MAJOR PROBLEM Kerry Group Old Shares

NovemberJersey

kerry cow wrote: »

There is a article in farmers journal today from a kerry milk supplier who wants his shares canceled all 330 of then worth 80k because he has a liability of around 23k .feel he can get on fine without them
Still profit there in the spoils and a conversion to come.
With the article ,is there a bit of hocus pocus !!!
.typical dumb farmer attitude that serves no good to the preying public eye .

I can see where the man was coming from in the farmers journal, I was at a meeting and they told us that in 3 years time from intrest and penalties our tax bills on the patron shares will have doubled, so if he owes €23,000 now it'll be €46,000 in 3 years and I heard some co op shares are after going through at a low of €190 at the last share exchange so there only turning into a liability

kerry cow

Kerry 2016 had a revenue enquiry into how he had so many shares for such a young person .so has been through this process already and may care to share what values revenue were quite happy to except in his transaction.i am sure most share holders would appreciate a good experience had by others .

Kerry2016

kerry cow wrote: »

Kerry 2016 had a revenue enquiry into how he had so many shares for such a young person .so has been through this process already and may care to share what values revenue were quite happy to except in his transaction.i am sure most share holders would appreciate a good experience had by others .

What happened with me was I bought a couple thousand shares back in 2011, the revenue kept hounding me about that this summer then, they didn't know what best to accuse me of, remember now like everything was above board and I'd done nothing wrong and in the finish up I was actually going to get my solicitor to start sending the revenue solicitors letters to stop harassing me

I thought maybe someone reported me for tax, I was only laughing at them anyway because I'd nothing to hide but I think a lot of Kerry shareholders were getting harassed by revenue over the last year were they?

BannerBarry

Kerry2016 wrote: »

What happened with me was I bought a couple thousand shares back in 2011, the revenue kept hounding me about that this summer then, they didn't know what best to accuse me of, remember now like everything was above board and I'd done nothing wrong and in the finish up I was actually going to get my solicitor to start sending the revenue solicitors letters to stop harassing me

I thought maybe someone reported me for tax, I was only laughing at them anyway because I'd nothing to hide but I think a lot of Kerry shareholders were getting harassed by revenue over the last year were they?

We're they questioning the valuation of the price the shares were bought at or the source of the funds you had to buy a huge quantity like that?

Kerry2016

BannerBarry wrote: »

We're they questioning the valuation of the price the shares were bought at or the source of the funds you had to buy a huge quantity like that?

Yeah they wanted to know where the money came from to buy them, when I told them they kept dragging it on and on, I was totally complying with everything they asked of me, in 2012 I sold PLC's to buy more Co Op shares, after about 2 months of harassing me they discovered I was a couple of days late paying the CGT because the deadlines were changed that year and I was unaware of it so they managed to get a totally insignificant amount of money off me, only a couple hundred euro. To this day I'm sure either the person in the revenue who came across me mustn't of been happy seeing how many shares I had at my age or else someone made up lies about me to Revenue and reported me

BannerBarry

Kerry2016 wrote: »

Yeah they wanted to know where the money came from to buy them, when I told them they kept dragging it on and on, I was totally complying with everything they asked of me, in 2012 I sold PLC's to buy more Co Op shares, after about 2 months of harassing me they discovered I was a couple of days late paying the CGT because the deadlines were changed that year and I was unaware of it so they managed to get a totally insignificant amount of money off me, only a couple hundred euro. To this day I'm sure either the person in the revenue who came across me mustn't of been happy seeing how many shares I had at my age or else someone made up lies about me to Revenue and reported me

Sounds like Kerry Co Op could do with you on the Board negotiating with the Revenue on the Patronage shares instead of unelected Ex Chairmen!

NovemberJersey

Good bit written about Kerry group today in the farmers journal, all very true what was written, one article talked about how there is "no appetite" for the co op shareholders to exercise the right they have up until 2020 to buy back the feed mills and milk processing things, it said too that there is a lot of changes to tax laws at the moment which Kerry co op said themselves in their annual report is a big threat to them, it looks like it is the revenue who are going to force a 100% conversion because they are squeezing the co op out of existence with these tax laws

BannerBarry

NovemberJersey wrote: »

Good bit written about Kerry group today in the farmers journal, all very true what was written, one article talked about how there is "no appetite" for the co op shareholders to exercise the right they have up until 2020 to buy back the feed mills and milk processing things, it said too that there is a lot of changes to tax laws at the moment which Kerry co op said themselves in their annual report is a big threat to them, it looks like it is the revenue who are going to force a 100% conversion because they are squeezing the co op out of existence with these tax laws

Did the article in rhe rag say what the purpose of the company was... ie that of a holding company?
If they saw the tax note that was slipped in for 2015 Accounts then they have to have seen the purpose of the company is that if holding investments.

NovemberJersey

BannerBarry wrote: »

Did the article in rhe rag say what the purpose of the company was... ie that of a holding company?
If they saw the tax note that was slipped in for 2015 Accounts then they have to have seen the purpose of the company is that if holding investments.

