1.16k likes | 1.5k Views
CHAPTER 16-7 Capital Structure Decisions: The Basics (Short version). Business vs. financial risk Capital structure theory Setting the optimal capital structure. Capital Structure Decisions: Extensions. MM models Miller model Financial distress and agency costs Tradeoff models.
E N D
CHAPTER 16-7Capital Structure Decisions: The Basics (Short version) • Business vs. financial risk • Capital structure theory • Setting the optimal capital structure
Capital Structure Decisions: Extensions • MM models • Miller model • Financial distress and agency costs • Tradeoff models
HOW DO YOU MEASURE THE VALUE OF THE FIRM? • From the perspective of capital structure theory, the answer is: • V = S(market value of equity--common and preferred) + D (market value of debt. • Key question: Does the ratio of Debt to equity (D/S) affect the value of the firm?
ISOLATION OF FINANCING DECISION • When discussing optimal capital structure, to isolate this decision, we insist that any issuance of debt must be accompanied by a repurchase of stock; and any issuance of stock must be accompanied by a retirement of debt. • Hence, only debt-equity ratio changes; no increase or decrease in “size” of the firm.
Isolation of financing decision (continued) • By this isolation, the financing decision is isolated from decisions relating to asset management or investment decisions of the firm
Data of industrial debt equity ratiosInsert graphs • Do these represent “optimal” capital structure, or • Do they simply represent stupidity on the part of financial managers?
DIGRESSION: TAX SHIELD • Advantage of debt in a world of corporate taxes is that interest payments are a tax-deductible expense to the debt-issuing firm; however dividends are not tax-deductible. • Hence, total amount of funds available to pay both debtholders and shareholders is greater if debt is employed. gman208n\txshld.xls
EV(tax shield benefits): • Tax savings are not usually certain, as implied above, because: • if taxable income is low or negative, tax benefits are reduced, or even eliminated • if firm should go bankrupt and liquidate, future tax benefits stop. • uncertainty that Congress may change the tax rate.
Business Risk versus Financial Risk • Business risk: • Uncertainty in future EBIT. • Depends on business factors such as competition, operating leverage, etc. • Financial risk: • Additional business risk concentrated on common stockholders when financial leverage is used. • Depends on the amount of debt and preferred stock financing. • Concentrates business risk on stockholders.
Business Risk vs. Financial Risk • Firm’s total risk (to its stockholders) is the sum of its business and financial risk: • Total risk = Business risk + financial risk
Total (stand alone) risk vs. market risk • Risk may be measured in either a total (stand alone) risk or a market risk framework. This is similar to the discussion of total vs. market risk in portfolio theory.
How are financial and business risk measured in a stand-alone (or total) risk framework, i.e., the stock is not held in a portfolio? Stand-alone Business Financial risk risk risk = + . Stand-alone risk = sROE. Business risk = sROE(U). Financial risk = sROE - sROE(U).
Now consider the fact that EBIT is not known with certainty. What is the impact of uncertainty on stockholder profitability and risk for Firm U and Firm L? • Suppose, the unleveraged firm issues $10K of debt and buys back $10K of equity.
Economy Bad Avg. Good Prob. 0.25 0.50 0.25 EBIT $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 Interest 0 0 0 EBT $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 Taxes (40%) 800 1,200 1,600 NI $1,200 $1,800 $2,400 Firm U: Unleveraged A=20K, D=0,E=20K
Economy Bad Avg. Good Prob.* 0.25 0.50 0.25 EBIT* $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 Interest 1,200 1,200 1,200 EBT $ 800 $1,800 $2,800 Taxes (40%) 320 720 1,120 NI $ 480 $1,080 $1,680 Firm L: Leveraged *Same as for Firm U. A=20K, D=10K, E=10K, int=.12
Firm U Bad Avg. Good BEP 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% ROI* 6.0% 9.0% 12.0% ROE 6.0% 9.0% 12.0% TIE Firm L Bad Avg. Good BEP 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% ROI* 8.4% 11.4% 14.4% ROE 4.8% 10.8% 16.8% TIE 1.7x 2.5x 3.3x 8 8 8 *ROI = (NI + Interest)/Total financing.
Profitability Measures: U L E(BEP) 15.0% 15.0% E(ROI) 9.0% 11.4% E(ROE) 9.0% 10.8% Risk Measures: ROE 2.12% 4.24% CVROE 0.24 0.39 E(TIE) 2.5x 8
Conclusions • Basic earning power = BEP = EBIT/Total assets is unaffected by financial leverage. • L has higher expected ROI and ROE because of tax savings. • L has much wider ROE (and EPS) swings because of fixed interest charges. Its higher expected return is accompanied by higher risk. (More...)
In a stand-alone risk sense, Firm L’s stockholders see much more risk than Firm U’s. • U and L: ROE(U) = 2.12%. • U: ROE = 2.12%. • L: ROE = 4.24%. • L’s financial risk is ROE - ROE(U) = 4.24% - 2.12% = 2.12%. (U’s is zero.) (More...)
