> it raises the question of why Buffett made one choice for his own portfolio and the opposite choice for Berkshire’s investors You can't actually determine th

> it raises the question of why Buffett made one choice for his own portfolio and the opposite choice for Berkshire’s investors You can't actually determine that from tax returns. For all you can tell from returns the transaction could have been intended to trigger taxes or to change allocations between account types (e.g. to move a position from a taxable account to an IRA), and was matched by another transaction that preserved the position. Similarly, you can't tell if the timing was controlled by the tax payer or if it was some long-set-in-advance programmatic trade (it's also pretty hard to tell if it was triggered by a derivatives contract). AFAICT the article also makes no effort to establish he was personally aware of BRK's plans in those securities, which would be a necessary condition for a potential conflict. Perhaps there is substance here but if he was engaging in crooked trading you would expect to see a systematic pattern of it, not two isolated trades that didn't even appear to produce an outsized benefit for him. Tax information is as easily misleading as it is revealing.