It said something along those lines anyway

kerry cow

Correct me barry , but is it bound possibility that the dry share holders could end up holding milk processing equipment and a feed mill .
And regardless of the type of share holding any farmer or co op director that wants to invest large sums in the above would want their heads examined .run a mile

BannerBarry

kerry cow wrote: »

Correct me barry , but is it bound possibility that the dry share holders could end up holding milk processing equipment and a feed mill .
And regardless of the type of share holding any farmer or co op director that wants to invest large sums in the above would want their heads examined .run a mile

You are correct. The Kerry Co op Directors can force Kerry Agribusiness to sell the milk processing back to the co op.
One though bandied around a few months ago was the Stan was paying a bad milk price to force the co op to do this.
If the Kerry Co op Directors do a ludicrous move like buying the milk processing the B's and C's can now sue the Directors for not acting in their interests so really it looks like that scenario cannot happen under the holding company called Kerry co-op.

They could convert all shares, close Kerry co-op and start a new Kerry Milk Processing company and have only A suppliers. Use the converted money of the A's to buy the milk processing alright I suppose... I doubt the A's would throw away Conversion money for that though

NovemberJersey

What happens in all families now anyway is one child gets the farm and the shares then is what the rest of the children get, I don't know 1 person on this planet who wants our co op shares used to buy back the mills and milk processing business

kerry cow

Kerry and clare farmers have a geographical disadvantage with land type and rainfall , longer winters .location allows no competition either .
We can not afford any extra burden on ourselves nor why should we sell our assets to support a milk processor .
Milk our cows and get paid for our milk .
Our off farm Investments are a separate business .
Farmers need to stop selling share to prop farming .
With the revenue on guys back , I did a quick sum on a guy who has older co op shares and the newer patronage shares .In a case where he has no cash spare or plc shares to sell and a tax bill now to pay , some of these guys will be forced in to selling co op shares to pay tax , therefore triggering more tax and because it's the older share they will be valued at 1.25 and full cgt will have to be paid .All in all its a total fcuked up without the conversion as guys will be loosing on the double .

BannerBarry

kerry cow wrote: »

Kerry and clare farmers have a geographical disadvantage with land type and rainfall , longer winters .location allows no competition either .
We can not afford any extra burden on ourselves nor why should we sell our assets to support a milk processor .
Milk our cows and get paid for our milk .
Our off farm Investments are a separate business .
Farmers need to stop selling share to prop farming .
With the revenue on guys back , I did a quick sum on a guy who has older co op shares and the newer patronage shares .In a case where he has no cash spare or plc shares to sell and a tax bill now to pay , some of these guys will be forced in to selling co op shares to pay tax , therefore triggering more tax and because it's the older share they will be valued at 1.25 and full cgt will have to be paid .All in all its a total fcuked up without the conversion as guys will be loosing on the double .

Shareholders are not vocal enough with the Directors that work for us on what we want from our Holdings company.
The C shareholders have no voice.... Co op in name only... one man... Some vote only

kerry cow

What are the penalties and interest per year for tax collection by revenue .For example 1000 euro owed in 2011 , 12 and 13 .how would that look like in 2016 .I presume the first 1k gathers momentum year after year .

BannerBarry

kerry cow wrote: »

What are the penalties and interest per year for tax collection by revenue .For example 1000 euro owed in 2011 , 12 and 13 .how would that look like in 2016 .I presume the first 1k gathers momentum year after year .

Am not sure. I know it's pretty penal and applies per day.
The interest is compulsory and something like 14% per year.
It's non negotiable (Unless you are a multinational I suppose :-) ... Kerry2016/November Jersey are the only ones big enough here to have negotiating power with them I suppose.

fepper

If November jersey has to pay more tax on top of what he says he pays already to revenue every year,he'll explode

BannerBarry

fepper wrote: »

If November jersey has to pay more tax on top of what he says he pays already to revenue every year,he'll explode

The bit of tax is only a drop in the ocean to someone with the level of wealth he has...Fair play to him... We can only look up and be envious!!
Any update on the leading milk price resolution? Another 50k windfall for him from that I suppose?

fepper

Well Barry,the pair of them are certainly up there in upper tier of society as their wealth status they go on about does have its benefits and lifestyle that goes with it but to join us poor peasants in our cause is the sign of true gentlemen that I'm sure they are.......!!on leading milk price when its sorted I suppose its Bahamas time again for the pair of them or maybe they go together...birds of a feather thing...

BannerBarry

fepper wrote: »

Well Barry,the pair of them are certainly up there in upper tier of society as their wealth status they go on about does have its benefits and lifestyle that goes with it but to join us poor peasants in our cause is the sign of true gentlemen that I'm sure they are.......!!on leading milk price when its sorted I suppose its Bahamas time again for the pair of them or maybe they go together...birds of a feather thing...

