Ford's $10 Billion Bonanza

Want a great example of why investors should always read the 10-K, a company's official annual report as filed with the SEC? Buried in Ford's (NYSE: F  ) most recent annual missive is this obscure-but-fascinating note:

[O]ur current low effective tax rate is primarily the result of our valuation allowance against deferred tax assets. Sustained levels of profitability are expected to lead to reversal of the majority of this valuation allowance, which could occur as early as the second half of 2011.

[source: 10-k (attached), p 75]

Of course, that doesn't mean a whole lot without some understanding of accounting nuances. But here's the essence of it in a nutshell: According to experts cited by Bloomberg, Ford could add more than $10 billion to its net income this year with nothing more than an accounting change.


What's more, not only is it a completely above-board accounting change, but it's also one the company is kind of obliged to make. And contrary to what you might think, it won't increase Ford's tax payments, at least not anytime soon.

What's the story? I'm glad you asked.

Welcome to the world of "valuation allowances"
In a nutshell, a valuation allowance is a reserve held on a company's books when the company doesn't think it will be able to use a tax loss in the near future -- typically because it expects to keep losing money for a while. In essence, this bookkeeping move allows the company to hang on to a credit it could have applied to its taxes until it has returned to sustained profitability -- in other words, until it has profits to actually pay taxes on.

Back in 2006, when then-new CEO Alan Mulally was first laying the groundwork for the company's dramatic turnaround, Ford's green-eyeshade folks created one of these allowances in anticipation of several years of rough seas. As of the end of 2010, according to the 10-K, that valuation allowance was worth $15.7 billion.

That's a hefty sum to have tied up in accounting limbo, and now that Ford's looking solidly profitable, it'll want to find a better use for that money. According to a corporate-tax expert interviewed by Bloomberg, the upshot of getting rid of the allowance is likely to be a $10 billion to $13 billion addition to Ford's net income for the year.

Ford said in the 10-K that it would record the move as a special item for the quarter in which it happens, a move that offers tax advantages. But to go back to the 10-K quote I included above, the valuation allowance is part of what has kept Ford's taxes low. Wouldn't getting rid of it mean that oh-so-profitable Ford will now have to start sending hefty chunks of cash to the IRS?

Short answer: no.

Putting that asset to work
In theory, Ford's profits will be subject to U.S. corporate-tax rates, which max out at 35%. In reality, though, Ford will be able to use its losses from 2005 through 2009 -- $31.4 billion worth -- to offset its tax obligations for the next several years, even if the company continues to be strongly profitable.

That's a good thing, but it's not exactly the huge competitive advantage you might think. The Japanese giants such as Toyota (NYSE: TM  ) and Honda (NYSE: HMC  ) receive all sorts of help from their home government, of course. And local archrival General Motors (NYSE: GM  ) got a whopper of a gift from the IRS when it was allowed to "keep" its pre-bankruptcy losses to offset future profits -- $45.4 billion worth of future profits, as Fool Rich Smith noted last November.

A Barclays analyst recently opined that concerns about taxes have probably held Ford's share price back in recent months. But when the reality of this move sinks in -- first, that Ford won't actually be shipping cash out the door to pay taxes for several years, and second, that the removal of the valuation allowance means that management is very confident that continued profits are likely -- shareholders could see a pleasant upturn in their fortunes.

Want to read more about Ford? Use My Watchlist to keep up with all of the Fool's analysis of the House of the Blue Oval -- and all of your other favorite stocks.

Fool contributor John Rosevear owns shares of Ford and General Motors. General Motors is a Motley Fool Inside Value selection. The Fool owns shares of Ford, which is also a Motley Fool Stock Advisor pick. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools don't all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.


Read/Post Comments (4) | Recommend This Article (31)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On March 06, 2011, at 8:57 AM, jb757 wrote:

    With 3.7 billion shares, $13 B will add approx. $.20 to 2011 earnings knowing that $35 B 2011 rev per share would translate into $2 earnings per share or 6% of revenue which matches their approx. 6.5 % profit margin. I'm not an accountant so it would be good to have a real estimate on the earnings impact.

  • Report this Comment On March 06, 2011, at 3:23 PM, busterbuddy wrote:

    First comments on Governments help of Toyota and Honda. Correct the state of Alabama and TExas help Toyota, Tundra is build in San Antonio and The Engine is build in Huntsville, Ala. And the State of Alabama helps Honda. The Honda Odyssey is built in a little the size of a nat call Lincoln, Alabama. Mercedes builds in a town little bigger than a nat in Alabama. And Hydunai has a large plant in Montgomery Alabama.

    Now back to Ford. Ford is a solid investment and new money should go into it. And hears is one for you. Looking at Warren Buffet's money where might he put it. And what does he drive. ?

    Accumulation of Ford just makes sense.

  • Report this Comment On March 06, 2011, at 4:35 PM, TMFMarlowe wrote:

    @busterbuddy, you're totally right, but to be fair we should point out that F and GM get breaks from Michigan, Ontario, etc.

    Doesn't WB drive a Cadillac DTS now? Or did he go back to Fords?

    Thanks for reading.

    John Rosevear

  • Report this Comment On March 06, 2011, at 9:17 PM, PatNowak wrote:

    I have owned about 70 cars thus far. About 20 of them were Fords, Lincolns or Ford owned brands like Jaguar. Taken as a group they were the most reliable (including the 4 Jags) and the best value for the dollar.

    I think Ford has the best chance of continued profits for the next 10 years. Alan Mullally leads a talented team that keeps the company focused on competitive products and profits.

    In a book I wrote on the subject of cars, I define a quality that the best cars possess that I called the "Secret Sauce" which is a combination of beauty and reliability with the beauty making up at least 70% of the sauce. In my opinion, Ford is building more models of these "best cars" than any other major manufacturer.

    Regards.

    Pat Nowak

    Author

    "Forty Cars That Owned Me"

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 1453215, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 9/19/2014 6:13:12 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...


Advertisement