Buyback Tax Reset: How Finance Act 2026 Changes Game for Shareholders

Tax laws regarding share buybacks have been swinging back and forth like a pendulum. Just when investors were getting used to one system, the Finance Act 2026 has hit the reset button. The government has effectively scrapped the unpopular “Deemed Dividend” rule introduced a few years ago and brought back the logical “Capital Gains” treatment.

But there’s a twist. While the new rules are a blessing for the common investor, they come with a catch for company founders and promoters. By amending Section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 2025, the government has created a two-tier system: relief for the retail investor, and a higher tax wall for promoters to prevent tax avoidance.

Here is a breakdown of what has changed and why it matters.

1. The “Phantom Loss” Trap is Finally Gone

To understand why this amendment is such a relief, you have to look at the mess we are leaving behind. Under the previous rules, if you tendered your shares in a buyback, the entire amount you received was treated as a Dividend.

This dealt a “double blow” to small investors:

• Tax on Revenue, Not Profit: You were taxed on the full buyback price, not just your profit. If you bought a share for ₹500 and sold it back for ₹600, you paid tax on the full ₹600 at your slab rate (which could be up to 39%).
• The Dead Loss: The ₹500 you spent buying the share was treated as a “Capital Loss.” Since most people didn’t have huge capital gains to offset this loss against, it sat in their tax returns as a carried forward loss.

The Fix: The Finance Act 2026 fixes this by reclassifying buyback proceeds as Capital Gains. Simply put, you now only pay tax on your actual profit (Sale Price minus Purchase Price).

2. The New Twist: Section 69 and the Promoter Tax

While the government wanted to help retail investors, they were worried that company owners (promoters) would use buybacks to extract profits at low tax rates. To stop this, the new Section 69 introduces a “Special Additional Tax” specifically for promoters.

Basically, if you are a promoter, the tax on your proceeds from a buyback is calculated as:

Normal Capital Gains Tax + A New Surcharge

This results in a much higher effective tax rate for promoters compared to the general public:

• For Retail Investors: You pay the standard Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) rate of 12.5%.
• For Corporate Promoters (e.g., Parent Companies): The effective rate jumps to 22%.
• For Non-Corporate Promoters (e.g., Founders): The effective rate is a steep 30%.

3. Illustration: How the Math Works Out

Let’s look at a real-world example. Imagine a company announces a buyback at ₹1,000 per share and, a Retail Investor, a Corporate Promoter and a Non-Corporate Promoter, all three bought their shares years ago for ₹200.

As you can see, on the exact same profit, the promoter pays more than double the tax.

4. What This Means for the Market

This amendment changes behaviour in two distinct ways.

♦ For Retail Investors:

This is great news. The removal of the “phantom loss” trap makes buybacks attractive again. You no longer need to worry about complex tax calculations or carrying forward losses. If a company announces a buyback, you can participate knowing you’ll only be taxed on your actual gains at a reasonable rate.

♦ For Promoters and Companies:

Promoters are now in a tough spot. A 30% tax rate on buybacks is significantly higher than the 12.5% rate they would pay if they simply sold their shares on the open market.

Because of this, we might see a shift in strategy. Instead of using buybacks to return money to themselves, promoters might prefer Offers for Sale (OFS) or open market sales to save that 17.5% difference in tax. Buybacks will likely be used only when the company genuinely needs to reduce its equity base, rather than just as a tax-saving tool for promoters.

Conclusion

The Finance Act 2026 strikes a difficult balance. It successfully corrects a major flaw that was hurting small investors, restoring the logical “income minus cost” principle. However, by slapping a surcharge on promoters, it ensures that the wealthy cannot use buybacks as a loophole to pay less tax. It’s a fairer system, even if it makes life a bit more expensive for company founders.

*****

Author: Devesh Aggarwal, Direct Tax Litigation (ITAT), VED JAIN & ASSOCIATES, New Delhi – 110001