For leverage to be positive (increase expected ROE), BEP must be > rd. • If rd > BEP, the cost of leveraging will be higher than the inherent profitability of the assets, so the use of financial leverage will depress net income and ROE. • In the example, E(BEP) = 15% while interest rate = 12%, so leveraging “works.”
In Fact: • ROE = BEP + (BEP - rd)(1-T) * (D/E)
Market risk framework Market Risk Framework • Hamada’s equation provides the relationship between business risk and financial risk: • rsL= rrf + (rm - rrf)bu + (rm - rrf) bu(1-T)(D/S) • = Time value premium business risk premium + financial risk premium + But also, rsL= rrf + (rm - rrf) bL
Market risk framework (continued) • Therefore, • rrf + (rm - rrf) bu + (rm - rrf) bu(1-T)(D/S) = rrf + (rm - rrf) bL or bL = bu + bu(1-T)(D/S) business risk Total risk = financial risk +
Hamada equation for beta: bL = + = + = + . bU Unlevered beta, which reflects the riskiness of the firm’s assets Business risk bU(1 - T)(D/S) Increased volatility of the returnsto equitydue to the use of debt Financialrisk
Consider financial risk term: bu(1-T)(D/S) The higher the D/S, the higher the financial risk The higher the T, the lower the financial risk. Why?
Market risk framework (continued) • or , another way to write total risk bL = bu [1 + (1-T)(D/S)] or bu = bL / [1 + (1-T)(D/S)]
Trade-off Theory • MM theory ignores bankruptcy (financial distress) costs, which increase as more leverage is used. • At low leverage levels, tax benefits outweigh bankruptcy costs. • At high levels, bankruptcy costs outweigh tax benefits. • An optimal capital structure exists that balances these costs and benefits.
Here’s a valuation model which includes financial distress and agency costs. • [X] represents either Tc in the MM model or the more complex Miller term. • Conclusion: Optimal leverage involves a tradeoff between the tax benefits of debt financing and the costs associated with financial distress and agency. PV of agency costs PV of expected financial distress VL = VU + [X]D - -
VL = VU + [X]D - PV(fin.dist.costs) - PV(agency costs) Tax effect alone Value of Firm ($) Net Tax effect alone 4 3 2 1 Financial distress and agency costs W/ taxes and bankruptcy and agency costs Debt ($) Opt. Capital structure
Relationship between value and leverage. Value of Firm ($) 4 3 2 1 Debt ($) Another view
Relationships between capital costs and leverage considering financial distress and agency costs. Cost of Capital (%) ks 14 4 WACC kd Debt ($)
Define financial distress andagency costs. Financial distress: As firms use more and more debt financing, they face a higher probability of future financial distress, which brings with it lower sales, EBIT, and bankruptcy costs. Lowers value of stock and bonds. Agency costs: The costs of monitoring managers’ actions. Increases with leverage. More on agency and bankruptcy costs
Bankruptcy Costs • In a bankruptcy, bondholders are likely to hire lawyers to negotiate or sue the company. Similarly, the firm is likely to hire lawyers to protect itself. Costs are also incurred in a bankruptcy. These fees are all paid before the bondholder gets paid. • Further, costs of purchasing inputs by a risky (subject to bankruptcy) firm increase.
BANKRUPTCY COSTS (cont’d) • The possibility of bankruptcy has a negative effect on the value of the firm. • It is not the RISK of bankruptcy, but rather it is the COSTS associated with bankruptcy that lower value. • Bankruptcy eats up part of the “pie” leaving less for stockholders and bondholders.
AGENCY COSTS • Definition: A contract under which one or more people (principals) hire another person (agent) to perform some service and then delegates decision making authority to that agent.
Types of Agency Cost relationships • Stockholders vs. management • Stockholders vs. bondholders: Recall Marriott example. Assets 200 Debt 100 Assets 100 Debt 100 Eq. 100 Assets 100 Equity 100
Event Risk • The risk that some deliberate action or event will convert a high-grade bond into a junk bond overnight and thus lead to a sharp decline in it value. E.g. Marriott or RJR. Effect of adding more and more debt: From the stockholder’s point of view: Heads I win {risks pay off}; Tails you (the bondholder) lose.{risks don’t pay off}
AGENCY COSTS • If a company were to sell only a small amount of debt, the debt would have: • low risk • a high bond rating • a low interest rate • However, if, after it sold the low risk debt, it issued more debt, secured by the same assets…
This would: • Raise risk faced by all bondholders • Cause rd to rise • Cause original bondholders to suffer capital losses
Similarly, suppose that after issuing the new debt, the firm decides to restructure its assets: • Selling of low risk assets, and • Acquiring riskier assets, which have a higher expected rates of return
If things work out, stockholders benefit; • If things don’t work out, most of the loss falls on the leveraged bondholders: • Stockholders are playing the game “Heads I win, tails you lose” with the bondholders.