Tax Benefits? Seriously? J.C. Penney, You Have Much Bigger Problems

Struggling retailer J.C. Penney's   (NYSE: JCP  ) board of directors and management team have made a decidedly shareholder-unfriendly move, even worse. Last year, the company enacted a so-called "stockholder rights plan," more commonly called a "poison pill." The thing is, poison pills quite often do protect companies from a hostile takeover attempt, but that's not necessarily in the best interest of stockholdersIn this case, it's most certainly not in the interest of shareholders, despite the reasons given -- protecting NOL carryforwards to reduce future income tax costs. 

Yes -- there are other reasons beyond a buyout attempt where this makes sense, specifically around limiting 5% owners to below 51% of the company which can trigger a reduction in those NOL carryforward benefits, but at the end of the day, tax loss carryforwards won't come close to saving J.C. Penney. Seeing the board take a short-sighted and decided shareholder-unfriendly step like this -- one that limits potential large investor activity more than anything -- is another caution flag. 

Potential earnings implications?
There's a very real chance that this is a precursor for a bad Q4 earnings report. With the existing poison pill in place through August, there was little reason to act now, beyond the expectation of more bad news. Think about it this way: With a market capitalization of $1.76 billion, all it would take to be labeled an "acquiring individual" and trigger the poison pill is a mere $86 million investment in J.C. Penney stock. 

This is a company that had a market cap of almost $20 billion in 2007, and $10 billion less than two years ago. Today's market cap of $1.76 billion represents a 91% loss of value from the peak, and a 82% drop in less than two years. When factoring in the massive dilution to shareholders from last year's stock offering, investors have lost a staggering 86% in the past 24 months alone. Shareholders need to seriously question if this further limiting of outside or large investor influence is really in their best interest or not. 

Covering your ass-ets?
Protecting  the company's " valuable net operating loss carryforwards ("NOLs")," was specified as the reasoning behind the amendment, according to the press release. The truth is, NOLs are the least of what management needs to be worrying about today. After all, this is what management and the board has done over the past three years:

  • Push out a CEO whose strategy that was failing -- only to bring him back and reinstitute the same failed strategy. 
  • Tell investors the company had plenty of liquidity, only to give them a 40% haircut through a $1 billion share offering in order to -- you guessed it -- raise cash. 
  • Do little to stop the massive losses, much less kick-start sales growth.

This chart tells a lot about how things have gone:

JCP Operating Income (Annual) Chart

JCP Operating Income (Annual) data by YCharts

Simply put, the company remains in disarray, and is absolutely burning through its capital. As of November, the company only had $1.227 billion in cash and cash equivalents. That's less than half of the company's negative $2.6 billion free-cash-flow over the past twelve months. At that rate, the company could run out of money in six months, NOL carrybacks or not. 

Traditional big box retailing done right
Competitor Macy's  (NYSE: M  ) is a competitor in name only, as the only things the two have in common is a century of existence, a massive number of stores and a name everyone recognizes. Beyond that, things end. While Penney has struggled, Macy's has used its brand to appeal to shoppers, focusing on trends and style in an effort to attract younger and more affluent shoppers.

Penney has failed to appeal to customers as a brand destination, and its discount-driven model (that was failing under Mike Ullman when he was fired in 2012, but still reinstated upon his return) just isn't bringing in new customers. It's not even bringing in as many customers as it was two or three years ago, and that's a much bigger threat to shareholders than an acquisition attempt. 

While Macy's has had to close a few locations -- a move that Penney only recently decided to take -- it has remained consistently profitable, and consistently returned value to investors. Over the past two years, Macy's market cap has increased by 36%, and shareholder total return (including dividends) has been a strong 59% gain, versus the 85% loss for Penney shareholders. 

Poison Pill 2.0 not a fix
The way things are going, Penney may not live to return to profitability, and NOL carrybacks can only offset losses so much in the form of tax credits against prior income taxes paid. Over 2012 and the first nine months of 2013, the company received $551 million and $228 million in tax benefit, a drop in the bucket compared to the company's cash burn.  

Yes -- there are some rules about total number of 5%+ shareholders increasing to above 51% of total ownership that would further limit the benefit of NOLs, but this is very nearly at the bottom of what management should be worrying about. After all, according to Yahoo! Finance, all insiders and 5% owners only hold about 12% of the company's shares. Shareholders are best advised to vote against this measure when you have the chance at the annual meeting in May, because really all it does is limit larger investor interest in the company.  

But it's in place for now, which means there's little chance of salvation through an acquisition, or a shakeup from an activist investor buying a large stake. 

 

Want to get rich investing in retail? Look here first
To learn about two retailers with especially good prospects, take a look at The Motley Fool's special free report: "The Death of Wal-Mart: The Real Cash Kings Changing the Face of Retail." In it, you'll see how these two cash kings are able to consistently outperform and how they're planning to ride the waves of retail's changing tide. You can access it by clicking here.

