Post New

First a short walk down memory lane. It took Buffett over 20 years to finally, authorize buybacks at " material discounts to IV".

For years not one poster agreed with me that brkb had to authorize a 50 for 1 split so that it would meet the requirements necessary to be eligible for many index funds.

First, he used a 1.1 xs BV limit which was embarrassing, he bought back very little stock.

Then he raised the limit to 1.2 xs BV and again, bought very little stock back.

Finally, the appropriate hurdle was used, better late than never.

The SPY currently yields about 1 %. SPY is very overweight Mag 8 type stocks which are not appealing to brk type investors.

THIS is the appropriate time for brkb to pay a 1$$ quarterly div to yield a bit below 1 %, which makes it competitive with SPYs current yield.

I seriously doubt brkb will pay this div while Buffett is alive, he doesn't change his thinking quickly. As certain as I was that brk had to split the Bs 50 for 1 AND authorize a buyback at, material discounts to IV, 20 years ago, that's how certain I am that this is the appropriate time for brkb to declare a quarterly div.

This small div payout would increase demand for the common with a very small taxable event relative to the increase in demand it would generate by private investors, certain funds, and many institutions.

Comments made on this board about Greg's challenge for deploying our capital are, embarrassing.

How did Buffett, T and T, do, deploying cap the past 15 years? Greg's hurdle is not that high, he will have little trouble beating recent history, imo. As usual most of you still can't kick the brkville habit, no one in brkville has pitched a perfect game the past 15 years. It's not even close.

Please, the regulars here who have never agreed with my prior calls the past 25 years, and ridiculed me on top of it, don't waste our time. I know, I can sell 4 % of my shares annually to pay the rent on my unfurnished Clayton double wide trailer, I know.

Buffett hopes to sell 10 Billion brk a year annually via the foundations for the next 10 years. Increasing demand for brk should be a priority. The div is step one once Buffett actually gives up control.

Good luck to all and be patient, obviously this isn't Greg's call, yet.

To be clear obviously I want more aggressive buybacks as well, I’ve been pounding that table for over 20 years. Brk should have had the, right of first refusal , on all Foundation sales in the 2006 letter , another mistake. I loved mantle and mays too, the time came for them to move on. Just sayin.

vivalasvegas,

Don't you have 25ish shares of BRKA? Do you really want $175,000 in forced dividend income every year? That would be stacked on top of all of your other income and probably cause you to be in the 32% bracket or worse. 20% capital gains sounds better -- unless you think the stock would trade materially higher with a dividend. It might, I would love to hear you quantify it.

Have you ever computed your tax differential on the two scenarios over 10-20-30 years?

What do you think the average change in P/BV or IV would be if Berkshire instituted a 1% dividend forever more?

How much more volume do you think there would be with a 1% dividend and would it be a one time effect over a couple of years or do you think it would be sustainably higher forevermore?

How much more net demand for the stock would there be and how would that change the value that shares would change hands at and what other benefits would it have?

I am seriously interested on any quantifications that you can put on this.


For my tax planning for me and my kids (step-up) a dividend is very unwelcome but if you think the market would decide Berkshire's IV would go up materially with a dividend (I think it would either be a draw or be a negative) I would love to hear your logic.

I was sick when VRSN, GOOG and META started paying dividends because I purposely put them in my taxable brokerage account with BRK BECAUSE they did not pay a dividend and I thought they had a long enough road for growth that they wouldn't have to pay a divy for a long while. I am guessing with the AI capEx GOOG and META are seeing they probably regret starting a divy much like Warren did when BRK paid out its only dividend. But maybe not.


I would love to hear how you quantify the increases in volume, demand and forward return if BRK paid a divy. I am happy to change my thinking.

I do agree with you that I would have preferred BRK would have bought back a lot more shares below 1.3 x P/BV but it is very possible that if they did do that they might have never felt comfortable putting 10% of their resources in Apple which turned out to be a much better outcome. Maybe they only put 3% or 5% into it. Hard to step in the same stream twice and there have been some purchases that didn't work out so great either. I do think Greg will be much more agrressive in buying shares back below 1.3 x P/BV and will buy a steady stream below 1.4 and even buy some below 1.5 when cash is as high as it is right now.

