16: Chapter Capital Structure: Limits to the Use of Debt 16.1 a. The value of a firms equity is the discounted expected cash flow to the firms stockholders. If there is a boom, Good Time will generate cash flow of $250 million. Since Good Time owes its bondholders $150 million, the firms stockholders will receive $100 million (= $250 million - $150 million) if there is a boom. If there is a recession, Good Time will generate a cash flow of $100 million. Since the bondholders have the right to the first $150 million that the firm generates, Good Time stockholders will receive $0 if there is a recession. The probability of a boom is 60%. The probability of a recession is 40%. The appropriate discount rate is 12%. The value of Good Times equity is: {(0.60)($100 million) + (0.40)($0)} / 1.12 = $53.57 million The value of Good Times equity is $53.57 million. b. Promised Return = (Face Value of Debt / Market Value of Debt) 1 Since the debt holders have been promised $150 million at the end of the year, the face value of Good Times debt is $150 million. The market value of Good Times debt is $108.93 million. The promised return on Good Times debt is: Promised Return = (Face Value of Bond / Market Value of Bond) 1 = ($150 million / $108.93 million) 1 = 0.3770 The promised return on Good Times debt is 37.70%. c. The value of a firm is the sum of the market value of the firms debt and equity. The value of Good Times debt is $108.93 million. As shown in part a, the value of Good Times equity is $53.57 million. The value of Good Time is: VL = B + S = $108.93 million + $53.57 million = $162.5 million The value of Good Time Company is $162.5 million. d. The market value of a firms debt is the discounted expected cash flow to the firms debt holders. If there is a boom, Good Time will generate cash flow of $250 million. Since Good Time owes its debt holders $150 million, the firms bondholders will receive $150 million if there is a boom. While the firms debt holders are owed $150 million, Good Time will only generate $100 million of cash flow if there is a recession. The firms debt holders cannot receive more than the firm can afford to pay them. Therefore, Good Times debt holders will only receive $100 million if there is a recession.
The probability of a boom is 60%. The probability of a recession is 40%. The appropriate discount rate is 12%. If no bankruptcy costs are priced into the debt, the value of Good Times debt is: {(0.60)($150 million) + (0.40)($100)} / 1.12 = $116.07 million Therefore, in a world with no bankruptcy costs, Good Times debt would be worth $116.07 million. e. The market value of a firms debt is the discounted expected cash flow to the firms debt holders. We know that the debt holders will receive $150 million in a boom and that the market value of the debt is $108.93 million. Let X be the amount that bondholders expect to receive in the event of a recession: $108.93 million = {(0.60)($150 million) + (0.40)(X)} / 1.12 X = $80 million Therefore, the market value of Good Times debt indicates that the firms bondholders expect to receive $80 million in the event of a recession. f. Since the firm will generate $100 million of cash flow in the event of a recession but the firms bondholders only expect to receive a payment of $80 million, Good Times cost of bankruptcy is expected to be $20 million (= $100 million - $80 million), should bankruptcy occur at the end of the year. Good Time expects bankruptcy costs of $20 million, should bankruptcy occur at the end of the year. 16.2 a. The total value of a firms equity is the discounted expected cash flow to the firms stockholders. If the expansion continues, each firm will generate earnings before interest and taxes of $2 million. If there is a recession each firm will generate earnings before interest and taxes of only $800,000. Since Steinberg owes its bondholders $750,000 at the end of the year, its stockholders will receive $1.25 million (= $2 million - $750,000) if the expansion continues. If there is a recession, its stockholders will only receive $50,000 (= $800,000 - $750,000). The market value of Steinbergs equity is: {(0.80)($1,250,000) + (0.20)($50,000)} / 1.15 = $878,261 The value of Steinbergs equity is $878,261. Steinbergs bondholders will receive $750,000 regardless of whether there is a recession or a continuation of the expansion. The market value of Steinbergs debt is: {(0.80)($750,000) + (0.20)($750,000)} / 1.15 = $652,174 The value of Steinbergs debt is $652,174. Since Dietrich owes its bondholders $1 million at the end of the year, its stockholders will receive $1 million (= $2 million - $1 million) if the expansion continues. If there is a recession, its stockholders
will receive nothing since the firms bondholders have a more senior claim on all $800,000 of the firms earnings. The market value of Dietrichs equity is: {(0.80)($1,000,000) + (0.20)($0)} / 1.15 = $695,652 The value of Dietrichs equity is $695,652. Dietrichs bondholders will receive $1 million if the expansion continues and $800,000 if there is a recession. The market value of Dietrichs debt is: {(0.80)($1,000,000) + (0.20)($800,000)} / 1.15 = $834,783 The value of Dietrichs debt is $834,783. b. The value of Steinberg is the sum of the value of the firms debt and equity. The value of Steinberg is: VL = B + S = $652,174 + $878,261 = $1,530,435 The value of Steinberg is $1,530,435. The value of Dietrich is the sum of the value of the firms debt and equity. The value of Dietrich is: VL = B + S = $834,783 + 695,652 = $1,530,435 The value of Dietrich is also $1,530,435. c. You should disagree with the CEOs statement. The risk of bankruptcy per se does not affect a firms value. It is the actual costs of bankruptcy that decrease the value of a firm. Note that this problem assumes that there are no bankruptcy costs.