I'd say the two of them are joined at the hip alright.... No Super Value Turkey for them this Xmas. .The finest Wild Goose and Caviar at the Summer house in the Hamptons I would say...

kerry cow

I read today in journal that revenue wrote out requesting payment in Patronage shares issued in 2011 because it had to be done before end of 2016 .how can they send out 400 letters and not the other 3000 suppliers .
Is that fair on all suppliers that some people may pay and others may not for 2011 . Or will someone enlighten me as to why this was done .

fepper

kerry cow wrote: »

I read today in journal that revenue wrote out requesting payment in Patronage shares issued in 2011 because it had to be done before end of 2016 .how can they send out 400 letters and not the other 3000 suppliers .
Is that fair on all suppliers that some people may pay and others may not for 2011 . Or will someone enlighten me as to why this was done .

they will probably send out the rest of letters this year to catch years 2012 and 2013

BannerBarry

fepper wrote: »

they will probably send out the rest of letters this year to catch years 2012 and 2013

I know two milk suppliers that sold the shares and paid the cgt.
They are smaller suppliers and paid little or no Income tax in those years hence should now get money back per the revenues argument.

I think individuals can only go back 4 years and the revenue can go back 6 years for a change of tax return so will these boys be even able to get the cgt back for 2011 & 2012?
It may have been strategic that the letters only went out to the 400 big milk suppliers?

fepper

BannerBarry wrote: »

I know two milk suppliers that sold the shares and paid the cgt.
They are smaller suppliers and paid little or no Income tax in those years hence should now get money back per the revenues argument.

I think individuals can only go back 4 years and the revenue can go back 6 years for a change of tax return so will these boys be even able to get the cgt back for 2011 & 2012?
It may have been strategic that the letters only went out to the 400 big milk suppliers?

they would have a case alrite if the revenue had those shares base cost at their value as it should apply to all patronage shareholders irespective of shareholding amount

kerry cow

I think you can nt apply two different rules to the same case .as every body is in same boat . I was talking to a person in the know recently who feels that revenue may lose this case based on the fact that farmers bought the shares for 1.25 and yes some shares traded for higher values but that was after they had been aquired. You had to active the share before you could sell it . So some sold higher and some held . They also traded at many different prices and not all the same even though they were all bought at 1.25 each .Some people didn't even know they could be traded and even if you wanted to trade there was no guarantee the board would allow it at each meeting .

BannerBarry

kerry cow wrote: »

I think you can nt apply two different rules to the same case .as every body is in same boat . I was talking to a person in the know recently who feels that revenue may lose this case based on the fact that farmers bought the shares for 1.25 and yes some shares traded for higher values but that was after they had been aquired. You had to active the share before you could sell it . So some sold higher and some held . They also traded at many different prices and not all the same even though they were all bought at 1.25 each .Some people didn't even know they could be traded and even if you wanted to trade there was no guarantee the board would allow it at each meeting .

Sounds a little Irish tbh... the shares were trading on a Grey market for years before 2011-2013 so were making some price even if not 65 75 and 90 before they were issued.

I wouldn't know how this test case will end up but I thought an argument that seems to be overlooked is that 200K Patronage shares per year (5%) of the co op total shares coming on the market at that time would cause a major flop in Grey Market price hence the 65 75 90 would not be realistic for valuing all the shares.

As I said earlier the Oil Market was over producing by something like 5% a year or so and it caused the oil market price to fall by ~ 50% in 2015.
The same could apply to the co op shares.. Valuations of 32 37 45 for those years maybe instead may be more realistic valuations

kerry made

I'm new to this and I haven't supplied milk for many years so this patronage share issue does not affect me. My understanding was that Kerry Co-op, like all co-ops, can take back shares from any member that has been deemed to act in a manner that is contrary to the best interests of the organisation. The shareholder is reimbursed the face value of the shares. If it is a possibility for this to happen to anyone holding such shares at any time, how can Revenue argue a higher value. Unless you go out and sell them for a higher value, this €1.25 is the only value you are guaranteed.
I remember a time when I was supplying milk to Kerry and was unhappy with the lack of independent milk testing, this threat hanging over me was one thing that made me keep my head below the parapet.

BannerBarry

kerry made wrote: »

I'm new to this and I haven't supplied milk for many years so this patronage share issue does not affect me. My understanding was that Kerry Co-op, like all co-ops, can take back shares from any member that has been deemed to act in a manner that is contrary to the best interests of the organisation. The shareholder is reimbursed the face value of the shares. If it is a possibility for this to happen to anyone holding such shares at any time, how can Revenue argue a higher value. Unless you go out and sell them for a higher value, this €1.25 is the only value you are guaranteed.
I remember a time when I was supplying milk to Kerry and was unhappy with the lack of independent milk testing, this threat hanging over me was one thing that made me keep my head below the parapet.

Is Kerry Co Op an actual Co Operative (Like they are trying to Argue with the Revenue) with one man one vote ethos so if this intimidating rule is in place prohibiting fellas standing up?

BannerBarry

Check out the changes effective 31 December 2016



Kerry Group plc Directorate Changes 


The Company announces that Mr Michael Ahern, Mr James Devane and Mr John Joseph O'Connor retired from the Board of Kerry Group on 31 December 2016.

THE DIVORCE PROCEEDINGS HAVE BEGUN!!

kerry cow

Tax demands arrived today from revenue for 2011 .what are guys going to do with them .pay or appeal