Thanks for any quantifications that you have.

vivalasvegas,


Sorry I have to get to a pickleball match it's getting hot here, later, thank you.

" Don't you have 25ish shares of BRKA?"
I don't have and As, Bs only.

" I was sick when VRSN, GOOG and META started paying dividends "

Doesn't that prove the point? WHY do you suppose companies like nvda, meta, googl, msft, aapl, etc pay a small dividend, stupid cap management? To repeat, there is huge money that cannot or will not buy a non-div paying stock.

IF Buffett had been a serious buyer of brkb that would be a different issue, he wasn't until the past few years.

Limits of 1.1 xs BV or 1.2 xs BV were done to goose the stock, above BV, nothing more. Can you name 5 public companies that authorized a buyback while stipulating such a tight buyback limit, in the past 50 years? Let's call it a buyback, gimmick, with no intent to actually buyback serious size.

I have brk in taxable accounts as well. I never thought I would be forced to sell calls while I watch my brk paint dry which generates taxable events. IF, IF, I thought Buffett was serious about buybacks I wouldn't have been selling calls or be pounding the table for the 1$$ a B share quarterly div.

It was clear to me at the annual it's still Uncle Warren in control, that was a disappointment to me and I love the guy. Buffett isn't going to change his thinking. At this year's annual did anyone ask Buffett or Greg why they think all these Mag 8 type stocks pay a small div? WHY do msft, aapl, nvda, meta, googl, etc pay a small dividend, that isn't an obvious reasonable question for Greg and Buffett? Thank you.

Mag 7 aren't appealing to Berkshire shareholders ? since when. Been a loyal amzn and Googl shareholder for over a decade myself. A lot of Berkshire shareholders own at least one in their portfolio . Why would you think no one would be interested ?

“ Mag 7 aren't appealing to Berkshire shareholders ? since when. ” Other than Apple does Brk have much exposure to mag 8? Btw, does apple pay a small div? Why? Name the last three major public companies Buffett bought that don’t pay a div. Thank you.

Will the Japanese stocks outperform Brk over ten years, total return? “ the five Japanese trading houses bought by Warren Buffett—Mitsubishi, Mitsui, Itochu, Marubeni, and Sumitomo—pay significant and consistent dividends. These companies, known as sogo shosha, have been a major source of income, with Berkshire Hathaway expecting to collect $812 million in dividends from these investments in 2025 alone.Key details on the dividends and investment strategy:High Yields: The trading houses were paying dividends of around 4% annually when Buffett invested.Dividends Increase: The companies have been increasing their dividends, a factor that prompted Buffett to increase his holdings in these firms.Financing Strategy: Buffett financed much of this investment by issuing low-interest yen-denominated debt (costing around 1% or less), using the high dividends from the stocks to comfortably cover the debt payments.Dividend Focus: In addition to high dividends, these firms are known for regular share buybacks.@

From an old friend and longtime brkb owner who responded to my post.

"$1/B share would amount to a little more than a $8B annual dividend for Berkshire, less than a quarter of normalized net operating earnings, so this would be almost a symbolic move and wouldn’t even make a dent in annual cash inflows much less the massive accumulated cash pile. At current prices, I’d rather see a big increase in repurchases. If you’re right about a $1 dividend increasing demand for the stock, that would likely halt repurchases. If Buffett agrees to do it, I don’t see why Berkshire can’t deploy $20-30 billion toward repurchases this year. Arguably a better move than a small dividend right now, at current prices, imo."

To be VERY CLEAR, I never said initiate a small div and stop the buybacks, brk can do both like 100s of other public companies, like apple.

IF, IF, Buffett had shown a serious interest in buying back brkb in size since 2006 I wouldn't be pounding the table to initiate the small div.

So, brkb can afford to pay out 8 billion a year in a div AND do 20 billion in buybacks price permitting annually.

IF, the markets believed this would be the minimum cap allocation plan going forward ,brkb rises 5 % or so, today.

To be clear, brkb will not pay a div in Buffett's lifetime imo, this requires patience.

Before I forget, brkb has around 70 wholly owned subs. Greg should do a deep dive with a forensic accountant into everyone the next two years.