16.3
Direct Costs: Legal and administrative costs: Costs associated with the litigation arising from a liquidation or bankruptcy. These costs include lawyers fees, courtroom costs, and expert witness fees. Indirect Costs: Impaired ability to conduct business: Firms may suffer a loss of sales due to a decrease in consumer confidence and loss of reliable supplies due to a lack of confidence by suppliers. Incentive to take large risks:
When faced with projects of different risk levels, managers acting in the stockholders interest have an incentive to undertake high-risk projects. Imagine a firm with only one project, which pays $100 in an expansion and $60 in a recession. If debt payments are $60, the stockholders receive $40 (= $100 - $60) in the expansion but nothing in the recession. The bondholders receive $60 for certain. Now, alternatively imagine that the project pays $110 in an expansion but $50 in a recession. Here, the stockholders receive $50 (= $110 - $60) in the expansion but nothing in the recession. The bondholders receive only $50 in the recession because there is no more money in the firm. That is, the firm simply declares bankruptcy, leaving the bondholders holding the bag. Thus, an increase in risk can benefit the stockholders. The key here is that the bondholders are hurt by risk, since the stockholders have limited liability. If the firm declares bankruptcy, the stockholders are not responsible for the bondholders shortfall. Incentive to under-invest: If a company is near bankruptcy, stockholders may well be hurt if they contribute equity to a new project, even if the project has a positive NPV. The reason is that some (or all) of the cash flows will go to the bondholders. Suppose a real estate developer owns a building that is likely to go bankrupt, with the bondholders receiving the property and the developer receiving nothing. Should the developer take $1 million out of his own pocket to add a new wing to a building? Perhaps not, even if the new wing will generate cash flows with a present value greater than $1 million. Since the bondholders are likely to end up with the property anyway, the developer will pay the additional $1 million and likely end up with nothing to show for it. Milking the property: In the event of bankruptcy, bondholders have the first claim to the assets of the firm. When faced with a possible bankruptcy, the stockholders have strong incentives to vote for increased dividends or other distributions. This will ensure them of getting some of the assets of the firm before the bondholders can lay claim to them. 16.4 You should disagree with the statement. If a firm has debt, it might be advantageous to stockholders for the firm to undertake risky projects, even those with negative net present values. This incentive results from the fact that most of the risk of failure is borne by bondholders. Therefore, value is transferred from the bondholders to the shareholders by undertaking risky projects, even if the projects have negative NPVs. This incentive is even stronger when the probability and costs of bankruptcy are high. A numerical example illustrating this concept is included in the solution to question 16.3 under the heading Incentive to take large risks. 16.5 You should recommend that the firm issue equity in order to finance the project. The tax-loss carry-forwards make the firms effective tax rate zero. Therefore, the company will not benefit from the tax shield that debt provides. Moreover, since the firm already has a moderate amount of debt in its capital structure, additional debt will likely increase the probability that the firm will face financial distress or bankruptcy. As long as there are bankruptcy costs, the firm should issue equity in order to finance the project. 16.6 a. If the low-risk project is undertaken, the firm will be worth $500 if the economy is bad and $700 if the economy is good. Since each of these two scenarios is equally probable, the expected value of the firm is $600 {= (0.50)($500) + (0.50)($700)}. If the high-risk project is undertaken, the firm will be worth $100 if the economy is bad and $800 if the economy is good. Since each of these two scenarios is equally probable, the expected value of the firm is $450 {= (0.50)($100) + (0.50)($800)}. The low-risk project maximizes the expected value of the firm.
b.
If the low-risk project is undertaken, the firms equity will be worth $0 if the economy is bad and $200 if the economy is good. Since each of these two scenarios is equally probable, the expected value of the firms equity is $100 {= (0.50)($0) + (0.50)($100)}. If the high-risk project is undertaken, the firms equity will be worth $0 if the economy is bad and $300 if the economy is good. Since each of these two scenarios is equally probable, the expected value of the firms equity is $150 {= (0.50)($0) + (0.50)($300)}.
c. d.
