Naive question about profit

I wonder if someone here can explain to me about profit as it is calculated in an annual statement: If a business is structured as a holding company
with fully-owned subsidiaries, how can the parent firm's profit be a bunch less than the group's profit shown on the consolidated income statement? I suppose it is bound to be a bit less due to the holding company's administrative expenses, but I can't figure out where else all the money goes.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

calculated
I
What company are you looking at? If the holding company owns 100% of the subs then the net income (after intercompany transactions are eliminated) should add up to the total consolidated net income.
.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 12:23:27 -0400, Steve wrote:

That does seem logical, doesn't it?
I have been looking at the 2005 annual statement for a Norwegian fish farming company named Cermaq. It is available in English at
    http://hugin.info/134455/R/1044880/171068.pdf
On p. 48 it shows a list of subsidiaries, all owned 100%. On p. 38 it shows group earnings for majority interest as NOK 658 million. On p. 67 it shows parent earnings of NOK 137 million, and "income from subsidiaries" of only NOK 5.7 million. So I would like to understand what happens to the rest of the group's earnings. I'm sure this is nothing unusual or improper, just my ignorance showing. (As you may gather, I'm not an accountant.)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

calculated
company
bunch
statement?
money
the
eliminated)
not
I did not look up the link and pdf document but "parent earnings" is NOT consolidated income. I don't know about Norwegian companies but in the US there would be a footnote showing all the individual sub's income, parent company income, intercompany eliminations income (loss) with all this adding up to 100% consolidated net income.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 21:07:45 -0400, Steve wrote:

All right, then what exactly determines the parent company's net income? Is it just at the discretion of management to decide how much of the subsidiaries' earnings it wants to formally appropriate in a given year, perhaps to minimize taxes?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

US
parent
No, taxes has nothing to do with it. The parent company has other transactions along with 100% owned sub's income/loss. It is (usually) NOT the accounting equivalent of the total consolidated company net income but if the parent co. owned 100% subs and there were no other transactions, then the individual profit statements, including parent co. should add up to total. There are many complications to this but for US companies there is a reconciliation of this relationship.
.
.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

BeanSmart.com is a site by and for consumers of financial services and advice. We are not affiliated with any of the banks, financial services or software manufacturers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.

Tax and financial advice you come across on this site is freely given by your peers and professionals on their own time and out of the kindness of their hearts. We can guarantee neither accuracy of such advice nor its applicability for your situation. Simply put, you are fully responsible for the results of using information from this site in real life situations.