyanna, I nevertheless offer a (possibly rare) contrarian view for your consideration: https://www.fmsbonds.com/News/bond_article.asp?id=488

@msf: Thanks for the comment. Since IRA acct can go more aggressive, for tax free growth for 6 more years( a lesson I learnt only 2 years ago) before RMD kicks in, I am tweaking my portfolio, making more index based in taxable and aggressive in IRA. my 401k with ltd. choice is on s&[email protected]%. So was looking for suitable alternatives for IRA holding. one i found was poskx. There will be a lot more surely. I find some members like catch22, crash ( max B), msf, rono etc giving really great insights, so am looking forward to some.

@andiel049, I have been impressed by everything about GP until now, including the big investments they have in their own funds, closing funds aggressively and even more hard closing funds. As I mentioned this all screams outperformance to me and in a world where not that many managers outperform over time I don't think its a big surprise that they've gathered assets so quickly. Maybe that's the trick. They thought it might take 10 years to gather this amount of assets. They thought they would close everything at $1.5-$2.0 billion then at $3 billion and now something larger. For all the experience they have they're conservative and they were probably too transparent about the asset levels they thought they could manage.
To answer @JoJo26 's question, I look at this as one small cap portfolio. It helps that it's global but as opposed to many small cap fund managers who are at the top end of small cap or have a lot of assets even in mid-caps, these guys are very small cap and that would lower the assets I'd like to see in the fund(s). I think $3 billion is a great level, but I think $5 billion is probably okay, although they don't have a lot invested in the US and I think that makes $5 billion relatively larger. Once you get past $5 billion I think it starts to get more difficult to keep the market cap down or to "only" have 400 plus stocks (based on GPROX) in their collection. I'm already concerned pending their explanation but above $5 billion I think they're losing their ability to prioritize what they said they would when they closed GPROX last September.
From what I understand, the Stalwarts are just going to be another cut of GPROX and it will be limited, more or less, to the stocks with market caps greater than $1.5 billion. That would tend to make me believe they will include the larger small caps and a good portion of the mid-caps in GPROX. There are only a few holdings that M* categorizes as large cap and while those could certainly be part of the Stalwarts, even so they wouldn't likely make up a big part of it.
@Charles, if we believe what andiel049 says, and I have no reason not to, then it's pretty clear this is motivated by pressure from institutional investors more than investment opportunities or more management fees (although clearly that goes along with more assets). Based on what I've read in commentaries, annual letters or press releases closing funds they've talked about understanding the difficulties hard closing funds causes for asset allocation, they've talked about the desire from customers for more room to continue investing, and it sounds like someone has managed to convince them they might be great at making investment decisions but they're wrong about how much money they can manage and keep making those great investment decisions. I'm trying to keep an open mind but hopefully it will help when they share some of the thinking that went into these decisions.

My score was a perfect 50%. (Exactly what you'd expect when guessing)
When these robots sign-up and start posting here, then we got a problem.
John Hussman might as well be a robot. Wrong now for how many years? Would also explain why his photo on his website hasn't changed a bit over the last 15 years. Robots don't age like we humans.

Great call; missed it but caught the mp3 yesterday. I thought AF's explanation of how security picking and macro interact in the Seafarer process was about the most detailed and illuminating I've heard from any manager.

Let me second AndyJ on this. I think Foster has it exactly right: It would be wonderful to get the future Macro environment right, but the unfortunate fact is that nobody can. Better to concentrate on something you might be able to judge with some accuracy, i.e., a company's fundamentals over the next couple of years (maybe 5 years tops in my view).
And a belated thanks to David for setting up these calls. In two cases (Seafarer and RSIVX) they've convinced me to invest in funds I likely would not have otherwise.

A little text here would help. This is a "reboot" of Julius Baer/Artio by the JB founders, including Rudolph-Riad Younes and Richard Pell (who isn't mentioned in the MFWire article). Their original fund, BJBIX, was excellent for several years until it ballooned; it was subsequently sold to Aberdeen and has continued its decline.
Here's a M* article from a year ago that describes this in gory detail.
The new incarnation of the fund is RSQ International Equity RSQVX. Not a particularly auspicious start to date.

Starbucks is very pricey for what you get. At the beginning their food offerings were also expensive but unique. Everyone else has the same things now. It does become an expensive habit. The frugal part of me pushed the idea of making my own. Never looked back but I cannot stand regular coffee anymore.
Chipotle has been a surprise for these few years. I've been waiting for the stock to revert to its mean but it hasn't happened. I guess this old guy doesn't understand the value of another restaurant chain.
I stopped by Olive Garden for lunch while stateside. Very disappointed. Food was bland. I don't think I'll go there anymore.

I'm starting to wonder who does eat there and who invests in their stock?

