Subject: Re: Say it isn’t So
There is zero chance of a dividend as long as Warren holds the stock directly because he would incur personal taxes on the dividend payment instead of all benefit of his stock holding accruing to charities.

I hope this isn't the governing attitude - one person's individual preferences shouldn't stand in the way of the best decision from the business's perspective, even if that one person is Warren Buffett. That's the very definition of agency costs: when the manager's personal preferences come before the interests of the shareholders.

I'm comfortable with the idea of carefully managing the firm's capital rather than rashly investing it; I'm pretty sure I was at the 2000 annual meeting when the audience member criticized Buffett for not investing in tech stocks and I certainly don't want to be that person. That being said, as cash builds up and builds up, with desirable reinvestment opportunities looking sparse, there are 3 options:

1. Issue a dividend
2. Buy back shares
3. Continue to wait for some future acquisition of either whole companies or marketable securities

You can say "no dividends" out of principle, but I don't think that's fair. There are problems with all 3 options. Dividends incur incremental taxes (for some, but not all), and go against the spirit of "Warren Buffett can invest my money better than I can". Repurchasing shares is inappropriate when the shares are trading comfortably above intrinsic value (which I still think they are). And I think those two things are what lead people to say, "Let's continue to wait, and continue to retain our earnings/cash." But at some point, this can't be the answer - that's why Berkshire's Owners' Manual has the retained earnings test.

I don't know if I'm ready yet for a dividend, but in a world where neither acquisitions nor repurchases are attractive over a sustained multi-year period, I think it's poor thinking to dismiss the idea out of hand and I certainly hope that Buffett isn't assessing dividend policy based on his own personal circumstances as opposed to the interests of the shareholders at large.