before or after 2000, when the change in tax law entitled eligible investors to a full refund of excess imputation credits. Table 411 is the equivalent table for alternative implied market value studies. In this table, several results are recorded as 'N/A', even though there is a specific date range provided. In such cases, that particular technique (or data limitations) did not permit the disaggregation of the value of the dividend component and the imputation credit. In this situation, the study typically reports the combined value of the cash dividend and imputation credit together. The minimum value for the imputation credit component of this package will arise if the cash dividend is fully valued, and these estimates are presented in the 'notes' column. Table 410 Estimates of the utilisation rate from dividend drop off studies Pre-2000 Post-2000 Authors Notes results results Dividend drop off study 0.35–0.55 Range derived from large number of Vo et al (2013) (2001–2012) permutations and sensitivity tests. 0.35 Author's point estimate across a number of SFG (2013a) (2001–2012) different regression forms. 0.35 SFG (2011) (2001–2010) Average of results from 2001–2005 and 0.39 2006–2009 sub-periods. For the most Minney (2010) (2001–2009) recent sub-period (2006–2009), utilisation rate is 0.53. 0.20 0.57 Several other pre-2000 periods are Beggs and Skeels (2006) (1992–1997) (2001–2004) presented. 0.49 Authors suggest that estimate has Hathaway and Officer (2004) (1986–2004) increased post-2000. 0.36 Bellamy and Gray (2004) Range of 0.0–0.60 is also presented. (1995–2002) 0.69 Also present an earlier period Bruckner et al (1994) (1991–1993) 0.80 Brown and Clarke (1993) (1988–1991) Source: As specified in table.
before or after 2000, when the change in tax law entitled eligible investors to a full refund of excess imputation credits. Table 411 is the equivalent table for alternative implied market value studies. In this table, several results are recorded as 'N/A', even though there is a specific date range provided. In such cases, that particular technique (or data limitations) did not permit the disaggregation of the value of the dividend component and the imputation credit. In this situation, the study typically reports the combined value of the cash dividend and imputation credit together. The minimum value for the imputation credit component of this package will arise if the cash dividend is fully valued, and these estimates are presented in the 'notes' column. Table 410 Estimates of the utilisation rate from dividend drop off studies Authors Pre-2000 results Post-2000 results Notes Dividend drop off study Vo et al (2013) 0.35–0.55 (2001–2012) Range derived from large number of permutations and sensitivity tests. SFG (2013a) 0.35 (2001–2012) Author's point estimate across a number of different regression forms. SFG (2011) 0.35 (2001–2010) Minney (2010) 0.39 (2001–2009) Average of results from 2001–2005 and 2006–2009 sub-periods. For the most recent sub-period (2006–2009), utilisation rate is 0.53. Beggs and Skeels (2006) 0.20 (1992–1997) 0.57 (2001–2004) Several other pre-2000 periods are presented. Hathaway and Officer (2004) 0.49 (1986–2004) Authors suggest that estimate has increased post-2000. Bellamy and Gray (2004) 0.36 (1995–2002) Range of 0.0–0.60 is also presented. Bruckner et al (1994) 0.69 (1991–1993) Also present an earlier period Brown and Clarke (1993) 0.80 (1988–1991) Source: As specified in table.
AER%20-%20Preliminary%20decision%20Jemena%20distribution%20determination%20-%20Attachment%204%20-%20Value%20of%20imputation%20credits%20-%20October%202015_0.DOCX