capital structure 2015

48
9-1 9-1 Institute of Human Resource Advancement University of Colombo Lecturer: Dr. A. A. Azeez Program: MBM Subject : MBM 14-Financial Management Topic : Capital Structure Policy Date : 02. 05.2015

Upload: ministry-of-public-administration-and-home-affairs

Post on 17-Aug-2015

10 views

Category:

Education


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Capital structure 2015

9-19-1

Institute of Human Resource Advancement

University of Colombo

• Lecturer: Dr. A. A. Azeez

• Program: MBM

• Subject : MBM 14-Financial Management

• Topic : Capital Structure Policy

• Date : 02. 05.2015

Page 2: Capital structure 2015

9-29-2

Capital Structure

Capital Structure -- The mix (or proportion) of a

firm’s permanent long-term financing represented

by debt, preferred stock, and common stock

equity.

Page 3: Capital structure 2015

9-39-3

Capital Structure and the Pie

• The value of a firm is defined to be the sum of

the value of the firm’s debt and the firm’s equity.

V = B + S

• If the goal of the firm’s

management is to make the

firm as valuable as possible,

then the firm should pick the

debt-equity ratio that makes

the pie as big as possible.

Value of the Firm

S BS BS BS B

Page 4: Capital structure 2015

9-49-4

Capital Restructuring

• We are going to look at how changes in capital

structure affect the value of the firm, all else equal

• Capital restructuring involves changing the amount of

leverage a firm has without changing the firm’s assets

• The firm can increase leverage by issuing debt and

repurchasing outstanding shares

• The firm can decrease leverage by issuing new shares

and retiring outstanding debt

16-4

Page 5: Capital structure 2015

9-59-5

Choosing a Capital Structure

• What is the primary goal of financial managers?

– Maximize stockholder wealth

• We want to choose the capital structure that will

maximize stockholder wealth

• We can maximize stockholder wealth by

maximizing the value of the firm or minimizing

the WACC

16-5

Page 6: Capital structure 2015

9-69-6

The Effect of Leverage

• How does leverage affect the EPS and ROE of a firm?

• When we increase the amount of debt financing, we increase the fixed interest expense

• If we have a really good year, then we pay our fixed cost and we have more left over for our stockholders

• If we have a really bad year, we still have to pay our fixed costs and we have less left over for our stockholders

• Leverage amplifies the variation in both EPS and ROE

16-6

Page 7: Capital structure 2015

9-79-7

Financial Leverage, EPS, and ROE

Current

Assets $20,000

Debt $0

Equity $20,000

Debt/Equity ratio 0.00

Interest rate n/a

Shares outstanding 400

Share price $50

Proposed

$20,000

$8,000

$12,000

2/3

8%

240

$50

Consider an all-equity firm that is contemplating going into

debt.

Page 8: Capital structure 2015

9-89-8

EPS and ROE Under Current

Structure

Recession Expected Expansion

EBIT $1,000 $2,000 $3,000

Interest 0 0 0

Net income $1,000 $2,000 $3,000

EPS $2.50 $5.00 $7.50

ROA 5% 10% 15%

ROE 5% 10% 15%

Current Shares Outstanding = 400 shares

Page 9: Capital structure 2015

9-99-9

EPS and ROE Under Proposed

Structure

Recession Expected Expansion

EBIT $1,000 $2,000 $3,000

Interest 640 640 640

Net income $360 $1,360 $2,360

EPS $1.50 $5.67 $9.83

ROA 1.8% 6.8% 11.8%

ROE 3.0% 11.3% 19.7%

Proposed Shares Outstanding = 240 shares

Page 10: Capital structure 2015

9-109-10

Financial Leverage and EPS

(2.00)

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

1,000 2,000 3,000

EP

S

Debt

No Debt

Break-even

point

EBIT in dollars, no taxes

Advantage

to debt

Disadvantage

to debt

Page 11: Capital structure 2015

9-119-11

Debt-equity Mix and the Value

of the Firm

Capital structure theories:

• Net operating income (NOI) approach.

• Traditional approach.

• MM hypothesis with and without corporate

tax.

• Trade-off theory: costs and benefits of

leverage.

• Pecking-order theory

Page 12: Capital structure 2015

9-129-12

Net Operating

Income Approach

Assume:

– Net operating income equals Rs.1,350

– Market value of debt is Rs.1,800 at 10% interest

– Overall capitalization rate is 15%

Net Operating Income Approach -- A theory of

capital structure in which the weighted average

cost of capital and the total value of the firm

remain constant as financial leverage is changed.

