Ch 17 Show
Transcript of Ch 17 Show
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
1/42
17 - 1
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
CHAPTER 17Capital Structure Decisions:
Extensions
MM and Miller models
Hamadas equation
Financial distress and agency costsTrade-off models
Asymmetric information theory
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
2/42
17 - 2
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Who are Modigliani and Miller (MM)?
They published theoretical papersthat changed the way people thoughtabout financial leverage.
They won Nobel prizes in economicsbecause of their work.
MMs papers were published in 1958and 1963. Miller had a separatepaper in 1977. The papers differed intheir assumptions about taxes.
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
3/42
17 - 3
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
What assumptions underlie the MM
and Miller models?
Firms can be grouped into
homogeneous classes based onbusiness risk.
Investors have identical
expectations about firms futureearnings.
There are no transactions costs.(More...)
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
4/42
17 - 4
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
All debt is riskless, and bothindividuals and corporations canborrow unlimited amounts of moneyat the risk-free rate.
All cash flows are perpetuities. Thisimplies perpetual debt is issued,firms have zero growth, and
expected EBIT is constant over time.
(More...)
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
5/42
17 - 5
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
MMs first paper (1958) assumedzero taxes. Later papers addedtaxes.
No agency orfinancial distresscosts.
These assumptions were necessary
for MM to prove their propositionson the basis of investor arbitrage.
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
6/42
17 - 6
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Proposition I:
VL = VU.
Proposition II:
ksL = ksU + (ksU - kd)(D/S).
MM with Zero Taxes (1958)
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
7/42
17 - 7
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Firms U and L are in same risk class.
EBITU,L = $500,000.
Firm U has no debt; ksU = 14%.
Firm L has $1,000,000 debt at kd = 8%.
The basic MM assumptions hold.
There are no corporate or personal taxes.
Given the following data, find V, S,
ks, and WACC for Firms U and L.
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
8/42
17 - 8
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
1. Find VU and VL.
VU = = = $3,571,429.
VL = VU = $3,571,429.
Questions: What is the derivation ofthe VU equation? Are the MM
assumptions required?
EBITksU
$500,0000.14
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
9/42
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
10/42
17 - 10
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
3. Find ksL.
ksL = ksU + (ksU - kd)(D/S)
= 14.0% + (14.0% - 8.0%)( )= 14.0% + 2.33% = 16.33%.
$1,000,000$2,571,429
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
11/42
17 - 11
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
4. Proposition I implies WACC = ksU.
Verify for L using WACC formula.
WACC = wdkd + wceks = (D/V)kd + (S/V)ks
= ( )(8.0%)
+( )(16.33%)= 2.24% + 11.76% = 14.00%.
$1,000,000$3,571,429
$2,571,429$3,571,429
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
12/42
17 - 12
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Graph the MM relationships between
capital costs and leverage as measuredby D/V.
Without taxesCost of
Capital (%)
26
20
14
8
0 20 40 60 80 100Debt/ValueRatio (%)
ks
WACCkd
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
13/42
17 - 13
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
The more debt the firm adds to itscapital structure, the riskier theequity becomes and thus the higher
its cost.
Although kd remains constant, ks
increases with leverage. The
increase in ks is exactly sufficient tokeep the WACC constant.
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
14/42
17 - 14
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Graph value versus leverage.
Value of Firm, V (%)
4
3
2
1
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5Debt (millions of $)
VLVU
Firm value ($3.6 million)
With zero taxes, MM argue that valueis unaffected by leverage.
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
15/42
17 - 15
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Find V, S, ks, and WACC for Firms U
and L assuming a 40% corporatetax rate.
With corporate taxes added, the MM
propositions become:
Proposition I:
VL = VU + TD.Proposition II:
ksL = ksU + (ksU - kd)(1 - T)(D/S).
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
16/42
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
17/42
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
18/42
17 - 18
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
VL = D + S = $2,542,857
$2,542,857 = $1,000,000 + S
S = $1,542,857.
2. Find market value of Firm
Ls debt and equity.
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
19/42
17 - 19
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
3. Find ksL.
ksL = ksU + (ksU - kd)(1 - T)(D/S)
= 14.0% + (14.0% - 8.0%)(0.6)( ) = 14.0% + 2.33% = 16.33%.
$1,000,000$1,542,857
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
20/42
17 - 20
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
4. Find Firm Ls WACC.
WACCL= (D/V)kd(1 - T) + (S/V)ks
= ( )(8.0%)(0.6)+( )(16.33%)
= 1.89% + 9.91% = 11.80%.When corporate taxes are considered, theWACC is lower for L than for U.
$1,000,000
$2,542,857$1,542,857$2,542,857
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
21/42
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
22/42
17 - 22
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Value of Firm, V (%)
4
3
2
1
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5Debt
(Millions of $)
VL
VU
MM relationship between value and debt
when corporate taxes are considered.
Under MM with corporate taxes, the firms valueincreases continuously as more and more debt is used.
TD
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
23/42
17 - 23
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Assume investors have the following
tax rates: Td = 30% and Ts = 12%. Whatis the gain from leverage according tothe Miller model?