Risk-neutral investors prefer the strategy with the highest expected value. Fountains stockholders prefer the high-risk project since it maximizes the expected value of the firms equity. In order to make stockholders indifferent between the low-risk project and the high-risk project, the bondholders will need to raise their required debt payment so that the expected value of equity if the high-risk project is undertaken is equal to the expected value of equity if the low risk project is undertaken. As shown in part a, the expected value of equity if the low-risk project is undertaken is $100. If the high-risk project is undertaken, the value of the firm will be $100 if the economy is bad and $800 if the economy is good. If the economy is bad, the entire $100 will go to the firms bondholders and Fountains stockholders will receive nothing. If the economy is good, Fountains stockholders will receive the difference between $800, the total value of the firm, and the required debt payment. Let X be the debt payment that bondholders will require if the high-risk project is undertaken: Expected Value of Equity = (0.50)($0) + (0.50)($800 X) In order for stockholders to be indifferent between the two projects, the expected value of equity if the high-risk project is undertaken must be equal to $100. $100 = (0.50)($0) + (0.50)($800-X) X = $600
Therefore, the bondholders should promise to raise the required debt payment by $100 (= $600 - $500) if the high-risk project is undertaken in order to make Fountains stockholders indifferent between the two projects. 16.7 Stockholders can undertake the following measures in order to minimize the costs of debt: 1. Use Protective Covenants: Firms can enter into agreements with the bondholders that are designed to decrease the cost of debt. There are two types of Protective Covenants: i. Negative Covenants prohibit the company from taking actions that would expose the bondholders to potential losses. An example would be prohibiting the payment of dividends in excess of earnings. ii. Positive Covenants specify an action that the company agrees to take or a condition the company must abide by. An example would be agreeing to maintain its working capital at a minimum level. 2. Repurchase Debt: A firm can eliminate the costs of bankruptcy by eliminating debt from its capital structure.
3.
Consolidate Debt: If a firm decreases the number of debt holders, it may be able to decrease the direct costs of bankruptcy should the firm become insolvent.
16.8
Modigliani and Millers theory with corporate taxes indicates that, since there is a positive tax advantage of debt, the firm should maximize the amount of debt in its capital structure. In reality, however, no firm adopts an all-debt financing strategy. MMs theory ignores both the financial distress and agency costs of debt. The marginal costs of debt continue to increase with the amount of debt in the firms capital structure so that, at some point, the marginal costs of additional debt will outweigh its marginal tax benefits. Therefore, there is an optimal level of debt for every firm at the point where the marginal tax benefits of the debt equal the marginal increase in financial distress and agency costs. There are two major sources of the agency costs of equity: 1. Shirking Managers with small equity holdings have a tendency to reduce their work effort, thereby hurting both the debt holders and outside equity holders. More Perquisites Since management receives all the benefits of increased perquisites but only shoulder a fraction of the cost, managers have an incentive to overspend on luxury items at the expense of debt holders and outside equity holders. i. If Fortune remains an all-equity firm, its value will equal VU, the value of Fortune as an unlevered firm. The general expression for the value of a levered firm in a world with both corporate and personal taxes is: VL = VU + [ 1 {(1 TC)(1 TS) / (1 - TB)}] * B where VL VU B TC TS TB = the value of a levered firm = the value of an unlevered firm = the market value of the firms debt = the tax rate on corporate income = the personal tax rate on equity distributions = the personal tax rate on interest income
16.9
2.
16.10
a.
In this problem: B TC TS TB = $13,500,000 = 0.40 = 0.30 = 0.30
The value of Fortune as a levered firm is: VL = VU + [ 1 {(1 TC)(1 TS) / (1 - TB)}] * B = VU + [ 1 {1 0.40)(1 0.30) / (1 0.30)}] * $13,500,000 = VU + (0.40)($13,500,000) = VU + $5,400,000 As was stated in Chapter 15, stockholders prefer a policy that maximizes the value of the firm. Equity holders will prefer Fortune to become a levered firm since the debt will increase the firms value by $5.4 million.