Page 13: Capital structure 2015

9-139-13

Required Rate of

Return on Equity

Total firm value = O / ko = 1,350 / .15

= 9,000

Market value = V - B = 9,000 - 1,800

of equity = 7,200

Required return = E / S

on equity* = (1,350 - 180) / 7,200

= 16.25%

Calculating the required rate of return on equity

* B / S = 1,800 / 7,200 = .25

Interest payments

= 1,800 x 10%

Page 14: Capital structure 2015

9-149-14

Total firm value = O / ko = 1,350 / .15

= 9,000

Market value = V - B = 9,000 - 3,000

of equity = 6,000

Required return = E / S

on equity* = (1,350 - 300) / 6,000

= 17.50%

Required Rate of

Return on Equity

What is the rate of return on equity if B=Rs.3,000?

* B / S = 3,000 / 6,000 = .50

Interest payments

= 3,000 x 10%

Page 15: Capital structure 2015

9-159-15

B / S kd ke ko

0.00 --- 15.00% 15%

0.25 10% 16.25% 15%

0.50 10% 17.50% 15%

1.00 10% 20.00% 15%

2.00 10% 25.00% 15%

Required Rate of

Return on Equity

Examine a variety of different debt-to-equity

ratios and the resulting required rate of

return on equity.

Calculated in slides 9 and 10

Page 16: Capital structure 2015

9-169-16

Required Rate of

Return on Equity

Capital costs and the NOI approach in a

graphical representation.

0 .25 .50 .75 1.0 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.0

Financial Leverage (B / S)

.25

.20

.15

.10

.05

0

Cap

ital C

osts

(%

)

ke = 16.25% and

17.5% respectively

kd (Yield on debt)

ko (Capitalization rate)

ke (Required return on equity)

Page 17: Capital structure 2015

9-179-17

Summary of NOI Approach

• Critical assumption is ko remains constant.

• An increase in cheaper debt funds is exactly offset

by an increase in the required rate of return on

equity.

• As long as kd is constant, ke is a linear function of

the debt-to-equity ratio.

• Thus, there is no one optimal capital structure.

Page 18: Capital structure 2015

9-189-18

Traditional Approach

Optimal Capital Structure -- The capital structure that

minimizes the firm’s cost of capital and thereby

maximizes the value of the firm.

Traditional Approach -- A theory of capital

structure in which there exists an optimal capital

structure and where management can increase

the total value of the firm through the judicious

use of financial leverage.

Page 19: Capital structure 2015

9-199-19

Optimal Capital Structure:

Traditional Approach

Traditional Approach

Financial Leverage (B / S)

.25

.20

.15

.10

.05

0

Cap

ital C

osts

(%

)

kd

ko

ke

Optimal Capital Structure

Page 20: Capital structure 2015

9-209-20

Summary of the

Traditional Approach

• The cost of capital is dependent on the capital

structure of the firm.

– Initially, low-cost debt is not rising and replaces

more expensive equity financing and ko declines.

– Then, increasing financial leverage and the

associated increase in ke and kd more than offsets

the benefits of lower cost debt financing.

• Thus, there is one optimal capital structure where ko

is at its lowest point.

• This is also the point where the firm’s total value will

be the largest (discounting at ko).

Page 21: Capital structure 2015

9-219-21

Total Value Principle:

Modigliani and Miller (M&M)

• Advocate that the relationship between financial

leverage and the cost of capital is explained by

the NOI approach.

• Provide behavioral justification for a constant ko

over the entire range of financial leverage

possibilities.

• Total risk for all security holders of the firm is not

altered by the capital structure.

• Therefore, the total value of the firm is not altered

by the firm’s financing mix.

Page 22: Capital structure 2015

9-229-22

Market value

of debt (65M)

Market value

of equity (35M)

Total firm market

value (100M)

Total Value Principle:

Modigliani and Miller

• M&M assume an absence of taxes and market imperfections.

• Investors can substitute personal for corporate financial leverage.

Market value

of debt (35M)

Market value

of equity (65M)

Total firm market

value (100M)

Total market value is not altered by the capital

structure (the total size of the pies are the same).

Page 23: Capital structure 2015

9-239-23

Assumptions of the M&M

Model• Homogeneous Expectations

• Homogeneous Business Risk Classes

• Perpetual Cash Flows

• Perfect Capital Markets:

– Perfect competition

– Firms and investors can borrow/lend at the same rate

– Equal access to all relevant information

– No transaction costs

– No taxes

Page 24: Capital structure 2015

9-249-24

Arbitrage and Total

Market Value of the Firm

Arbitrage -- Finding two assets that are

essentially the same and buying the cheaper and

selling the more expensive.

Two firms that are alike in every respect

EXCEPT capital structure MUST have

the same market value.

Otherwise, arbitrage is possible.