 


Read/Post Comments (5) | Recommend This Article (1)

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 January 31, 2014, at 6:37 PM, rtmay wrote:

    Amazing how people forget that

    1. Ullman was the one that turned Macys around when Ullman served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of R. H. Macy & Co., Inc., from May 1992 to January 1995. When Macys stunk and required filing bankruptcy.

    2. That the reason JCP is in such dire condition is because some corporate raider took control of the board and inserted an idiot as CEO because he thought he knew more than Ullman. Had they had a poison pill back then Ackman couldn't of screwed the company up so bad.

    This is not going to turn around in a couple months. They have to dump left over inventory without giving it away, re-establish their private labels like St Johns Bay and rebuild customer confidence. Trying to maximize any profits that could eventually come is certainly not a bad thing. People are just trying to find a negative with everything JCP is doing.

    The parking lots of the 3 JCP stores I've seen are starting to fill again. (PS: Don't own any JCP but will be buying some when I think the haters have done all they can to lower the price)

  • Report this Comment On January 31, 2014, at 7:39 PM, TMFVelvetHammer wrote:

    rtmay,

    Yes -- Ullman led Macy's emergence from Bankruptcy, and Johnson's time was a disaster, though I think it was made worse by his quick jettison before there was any realistic chance of the changes he was making turning things around.

    The issue with JCP today isn't just about Ullman, though he has his share of responsibility, since the company was losing ground in a very real way under his initial leadership, and that's only worsened over the past year.

    The issue is that these sorts of actions don't indicate a company's leadership being focused on internals, or even on customers. This is a step to limit investor action as much as to protect NOL carryforwards.

    This company has serious problems, and its current path is more likely to lead across the river Styx than to profits...

  • Report this Comment On February 01, 2014, at 5:18 AM, famulla wrote:

    Amid severe drought conditions, California officials announced Friday they won't send any water from the state's vast reservoir system to local agencies beginning this spring, an unprecedented move that affects drinking water supplies for 25 million people and irrigation for 1 million acres of farmland.

    The announcement marks the first time in the 54-year history of the State Water Project that such an action has been taken, but it does not mean that every farm field will turn to dust and every city tap will run dry.

    The 29 agencies that draw from the state's water-delivery system have other sources, although those also have been hard-hit by the drought.

    Many farmers in California's Central Valley, one of the most productive agricultural regions in the country, also draw water from a separate system of federally run reservoirs and canals, but that system also will deliver just a fraction of its normal water allotment this year.

  • Report this Comment On February 01, 2014, at 5:48 AM, famulla wrote:

    THE other side of coin USA '''Struggling retailer J.C. Penney's board of directors and management team have made a decidedly shareholder-unfriendly move, even worse. Last year, the company enacted a so-called "stockholder rights plan," more commonly called a "poison pill." The thing is, poison pills quite often do protect companies from a hostile takeover attempt, but that's not necessarily in the best interest of stockholders. In this case, it's most certainly not in the interest of shareholders, despite the reasons given -- protecting NOL carry forwards to reduce future income tax costs.

    Yes -- there are other reasons beyond a buyout attempt where this makes sense, specifically around limiting 5% owners to below 51% of the company which can trigger a reduction in those NOL carry forward benefits, but at the end of the day, tax loss carry forwards won't come close to saving J.C. Penney. Seeing the board take a short-sighted and decided shareholder-unfriendly step like this -- one that limits potential large investor activity more than anything -- is another caution flag. WE DOT seem to have better news then the worse and we have UK very close following USA not that we will have this but it worth noting that the Super markets etc have swiped all the trade making the cash with, of course politics read the book SHOPPED "Shopped: The Shocking Power of British Supermarkets: Amazon ...

    www.amazon.co.uk/Shopped-Shocking-Power-British... Cached

    Shopped: The Shocking Power of British Supermarkets and over 2 million other books are available for Amazon Kindle . Learn more

  • Report this Comment On February 01, 2014, at 6:00 AM, famulla wrote:

    A closely watched gauge of of business conditions—The Institute for Supply Management’s purchasing manager’s index—showed slowing expansion in the manufacturing sector. In addition, weak earnings from large American firms like Amazon have made some traders question the strength of the economy. “I’m really bearish and defensive at the moment,” Daniel Weston, a fund manager at Aimed Capital GmbH in Munich, told Bloomberg. “Amazon was a big concern because the earnings were a reflection on the consumer. I’m concerned about growth and inflation coming off, continuing to trend lower.”

    The downturn follows a positive day for the stock market Thursday, with the S&P 500 gaining more than 1 percent.

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: 2819768, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 11/28/2014 10:50:34 PM

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