Obviously it matters when cash is paid because a dollar received today is worth more than a dollar received tomorrow. The more distant in time that cash will be received, the less its value today. This is the time value of money concept from finance 101.
Consider CHS's equity management approach from the point of view of the time value of money. CHS pays a 35% cash refund to its patrons, who either have a tax obligation or an obligation to pay cash refund themselves. In any case, the cash that CHS pays does not remain in the patron's hands, but it eventually is paid to state and federal governments to meet the patrons' income tax obligations.
The net, net effect of CHS's approach is zero. There is no net plus or minus effect on patron's cash position. See slide #4 in the attached power point presentation. http://www.blackdogcooplaw.com/case-study-managing-allocated-equity-1.
On the other hand, consider CoBank's equity management approach. CoBank pays a cash patronage refund that approached 70% this year. After the recipient patron pays a cash refund or income taxes on the distribution from CoBank, which requires half of the cash received, the patron keeps the other half. The net, net effect of CoBank's approach is to leave the patron with net cash equal to half of the cash patronage refund. See slide #4 again.
What would you rather have? Net, net cash of $29,000 from CoBank? Or net, net cash of $0 from CHS?
No comments:
Post a Comment