Due to easy access to gaming sites, drugs, drinking, improper relationships etc, I would love to bet uncle warren a million dollar's Greg finds, serious misconduct in at least 5 % of the companies, and I'm being very conservative to make sure I win the bet.

Marc make this happen, a friendly wager between me and my American Idol! I'll even agree to give 10 % of my win to Buffett's favorite charity! Thank you.

needless to say I expect a big buyback number this 1/4.

We shall see.

" Author: hclasvegas 😊 😞
Number:
20183
of 20253
Subject: brk options, another heads up,
Date: 05/08/26 9:39 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 1
For the past few days there has been a buyer in the calls, 480 plus next week should be easy. ::)). Thank you."



How did I do on that call? ::))

YIKES, I'm back from the park did brkb declare a div?


ucmtsu, no way!

"" Key Points

About This Summary

Largest US banks executed record quarterly stock repurchases of $40 billion in the first quarter, exceeding the 2019 record.

M&T Bank led with a 3.9% share reduction, followed by First Citizens (3.8%) and Citigroup (3.1%); the median bank repurchased 1%.

Buybacks encourage investors as banking stocks show mixed performance; the KBW Bank ETF is down about 1%, almost 10 percentage points behind S&P 500.

The country’s largest banks, flush with record earnings and capital, executed their largest quarterly stock repurchases ever in the first three months of the year.

The 21 large banks covered by Barclays analyst Jason Goldberg bought back $40 billion in the first quarter, up from $34 billion in the fourth quarter of 2025 and from the prior record of $38 billion in the 2019 fourth quarter, just before the Covid crisis.

The industry leaders, based on the biggest percentage reductions in share counts in the first quarter, were M&T Bank
MTB

+0.37%

(3.9% reduction), First Citizens Bancshares
FCNCA

-0.07%

(3.8%), Citi
C

+0.47%

group (3.1%), Bank of America (1.9%), and Goldman Sachs Group
GS

+0.11%

(1.8%).

Newsletter Sign-up

Review & Preview

Every weekday evening we highlight the consequential market news of the day and explain what's likely to matter tomorrow.


Preview

Barrons,
The buybacks are encouraging for investors amid a mixed performance for banking stocks this year. The Invesco KBW Bank exchange-traded fund is down about 1% this year, almost 10 percentage points behind the S&P 500
SPX

-0.16%

index. As many technology companies scale back or suspend their repurchases, financial stocks are one of the larger sources of buybacks in the S&P 500. Many banks have “total yields” of more than 5%, reflecting dividend yields in the 2% to 3% range plus ample stock buybacks.

The median bank in the group repurchased 1% of its shares, Goldberg wrote in a client note.

Among the largest banks, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley stocks have each gained about 6% this year, while JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America are down around 8% each.

The repurchases are continuing into the second quarter. First Citizens, Bank of America, M&T, and others continued to repurchase stock in April, based on share counts listed in their first-quarter 10-Q reports."

PLUS, do they pay a div? Is that called multitasking? Thank you.

" Berkshire Hathaway
said Thursday it has resumed repurchasing its own shares for the first time since 2024 and separately new CEO Greg Abel bought $15 million worth of stock himself, an amount equal to his after-tax annual salary.

Abel told CNBC he will continue using his full salary amount to purchase Berkshire shares every year.

The Omaha, Nebraska-based conglomerate disclosed in a regulatory filing that it began buying back its Class A and Class B shares on Wednesday. Berkshire’s stated policy allows the company to repurchase stock whenever the chief executive — after consultation with the chairman of the board, Warren Buffett —believes that the repurchase price is below Berkshire’s intrinsic value, according to its annual report released over the weekend."

That report was from March 5th or so and brkb responded positively to that news, rising to 500ish. That report should have disclosed at least a 50-cent quarterly div IF Greg was really in control, and, there was no need to repost a return to buybacks if they only intended to buy an odd lot in the quarter. That press release had Buffett's name all over it, imo, but I'm still giving Greg the benefit of doubt.

As a result, I sold calls yesterday into the rally. Until I'm certain how Greg thinks about certain issues, I'm still a very conservative, long. IF, IF, there isn't a meaningful buyback in q-2 my plans will change, accordingly.

GL to all it's been an interesting journey.