Millers Proposition I:
VL = VU + [1 - ]D.Tc = corporate tax rate.Td = personal tax rate on debt income.
Ts = personal tax rate on stock income.
(1 - Tc)(1 - Ts)
(1 - Td)
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
24/42
17 - 24
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Tc
= 40%, Td
= 30%, and Ts
= 12%.
VL = VU + [1 - ]D= VU + (1 - 0.75)D
= VU + 0.25D.
Value rises with debt; each $100 increase
in debt raises Ls value by $25.
(1 - 0.40)(1 - 0.12)(1 - 0.30)
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
25/42
17 - 25
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
How does this gain compare to the gain
in the MM model with corporate taxes?
Ifonly corporate taxes, then
VL = VU + TcD = VU + 0.40D.
Here $100 of debt raises value by
$40. Thus, personal taxes lowers thegain from leverage, but the net effectdepends on tax rates.
(More...)
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
26/42
17 - 26
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
If Ts declines, while Tc and Td remainconstant, the slope coefficient(which shows the benefit of debt) isdecreased.
A company with a low payout ratiogets lower benefits under the Millermodel than a company with a high
payout, because a low payoutdecreases Ts.
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
27/42
17 - 27
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
When Miller brought in personal
taxes, the value enhancement of debtwas lowered. Why?
1. Corporate tax laws favor debt overequity financing because interestexpense is tax deductible while
dividends are not.
(More...)
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
28/42
17 - 28
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
2. However, personal tax laws favor
equity over debt because stocksprovide both tax deferral and alower capital gains tax rate.
3. This lowers the relative cost ofequity vis-a-vis MMs no-personal-tax world and decreases the spreadbetween debt and equity costs.
4. Thus, some of the advantage of debtfinancing is lost, so debt financingis less valuable to firms.
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
29/42
17 - 29
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
What does capital structure theory
prescribe for corporate managers?
1. MM, No Taxes: Capital structure is
irrelevant--no impact on value or WACC.2. MM, Corporate Taxes: Value increases,
so firms should use (almost) 100% debtfinancing.
3. Miller, Personal Taxes: Value increases,but less than under MM, so again firmsshould use (almost) 100% debt financing.
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
30/42
17 - 30
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Firms dont follow MM/Miller to 100%debt. Debt ratios average about 40%.
However, debt ratios did increaseafter MM. Many think debt ratios
were too low, and MM led to changesin financial policies.
Do firms follow the recommendations
of capital structure theory?
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
31/42
17 - 31
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Define financial distress and
agency costs.
Financial distress: As firms usemore and more debt financing, theyface a higher probability of futurefinancial distress, which brings with
it lower sales, EBIT, and bankruptcycosts. Lowers value of stock andbonds.
(More...)
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
32/42
17 - 32
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Agency costs: The costs ofmanagers not behaving in the bestinterests of shareholders and theresulting costs of monitoring
managers actions. Lowers value ofstock and bonds.
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
33/42
17 - 33
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
How do financial distress and agency
costs change the MM and Millermodels?
MM/Miller ignored these costs, hencethose models show firm valueincreasing continuously withleverage.
Since financial distress and agencycosts increase with leverage, suchcosts reduce the value of debt
financing.
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
34/42
17 - 34
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Heres a valuation model which
includes financial distress andagency costs:
X represents either Tc in the MM modelor the more complex Miller term.
Now, optimal leverage involves atradeoff between the tax benefits ofdebt and the costs associated withfinancial distress and agency.
VL
= VU
+ XD - - .PV of expected
fin. distress costs
PV of agency
costs
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
35/42
17 - 35
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Cost of Capital (%)
14
4
Debt ($)
Relationships between capital costs
and leverage when financial distressand agency costs are considered.
ks
WACC
kd(1 - T)
D*
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
36/42
17 - 36
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Relationship between value and
leverage.
Value of Firm ($)
Debt ($)
4
3
21
Note that value ismaximized and WACC is
minimized at the samecapital structure.
D*
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
37/42
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
38/42
17 - 38
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Hamadas equation for beta:
bL = +
= +
= + .
bU
Unleveredbeta, which
reflects thebusinessrisk of the
firmBusiness
risk
bU(1 - T)(D/S)Increased
volatility of
the returnsto equity
due to the
use of debtFinancial
risk
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
39/42
17 - 39
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Results of a survey by Donaldson andthe asymmetric information theory.
Firms follow a specific financing order:First use internal funds.
Next, draw on marketable securities.Then, issue new debt.
Finally, and only as a last resort, issue newcommon stock.
What is the pecking order theory
of capital structure?
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
40/42
17 - 40
Copyright 2002 by Harcourt Inc. All rights reserved.
Does the pecking order theory make
sense? Explain.Is the pecking order theory consistentwith the trade-off theory?
It is consistent with theasymmetric information theory, inwhich managers avoid issuing
equity.
It is not consistent with trade-offtheory.
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
41/42
-
8/14/2019 Ch 17 Show
42/42