Aren't any where we are in northern Michigan. Not sure about the downstate area. My first encounter with them was on a long drive we took across the Ohio-Pennsylvania Turnpike on the way to W. Virginia couple years ago. They're scattered all along the way at those big commercialized rest areas. We stopped every couple hours for our caffeine fix. Clean & modern with customer friendly staff. Any flavor/size concoction you can imagine. But 2 or 3 X more expensive than your local coffee shop. Also, while in NY, I picked-up a prepackaged salad at the Starbucks inside Macy's big store in Manhattan. Took it back to the hotel for later. I'll have to say it was nothing special. A bit disappointing considering the high price paid.
If you go to EBay or Amazon they have large sections devoted soly to Starbuck branded items. I've looked at some of their classic Holiday mugs from specific years in the past - which actually have attained collector's value. They've attained something of a cult-like following I dare say.

Rumor has it the Micro Cap might only be open for a day to keep the assets at under $50MM...I may have misunderstood, but I was under the impression these funds would likely only be opening to current shareholders. At the very least there would be no advertising with the new funds. They are concerned more about satisfying tenured shareholders than new shareholders.
Given that the stalwart funds will be more SMid-Large Cap offerings, the capacity won't be much of a concern here. I think $4 billion will be the likely mark where all funds are closed.
I traveled to Salt Lake City last year and had the opportunity to sit in on a few meetings they had with companies they were considering investing in...I am very impressed with their due diligence and process. Hope their funds reward all of you who have positions. The micro cap should be a fun high risk high reward fund. His micro cap at Wasatch was one of the best funds of all time while Robert ran it through the late 90s/early 2000s.
@LLJB I think GP is a real winner in terms of small cap stock picking! The firm was hoping to reach the asset base they are currently at 10 years after launch. Money just flooded in so rapidly given the Blake and Robert's track records that they were put in a tough spot. I think they are nimble enough to be a winning shop for long term investors. I love the fact that Rob and his team have over $10,000,000 invested directly in the funds...that should make you feel better about trusting them with some of your dollars.

Pretty much every young person I have met that I mentioned saving for retirement to, has said they would start in a few years. Current debt load or just wanting to have fun might be two of the biggest reasons. These were twenty somethings who got into good jobs. ( 70-80k and up. They will end up losing a full decade of investing in my view. (Age 25-35 approx.)
A crash or a downturn midstream does affect you if you drop out. I started in 1986 and stopped in 2008. I had some serious swings there but I was lucky in timing. GNMA's did very well in the early 2000's. So I didn't drop out per say but made a good choice and only lost nominally compared to those who lost half
Discipline and luck.

To be fair, I would lump all tax advantage accounts together (and maybe even from spouses) to give you real numbers. I have for instance, had four 401k's but after leaving the companies I worked for, rolled them into IRA's (multiple accounts as a matter of fact). If an employee has several different accounts the odds go down substantially that they would have equity north of $1m in any one account. That seems to coincide with their figure of 34 years with average tenure for those that the average >$1m accounts.
I do agree though, the population of millionaire-retirement account investors, is probably very small overall. But I'm sure it's far greater than 0.6% of workers. I guess it depends on your definition of millionaire too (do you include a spouses accounts in a dual income household?).
As a related side note, I think it's absurd how frequently you hear finance articles, financial planners, etc reference enormous sums needed for retirement. Many times they will make the point that if you don't have $3-4m saved for retirement you will be eating dog food and working at Walmart until your death bed.
The numbers are so out of line with most American workers, that it may actually discourage savings to some degree. For a 45 year old making $50k/yr and $25k saved, it would be discouraging to hear that you needed $3m+ to retire comfortable. So discouraging that I'm sure people have said "what the heck am I saving for then?".

@rjb112
Based upon their currency forecast, still time for one to purchase their favorite Japan or Europe hedged etf, eh?
Well, we'll see how GS does with their forecast. I recall they and a few others who projected the the 10 year note would already be at a +4% and more yield from a few years ago.
Catch

FYI: Biotechnology has been one of the best performing industries in the stock market over the past several years. According to S&P Capital IQ, there were numerous catalysts, for this substantial stock outperformance, including several blockbuster drug approvals that drove significant sales and earnings growth. Yet, S&P CIQ thinks the industry’s drivers, including a robust pipeline, remain intact and have a positive fundamental outlook - See more at: http://www.indexologyblog.com/2015/04/17/biotech-has-more-room-to-run/#sthash.O8OC1ZJJ.dpuf
Regards,
Ted
http://www.indexologyblog.com/2015/04/17/biotech-has-more-room-to-run/
ETF Trend Article:
http://www.etftrends.com/2015/04/biotech-etf-run-not-over-yet-says-analyst/

India plans to raise about $6.5 billion (Dh24bn) by taxing foreign firms for capital gains they made in previous years."

Don't think that move would encourage foreign investment.

The India related funds have been weak for the past several weeks; somewhat, perhaps related to profit taking from the previous run in prices.
A note from the article: "India plans to raise about $6.5 billion (Dh24bn) by taxing foreign firms for capital gains they made in previous years."
This article relates some new information relative to taxation of investments towards some organizations, which may of value for your investment decisions.
Regards,
Catch