“ As of April 30, 2026, S&P Dow Jones Indices is consulting on major rule changes to accelerate the inclusion of large, newly public companies (such as SpaceX, Anthropic, and OpenAI) into the S&P 500. Proposed changes include reducing the required public listing time from 12 months to 6 months and potentially waiving profitability requirements for "mega-cap" companies.Proposed New Requirements (Under Consultation)Seasoning Period: Reducing the time a company must be public from 12 months to 6 months.Profitability/Liquidity: Considering the removal of these requirements for large-cap firms.Target: Specifically designed for "mega-cap" companies—defined as those with market caps similar to the top 100 in the S&P Total Market Index (roughly \(\ge \) $112 billion), according to a Yahoo Finance report.Current 2025-2026 Requirements for InclusionDomicile: Must be a U.S. company.Market Cap: As of July 2025, a minimum unadjusted market capitalization of at least $22.7 billion.Listing: Listed on a major U.S. exchange (NYSE or NASDAQ).Liquidity: High trading volume (minimum of 250,000 shares in each of the six months prior to evaluation).“. In view of these potential rule changes did it occur to Becky or any questioner to ask Buffett his current thoughts with respect to any retired investor being overweight spy, going forward? In view of these potential rule changes and spy concentration in mag 8 type stocks has Buffett changed his thinking? For investors who are already rich would brkb yielding a bit below 1 percent be a compelling value vs spy for more conservative investors who do not want that over exposure to tech? How does Buffett feel about adding hot IPOs to the indexes in reduced time? This is now so compelling and so obvious that if Marc or someone at Brk called me today, and said stop wasting your time, Brk will not declare a div prior to 2030, they could save us all a lot of time and energy. Thank you for your attention to this matter. :)

So, brkb can afford to pay out 8 billion a year in a div AND do 20 billion in buybacks price permitting annually.

IF, the markets believed this would be the minimum cap allocation plan going forward ,brkb rises 5 % or so, today.

Ok, finally we have a hard number estimate from you regarding the benefit of a dividend.

Let's say a ~1% dividend is established, and let's further say as you assert, the stock goes up by 5%. So on that 1% each year, about 1/3% goes towards taxes. That means that in a mere 15 years, most of the stock holders will have sent the entire 5% bump into the government's maw. It means that had this policy been in place for all the decades, the Gottesman charitable contribution would have been about $1.2B lower than it was not having a dividend for all the decades! That's about 20% lower!

Now please explain how intrinsic value (or any long-term value) can go up simply by the institution of some other method (in this case a dividend) of distributing capital to investors. It smacks of financial engineering of some sort, and as we all know, financial engineering rarely adds any real value. Financial engineering sometimes improves taxation, that is indeed why it's done most of the time, but as far as REAL value of a business, I don't see it. Can you explain your thought process further? How did you come up with 5%?

Hi, one of the most frustrating things about being a long time brk shareholder is the fact that the annual meeting has become almost worthless. First, I'll stipulate that I didn't watch much of it, again.

So tell me,

Was Buffett asked his current thoughts with respect to retired people or any investor being 90 percent SPY at the current valuation, current concentration, current rule changes for inclusion etc? To be honest, Buffett shouldn't even be waiting for the question, HE, should be updating Becky without being asked, Imo.



Did anyone ask Buffett or Greg what are the last three major stock buys by brk that do not pay a dividend?

WHY do several Mag 8 type stocks pay a small div, they are all wrong? THEY, are all poor capital allocators?

Did Buffett ever tell Cook never raise the div again, just keep buying back the stock, and I won't sell a share?

Was spinning out the apple shs as a dividend ever considered by Buffett?

Does paying a rising div increase the likelihood of long-term holder's?


Let's start there, were any of my questions asked? Thank you.

For the love of God, just sell. Why would anyone ask Buffett those questions when people already knew he wasn't going to ask and answer questions.

"For the love of God, just sell. Why would anyone ask Buffett those questions when people already knew he wasn't going to ask and answer questions."

Most of those questions have been answered, but Harold did not like the answer so he just ignored it and repeated the question pretending like it hasn't been answered.

What logic is there to pay a dividend versus buying back the stock? It's simply tax punitive to certain shareholders and I would hope that most Berk shareholders would know enough to know this.

