Cost each component of
capital are based on
CURRENT conditions
Historical value is irrelevant
Calculate after tax cost of debt:
after tax kd= before tax kd (1-te)
te: effective company tax rate
Calculate cost of equity
CAPM
DFC approach
(Dividend Valuation
Models)
Weight each component to
determine the WACC (value
each source of funds and total
value of projects)
Appropriate weights: the proportion that each
source of funds represents of the total sources
used to finance proposed projects
Current capital structure can be used
if cap structure is
expected to change, use
company's target capital
structure
Weight should be calculated
using current market values
rather than book values
consistent with the
way source of fund is
calculated
reflect the amounts investors
can realize from selling the
investment
Issue with WACC
do not take into account risk of a project
Capital Strucuture
Mix of securities which serves to divide those CF between diff classes of investors
Debt
Equity
Modigliani
and Miller
Propositions
Assumptions
Nota:
1. Capital markets are perfect
2. Companies and individual can borrow at the same interest rate
3. There are no taxes
4. There are no cost associated woth the liquidation of a company
5. Companies have fixed investment policy so that investment decisions are not affected by financing decisions
Proposition 1
Conservation of Value
The value of an asset remains the same, regardless of how the net
operating CF generated by the asset are divided between different classes
of investors
Two firms with identical operating CF but different capital
structures should have the same total value
If one firm is more valued than the other(VL>VU)
In a competitive market, investors
will recognise the relative
mispricing of shares in the two
companies and will seek to make
an arbitrage profit by selling shares
in L and buying shares in U
This will force the price of L
down and price of U up until the
mispricing is eliminted
Proposition 2
Conservation of Risk
Firm value is expected
cashflow/cost of capital
ke>kd
k is the weighted average of ke and kd
So it follows therefore that we can decrease
k by getting funds from a cheaper source
(debt)
By lowering k we increase the value of the firm
The cost of equity of a levered firm
ke=k0+(k0-kd)(D/E)
k0= compensation for business risk
(k0-kd)(D/E) is compensation for financial risk
When debt increases total risk is
conserved, but it is concentrated
upon a smaller number of
shareholders and hence required
returns increases
The introduction of relatively cheap
debt into the firm's capital CF will not
decrease cost of capital of the firm's CF
nor the value of the firm
Direct cost of debt (explicit): debt
Indirect cost of debt (implicit):
increased required return required by
the shareholder
The impact of taxes
on capital strucuture
Claasical tax system
Leverage will increase
firm value because
interest on debt is a tax
deductible expense
resulting in an
increase in the after tax
net CF to investors
PV of tax shield= tcD
M&M Proposition1
with taxes
value of levered firm is
equal to value of an
unlevered firm of the
same risk class plus the
present value of the
tax saving
VL=VU+tcD
k=ke(E/V)+kd(1-tc)(D/V)
Imputation tax system
The imputation system implies
that firm income distributed as
dividends is effectively taxed at
the shareholder's marginal rate
- just like interest income
capital gains may be
tax-advantaged for some
investors
t interest = t dividends
t dividends > t cap gain
hence, t interest >t cap
gain
There might be a
tax-induced reason to issue
equity rather than debt
where shareholders
generate their returns via
capital gains
Non tax impact on cap structure
Bankruptcy cost:
The trade off theory
As debt increases, financial risk
increases and thus the probability of
default (bankruptcy or risk of financial
distress also increases
Debtholder bear
realised
bankruptcy costs
Greater default probability,
higher interest rate
charged by debtholder
Higher interest charged,
lower leveraged
Shareholder
bear expected
bankruptcy
costs in the
form of more
expensive debt
The possibility of a tradeoff
between opposing effects of
benefits of debt finance and cost of
financial distress may mean that
optimal capital structure exists
VL=VU+tcD-PV(expected bankruptcy costs)
GRAPH! VERY IMPORTANT
Agency cost:
Pecking-order theory
Management's
announcement of a new
equity issue may be
interpreted as a sign that
management believes that
its equity is overpriced
cause a decrease in
share price
prefer debt than
equity
but debt involves transaction costs and
open company to external scrutiny
Preference for using retained earnings over
debt finance
This theory does not lead to optimal cap structure
Rather cap structure is reflection of the
firm;s need for external finance
It explains that
negative inta-industry correlation between
profitability and D/E
Negative share price reaction on
annonucement of equity issue
Asset type
Companies
with general
used assets
can borrow
more than
firm specific
assets
Company
with tangible
assets are
able to
borrow more
than the
intangible
assets
Free Cash Flow
Unless CF is
paid to
investors,
manager could
destroy value
Invest
in -ve
NPV
Increase
consumption
of
perquisites
Increase leverage to soak up
free CF
Agency cost
Asset
substitution
problem
Nota:
Shareholder in a company with outstanding debt own a call option on the assets of the company
Call option values increase with increasing volatility
A company with outstanding debt may have an incentives to take higher risk projects, even the project may reduce overall market value of the firm
Underinvestment
problem
Nota:
Firm close to bankruptcy may pass up +ve NPV projects because nobody will be willing to finance them
Existing s/h will not contribute equity as first gains from investing in +ve NPV projects accrue to debtholders
New s/h will not buy equity at existing prices but require a substantial discount
-Existing s/h will reject as their interest is diluted
knowing this debtholder
will
build into their
required return
compensation
for any
expected losses
from this
activity, making
debt more
expensive
insist on
restrictive
lending
condition that
inhibit these
activities