Page 25: Capital structure 2015

9-259-25

Arbitrage Example

Consider two firms that are identical

in every respect EXCEPT:

Company NL -- no financial leverage

Company L – Rs.30,000 of 12% debt

Market value of debt for Company L equals its

par value

Required return on equity

-- Company NL is 15%

-- Company L is 16%

NOI for each firm is Rs.10,000

Page 26: Capital structure 2015

9-269-26

Earnings available to = E = O – I

common shareholders = 10,000 - 0= 10,000

Market value = E / ke

of equity = 10,000 / .15 = 66,667

Total market value = 66,667 + 0= 66,667

Overall capitalization rate = 15%

Debt-to-equity ratio = 0

Arbitrage Example:

Company NL

Valuation of Company NL

Page 27: Capital structure 2015

9-279-27

Arbitrage Example:

Company L

Earnings available to = E = O – I

common shareholders =10,000 - 3,600

= 6,400

Market value = E / ke

of equity = 6,400 / .16

= 40,000

Total market value = 40,000 + 30,000

= 70,000

Overall capitalization rate = 14.3%

Debt-to-equity ratio = .75

Valuation of Company L

Page 28: Capital structure 2015

9-289-28

Completing an

Arbitrage Transaction

Assume you own 1% of the stock of

Company L (equity value = Rs.400).

You should:

1. Sell the stock in Company L for 400.

2. Borrow 300 at 12% interest (equals 1% of debt

for Company L).

3. Buy 1% of the stock in Company NL for 666.67.

This leaves you with 33.33 for other

investments (400 + 300 - 666.67).

Page 29: Capital structure 2015

9-299-29

Completing an

Arbitrage Transaction

Original return on investment in Company L

400 x 16% = 64

Return on investment after the transaction

666.67 x 15% = 100 return on Company NL

300 x 12% = 36 interest paid

64 net return (100 - 36) AND 33.33 left over.

This reduces the required net investment to

366.67 to earn 64.

Page 30: Capital structure 2015

9-309-30

Summary of the

Arbitrage Transaction

• The equity share price in Company NL rises

based on increased share demand.

• The equity share price in Company L falls

based on selling pressures.

• Arbitrage continues until total firm values are

identical for companies NL and L.

• Therefore, all capital structures are equally asacceptable.

The investor uses “personal” rather than

corporate financial leverage.

Page 31: Capital structure 2015

9-319-31

MM Proposition I (No Taxes)

• We can create a levered or unlevered

position by adjusting the trading in our own

account.

• This homemade leverage suggests that

capital structure is irrelevant in

determining the value of the firm:

VL = VU

Page 32: Capital structure 2015

9-329-32

MM Proposition II (No Taxes)

• Proposition II

– Leverage increases the risk and return to

stockholders

Rs = R0 + (B / SL) (R0 - RB)

RB is the interest rate (cost of debt)

Rs is the return on (levered) equity (cost of equity)

R0 is the return on unlevered equity (cost of

capital)

B is the value of debt

SL is the value of levered equity

Page 33: Capital structure 2015

9-339-33

MM Proposition II (No Taxes)

Debt-to-equity Ratio

Cost

of

capit

al:

R (

%)

R0

RB

SBW ACC RSB

SR

SB

BR

)( 00 B

L

S RRS

BRR

RB

S

B

Page 34: Capital structure 2015

9-349-34

MM Propositions I & II (With Taxes)

• Proposition I (with Corporate Taxes)

– Firm value increases with leverage

VL = VU + TC B

• Proposition II (with Corporate Taxes)

– Some of the increase in equity risk and return

is offset by the interest tax shieldRS = R0 + (B/S)×(1-TC)×(R0 - RB)

RB is the interest rate (cost of debt)

RS is the return on equity (cost of equity)

R0 is the return on unlevered equity (cost of capital)

B is the value of debt

S is the value of levered equity

Page 35: Capital structure 2015

9-359-35

The Effect of Financial Leverage

Debt-to-equityratio (B/S)

Cost of capital: R(%)

R0

RB

)()1( 00 BC

L

S RRTS

BRR

S

L

LCB

LW ACC R

SB

STR

SB

BR

)1(

)( 00 B

L

S RRS

BRR

Page 36: Capital structure 2015

9-369-36

Example of the Effects

of Corporate Taxes

Consider two identical firms EXCEPT:

– Company ND -- no debt, 16% required return

– Company D -- 5,000 of 12% debt

– Corporate tax rate is 40% for each company

– NOI for each firm is 2,000

The judicious use of financial leverage

(i.e., debt) provides a favorable impact

on a company’s total valuation.