Don't you have 25ish shares of BRKA? Do you really want $175,000 in forced dividend income every year? That would be stacked on top of all of your other income and probably cause you to be in the 32% bracket or worse. 20% capital gains sounds better -- unless you think the stock would trade materially higher with a dividend. It might, I would love to hear you quantify it.

In the US, Dividends are taxed at the same rate as long term capital gains.

I would say the real problem with dividends is many of us already are forced to take more in Required Minimum Distributions from IRAs and 401ks and the last thing we need is that pile of BRK we have had outside the IRA/401k sphere to start adding to the problem. Right now I keep my BRK because I can eventually leave it to my heirs who will take a step up in basis. The last thing I need is an extra bunch of forced income. It is what I would call an unforced error.

R:

" I would say the real problem with dividends is many of us already are forced to take more in Required Minimum Distributions from IRAs and 401ks and the last thing we need is that pile of BRK we have had outside the IRA/401k sphere to start adding to the problem. Right now I keep my BRK because I can eventually leave it to my heirs who will take a step up in basis. The last thing I need is an extra bunch of forced income. It is what I would call an unforced error.

R:"

Good morning partner. Almost 30 years ago I bought brk in my taxable accounts, non in my Iras. Nevada is in the United States, I'm 76, I too have substantial RMDs from my IRAs. For all those years my brk crated NO taxable events other than expired puts and calls.

It's 2026, things have changed. The Dems are currently a 60-40 favorite to take the white house in 28. The Dems are a 4 to 1 favorite to take control of the house in 26. The gop is once again a small favorite to control the senate in 26. Are you that certain that all the tax breaks for the rich, like, stepped up basis, are safe in today's Dem party?

How has brkb done vs spy or most other index's the past year? Brk common is suffering from a lack of demand, comprende partner? Gimmicks will only take you so far on wall street. That fancy press release in March resuming, buybacks, which goosed brkb back to 500 plus, followed by disclosing an odd lot purchase in the quarter was embarrassing for those of us who can find wall street on a map, still with me?

I'm following Uncle Warren for over 30 years, I know his moves. For now, I'm 99% certain that was a Buffett move, not Greg. IF IF, I thought that was a Greg move, I would have paid the tax and moved on.

To repeat for the very slow learners, you know who you are :), the market has to absorb 10 billion a year of Buffetts foundation sales a year into the float for the next 10-12 years. It's, material, and significant. IF our current board doesn't understand this concept they should hire outside consultants!

Thank you for your attention to this matter. ::))

R:"


While I'm at the park find a few studies that conclude that if aapl, msft, googl, nvda, etc did NOT pay a small div their share prices would be higher today show us.

In March 2026 IF, Greg had initiated a 1$$ a share quarterly div and IF IF, brk had disclosed it bought back 2.5 billion in q-1, I say brkb would be 500 plus today. Would that be worth the taxable event to you? To Buffett? THINK, I know that's hard in brkville but THINK!!

BTW, there are several Kaka roaches who have been trolling for 25 years out there I don't see them hence I don't respond, I don't duck, adults. Lay it on me critical thinkers who can find wall street on a map, thank you. :)

You do duck

In the US, Dividends are taxed at the same rate as long term capital gains.

In theory yes. In practice no.

Dividends (qualified dividends) are ALWAYS taxed at your long-term capital gains tax rate. But long-term capital gains aren't always taxed at that rate, or at any rate. That's because only long-term capital gains that are REALIZED are taxed. Long-term capital gains that are not realized, or that are realized after death are not taxed at that rate.

See my Gottesman example in previous posts.

A shame it wasn't 50bn at 150-180

Hindsight of course is a wonderful thing 😂.

Who would buy Goog? Management is so lost and clueless they actually believe paying a small dividend increases demand for the common. Sell sell sell , buy non dividend paying stocks on the pink sheets. Ucmtsu, no way. What next, will Buffett , in his lifetime concede he was wrong? Stay tuned partners.

" What next, will Buffett , in his lifetime concede he was wrong? Stay tuned partners."

IF, there is a way to edit or add to a post it's above my pay grade so sorry about that.

For many of the old-time posters THIS is a unique opportunity to get one right.

It's become increasingly obvious that this is the appropriate time for brkb to initiate a quarterly div, 1 $$ would be great, .50 is better than nothing.

