Nope. Your own WSJ link in the post before the above one says in its subheadline, quote:
" 'This Is Not a Tax-Driven Deal,' Executive Says"
-- which also agrees with other links I've seen and posted.
Your own link.
Still cannot comprehend English, can you?
If you read my post you will never see the words tax driven. If you read your post you will see the claim that taxes had nothing to do with the deal. Your challenge to everyone was to prove you wrong on that claim. If the deal had nothing to do with taxes they would have not included the provision that transferred just enough of their stock to Tom Horton to allow them to not pay US taxes. Therefore, your claim that the tax differential had nothing to do with the deal has been disproven.
Feel free to run away from the thread just like every other time I proved your claims wrong.