Page 37: Capital structure 2015

9-379-37

Earnings available to = E = O - I

common shareholders = 2,000 - 0= 2,000

Tax Rate (T) = 40%

Income available to = EACS (1 - T)

common shareholders = 2,000 (1 - .4) = 1,200

Total income available to = EAT + I

all security holders = 1,200 + 0= 1,200

Corporate Tax Example:

Company ND

Valuation of Company ND (Note: has no debt)

Page 38: Capital structure 2015

9-389-38

Earnings available to = E = O - I

common shareholders = 2,000 - 600= 1,400

Tax Rate (T) = 40%Income available to = EACS (1 - T)common shareholders = 1,400 (1 - .4)

= 840Total income available to = EAT + I

all security holders = 840 + 600= 1,440*

Corporate Tax Example:

Company D

Valuation of Company D (Note: has some debt)

* 240 annual tax-shield benefit of debt (i.e., 1,440 - 1,200)

Page 39: Capital structure 2015

9-399-39

Tax-Shield Benefits

Tax Shield -- A tax-deductible expense. The

expense protects (shields) an equivalent rupee

amount of revenue from being taxed by reducing

taxable income.

Present value of

tax-shield benefits

of debt*=

(r) (B) (tc)

r= (B) (tc)

* Permanent debt, so treated as a perpetuity

** Alternatively, 240 annual tax shield / .12 = 2,000, where

240=600 Interest expense x .40 tax rate.

= (5,000) (.4) = 2,000**

Page 40: Capital structure 2015

9-409-40

Value of the Levered Firm

Value of unlevered firm = 1,200 / .16

(Company ND) = 7,500*

Value of levered firm = 7,500 + 2,000

(Company D) = 9,500

Value of Value of Present value of

levered = firm if + tax-shield benefits

firm unlevered of debt

* Assuming zero growth and 100% dividend payout

Page 41: Capital structure 2015

9-419-41

Summary of

Corporate Tax Effects

• The greater the financial leverage, the lower

the cost of capital of the firm.

• The adjusted M&M proposition suggests an

optimal strategy is to take on the maximum

amount of financial leverage.

The greater the amount of debt, the greater the

tax-shield benefits and the greater the value of

the firm.

Page 42: Capital structure 2015

9-429-42

Financial Distress

• Financial distress arises when a firm is not able tomeet its obligations to debt-holders.

• For a given level of debt, financial distress occursbecause of the business (operating) risk . with higherbusiness risk, the probability of financial distressbecomes greater. Determinants of business risk are:

– Operating leverage (fixed and variable costs)

– Cyclical variations

– Intensity of competition

– Price fluctuations

– Firm size and diversification

Page 43: Capital structure 2015

9-439-43

Consequences of Financial Distress

– Bankruptcy costs

Specific bankruptcy costs include legal andadministrative costs along with the sale of assets at“distress” prices to meet creditor claims. Lendersbuild into their required interest rate the expectedcosts of bankruptcy which reduces the market value

of equity by a corresponding amount.– Indirect costs

• Investing in risky projects.

• Reluctance to undertake profitable projects.

• Premature liquidation.

• Short-term orientation.

Page 44: Capital structure 2015

9-449-44

Agency Costs

• Monitoring includes bonding of agents, auditing financial statements, and explicitly restricting management decisions or actions.

• Monitoring costs, like bankruptcy costs, tend to rise at an increasing rate with financial leverage.

Agency Costs -- Costs associated with monitoring

management to ensure that it behaves in ways

consistent with the firm’s contractual agreements with

creditors and shareholders.

Page 45: Capital structure 2015

9-459-45

Bankruptcy Costs,

Agency Costs, and Taxes

As financial leverage increases, tax-shield benefits increase as do bankruptcy and agency costs.

Value of levered firm

= Value of firm if unlevered

+ Present value of tax-shield benefits

of debt

- Present value of bankruptcy and

agency costs

Page 46: Capital structure 2015

9-469-46

Tax Effects and Financial Distress

Debt (B)

Value of firm (V)

0

Present value of taxshield on debt

Present value offinancial distress costs

Value of firm underMM with corporatetaxes and debt

VL = VU + TCB

V = Actual value of firm

VU = Value of firm with no debt

B*

Maximumfirm value

Optimal amount of debt

Page 47: Capital structure 2015

9-479-47

Optimum Capital Structure:

Trade-off Theory

• The optimum capital structure is a function of:– Agency costs associated with debt

– The costs of financial distress

– Interest tax shield

• The value of a levered firm is:Value of unlevered firm

+ PV of tax shield

– PV of financial distress (bankruptcy and

agency costs)

Page 48: Capital structure 2015

9-489-48

The Pecking-Order Theory

• Theory stating that firms prefer to issue

debt rather than equity if internal financing

is insufficient.

– Rule 1

• Use internal financing first

– Rule 2

• Issue debt next, new equity last

• The pecking-order theory is at odds with

the tradeoff theory:

– There is no target D/E ratio

– Profitable firms use less debt

– Companies like financial slack 16-48