Before Buffett acts, who is willing to post they agree with me so they can say they get it correct, every 25 years or so.

I'm laying 2 to 1, at most, two will step up and agree.

Have a grand Sunday all.

We don't want a div. How long have you been a shareholder ?

We don't want a div.

I am not sure who "we" refers to.

I am in the distribution phase, I expect the long term capital gains tax advantage to be taken away in the next Administration (say 2030) and step up basis on transfer at death to be eliminated by the next Administration and corporate taxes are going to be raised substantially (the tax money is going to have to come from somewhere). As such, I think the benefits of buybacks vs dividends on on a tax basis are going to disappear and would welcome the higher price due to dividend payments.

For those that don't think dividends raise stock prices, imagine what would happen to Apple if they said they were going to stop paying a dividend and hold the money for an unspecified length of time to be used when opportunities may develop.

Aussi

I agree. I want a one dollar dividend on my A shares.

Dan

The majority of Berkshire holders and a majority of my fellow A shareholders

Apple doesn't have the greatest stock allocator in their company like Berkshire does.

For those that don't think dividends raise stock prices, imagine what would happen to Apple if they said they were going to stop paying a dividend and hold the money for an unspecified length of time to be used when opportunities may develop.

Like Amazon does?

Also, why do we want to "raise the stock price"?
So the stock becomes expensive and we can no longer do buybacks?

Apple doesn't have the greatest stock allocator in their company like Berkshire does.

If your assumption is correct that Berkshire has the greatest stock allocator, what is the optimum amount of cash to be invested in short term treasury bills that are depreciating in value due to inflation? Is it more than currently held? If yes, how much more?

Aussi

Following on from Berkshire has the greatest stock allocator, Berkshire was a buyer of Google in 2026. Google was approximately 40% less in 2025. What changed to make Google a buy at +$335 but not at $250???

Aussi

you can say the same thing about Apple prior to 2016 too.

I agree with you about Apple.

Aussi

For Apple, didn't T or T buy it in a small way when they joined? Must have diacussed it with WEB and that was the catalyst for the big position.

In regards to possible tax law changes I think you're definitely skating to where the puck is going. If the Democrats were to win the Presidency and take control of the House and Senate (they are already close to doing that) we should all be prepared for significant tax law changes to be passed. They could even increase the tax on companies buying back stock. In any case BRK initiating a small dividend would not even put a dent in the yearly cash flow. Has Warren ever turned down a dividend payment from a company that he owns stock in?

yes , that was the rumor or rumour for our British brothers

A shame it wasn't 50bn at 150-180

Let's say they did a buyback of $50B between 150 and 180, and at the same time decided to own $50B less of Apple, or even $25B less of Apple. Would Berkshire be better off today or worse off today?

This is why they must step up the buybacks at current levels. It's a possibility that the buybacks tax will be increased in the near future. It's not clear that at the margin that every last dollar of the 380 billion is best invested in treasuries with the possibility of being deployed in something better later.

"This is why they must step up the buybacks at current levels. It's a possibility that the buybacks tax will be increased in the near future. It's not clear that at the margin that every last dollar of the 380 billion is best invested in treasuries with the possibility of being deployed in something better later."

Sounds like a call to "swing you bum".

Big heavy YAWN!

Please wake me up when this stops being the Berkshire Should Pay a Dividend board. Or should I say bored.

Seriously hclasvegas, do you think that even if you convinced everyone on this board that BRK should pay a dividend (fat chance) it would make any difference? Please give us a break. Maybe you should write Warren Buffett a personal letter every day, instead. Maybe you could wear him down, because wearing us down accomplishes diddly squat.

Or everyone could exercise self control and ignore him. He would eventually stop.

That hasn't worked. HC thinks that he convinced Buffett about buybacks when Buffett mentioned the possiblity years before HC even bought the stock(March 2000) .

Please stop replying to these non-serious people, and thus giving them attention. Put them in the penalty box and let's get back to pithy discussion, not the inane variety.

Hmmm, NVIDIA announced tonight that it is increasing its quarterly dividend from $.01 to $.25 and it increased its share buyback program by $80 billion...but the stock is down after hours. How could that be ;-)

Post New

Berkshire Hathaway FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.