So how is this credit applied then?Last I checked it was paid in...

So how is this credit applied then?
Last I checked it was paid in cash, same way the tax was paid by the company, all pretty simple really, using labels that quite frankly (no pun intended) don't suit the process doesn't change what is occurring.
It is indeed cash previously withheld being paid back by the Government.
I know lots don't seem to understand this very simple mechanism for returning excess taxes paid and that many Countries do indeed double tax this income like the US.
BUT this is also why companies will either retain and re-invest profit or buy back shares instead of paying it out to investors in the US.
This is referred to as "avoiding double taxation of profits for shareholders" when explained to shareholders by the company when they get asked to pay more dividends.
This is not to say dividends don't get paid but they will only be paid if there is no appropriate use for the cash to re-invest and the shares are not at a reasonable value to buy back.
The US Government doesn't even try to hide this double taxation as it's a deliberate policy aimed at creating huge reinvestment so companies can reinvest in growing operations and thus employment, spread across the globe with enormous amounts of capital, this provides a large advantage over other businesses and drives value and has profits flow from around the world back into the US.
Is it a bad policy? No it's not, but they don't try to hide the fact it is a DOUBLE TAX on the same profit, it's fair for all as it's applied evenly across the board.
I'm not saying don't abolish Franking Credits, either are most here, just don't target one particular group of people and one particular asset class.
Finish them across the board and I'm happy, it would sting but at least it would be fair, they should also abolish negative gearing, no grandfathering, Bill Shorten just announced reductions to negative gearing will not apply to anyone who currently owns a property as "they are the rules the property was purchased under".
Why would this not be the case for Franking Credits?
Does that seem fair and equitable?
Are they saying "don't worry anyone who currently owns shares, we will only impose this on new purchasers"?
Can't say it enough, it's truly disgusting.