– Advertisement –
Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman fundamentally reshaped the landscape for corporate distributions in the 2026 Budget. The Finance Ministry officially ended the controversial “deemed dividend” treatment for share buybacks.
Add rightsofemployees.com as a Preferred Source
Consequently, the new framework classifies these payouts as capital gains once again. This shift directly addresses the “phantom loss” trap that previously penalized retail investors.
Fortunately, the move ensures that taxpayers pay on actual profits rather than their own invested capital. Market participants have largely welcomed this move toward tax equity.
At a Glance
-
The Classification: Buybacks move from “Dividend Income” to “Capital Gains.“
-
Employee Rate: Long-term gains for non-promoters are now capped at 12.5%.
-
Promoter Levy: Corporate promoters face 22%, while individuals pay 30%.
The End of Deemed Dividends
The 2024 tax regime forced shareholders to treat the entire buyback consideration as income from other sources.
Thus, an investor in the highest tax bracket effectively paid over 35% on the gross amount received. The Income Tax Act 2025 now restores the “true character” of these transactions as capital exits.
Furthermore, this change eliminates the need for companies to serve as withholding agents for dividend-style TDS. Simplifying the tax code was the primary driver here.
Differentiated Tax Rates: Employees vs. Promoters
The Finance Ministry introduced a three-tier tax structure to prevent promoters from misusing the new rules for tax arbitrage.
Notably, non-promoter employees holding shares for over a year will enjoy the standard LTCG rate of 12.5%.
However, individual promoters or any shareholder with over 10% equity must pay a higher effective rate of 30%. Domestic corporate promoters sit in the middle with a 22% tax liability on their gains. This hierarchy protects minority interests.
Solving the Capital Loss Mismatch
Previously, taxpayers paid high slab rates on the full payout while recording the original purchase cost as a low-value capital loss.
Indeed, this mismatch meant an employee could pay more in taxes than the actual profit earned from the shares. The new system allows for a direct deduction of the acquisition cost before applying the tax rate.
As a result, investors only provide the government a slice of their actual profit. Financial logic has returned.
Comparison: Buyback Taxation Before and After 2026
| Feature | Pre-Budget 2026 (Post-Oct 2024) | Budget 2026 Proposal (FY 27) |
| Income Head | Income from Other Sources (Dividend) | Capital Gains |
| Taxable Amount | Entire Proceeds (Gross) | Profit only (Proceeds minus Cost) |
| Standard Rate | Individual Slab Rates (up to 30%+) | 12.5% (LTCG) / 20% (STCG) |
| Promoter Rate | Individual Slab Rates | 22% (Corporate) / 30% (Individual) |
Human Insight: The Reality Check
Don’t bank on this money yet—I’ve seen “simplification” turn into a litigation nightmare before. The government claims this will boost investor confidence, but the new “10% holder” definition might unfairly catch small venture capital funds.
Reality Check: Promoters will likely stop using buybacks and pivot to “Capital Reduction” schemes or complex bonus share issues to bypass the new 30% levy.
Furthermore, tax officers might still challenge the cost-of-acquisition claims if records from ten years ago are missing. Ultimately, the real winners are the retail investors who finally stopped paying tax on their own principal. Common sense won this round.
Related News:
Add rightsofemployees.com as a Preferred Source
– Advertisement –
#Stock #Buybacks #Taxed #Capital #GainsBudget #WhoWiki.org