ii. The IRS will prefer the plan that generates the highest amount of tax revenue. The IRS taxes corporate income at 40%, interest income at 30%, and equity distributions at 30%. Under the unlevered plan: The IRS generates $1,200,000 (= 0.40 * $3,000,000) of corporate tax revenue on the firms earnings and $540,000 (= 0.30 * $1,800,000) of personal tax revenue on Fortunes equity distributions. Since the firm has no debt, no interest payments are made, and the IRS will not generate any tax revenue on interest. The IRS generates $1,740,000 (= $1,200,000 + $540,000) of tax revenue under the unlevered plan. Under the levered plan: The IRS generates $660,000 (= 0.40 * $1,650,000) of corporate tax revenue on the firms earnings, $297,000 (= 0.30 * $990,000) of personal tax revenue on Fortunes equity distributions, and $405,000 (= 0.30 * $1,350,000) of personal tax revenue on the firms interest payments. The IRS generates $1,362,000 (= $660,000 + $297,000 + $405,000) of tax revenue under the levered plan. Since the all-equity plan generates higher tax revenues, the IRS will prefer an unlevered capital structure. iii. As an unlevered firm, Fortune would generate $1,800,000 of net income every year into perpetuity. Since the firm distributes all earnings to equity holders, this amount will be taxed at a rate of 30%, providing a $1,260,000 {= $1,800,000 * (1 0.30)} annual after-tax cash flow to the firms equity holders. Since stockholders demand a 20% return after taxes, the value of Fortune if it were an unlevered firm is equal to a perpetuity of $1,260,000 per year, discounted at 20%. VU = $1,260,000 / 0.20 = $6,300,000 The value of Fortune as an unlevered firm is $6.3 million. The general expression for the value of a levered firm in a world with both corporate and personal taxes is: VL = VU + [ 1 {(1 TC)(1 TS) / (1 - TB)}] * B where VL VU B TC TS TB = the value of a levered firm = the value of an unlevered firm = the market value of the firms debt = the tax rate on corporate income = the personal tax rate on equity distributions = the personal tax rate on interest income
In this problem: VU B TC TS TB = $6,300,000 = $13,500,000 = 0.40 = 0.30 = 0.30
The value of Fortune as a levered firm is: VL = VU + [ 1 {(1 TC)(1 TS) / (1 - TB)}] * B = $6,300,000 + [ 1 {1 0.40)(1 0.30) / (1 0.30)}] * $13,500,000 = $6,300,000 + (0.40)($13,500,000) = $11,700,000 The value of Fortune as a levered firm is $11.7 million. b. i. Under the unlevered plan, the firms earnings available to equity holders is $1,800,000. Since equity distributions are taxed at a rate of 20%, the annual after-tax cash flow to Fortunes equity holders is $1,440,000 {= $1,800,000 * (1 0.20)}. The annual after-tax cash flow to equity holders under the unlevered plan is $1,440,000. Under the levered plan, the firms earnings available to equity holders is $990,000. Since equity distributions are taxed at a rate of 20%, the annual after-tax cash flow to Fortunes equity holders is $792,000 {= $990,000 * (1 0.20)}. The annual after-tax cash flow to equity holders under the levered plan is $792,000. ii. Under the unlevered plan, Fortune will have no debt. The annual after-tax cash flow to debt holders under the unlevered plan is $0. Under the levered plan, the firm will annual make interest payments of $1,350,000 to debt holders. Since interest income is taxed at a rate of 55%, the annual after-tax cash flow to Fortunes debt holders is $607,500 {= $1,350,000 * (1 0.55)}. The annual after-tax cash flow to debt holder under the levered plan is $607,500 16.11 a. In their no tax model, MM assume that TC, TB, and C(B) are all zero. Under these assumptions, VL = VU, signifying that the capital structure of a firm has no effect on its value. There is no optimal debtequity ratio.
b. In their model with corporate taxes, MM assume that TC > 0 and both TB and C(B) are equal to zero.
Under these assumptions, VL = VU + TCB, implying that raising the amount of debt in a firms capital structure will increase the overall value of the firm. This model implies that the debt-equity ratio of every firm should be infinite.
c. If TS = 0 and the costs of financial distress are zero, the general expression for the value of a levered
firm equals: VL = VU + [ 1 {(1 TC) / (1 - TB)}] * B C(B) where VL VU B TC TB = the value of a levered firm = the value of an unlevered firm = the market value of a firms debt = the tax rate on corporate income = the personal tax rate on interest income
Therefore, the change in the value of an all-equity firm that issues debt and uses the proceeds to repurchase equity is:
Change in Value = [ 1 {(1 TC) / (1 - TB)}] * B In this problem: TC TB B C(B) = 0.34 = 0.20 = $1,000,000 =0
The change in the value of the firm is: Change in Value = [ 1 {(1 0.34) / (1 0.20)}] * $1,000,000 = $175,000 The value of the firm will increase by $175,000 if it issues $1 million of debt and uses the proceeds to repurchase equity.
d. If TS = 0 and the costs of financial distress are zero, the general expression for the value of a levered
firm equals: VL = VU + [ 1 {(1 TC) / (1 - TB)}] * B where VL VU B TC TB = the value of a levered firm = the value of an unlevered firm = the market value of a firms debt = the tax rate on corporate income = the personal tax rate on interest income
Therefore, the change in the value of an all-equity firm that issues $1 of perpetual debt instead of $1 of perpetual equity is: Change in Value = [1 {(1 TC) / (1 - TB)}] * ($1) If the firm is not able to benefit from interest deductions, the firms taxable income will remain the same regardless of the amount of debt in its capital structure, and no tax shield will be created by issuing debt. Therefore, the firm will receive no tax benefit as a result of issuing debt in place of equity. In other words, the effective corporate tax rate when considering the change in the value of the firm is zero. Debt will have no effect on the value of the firm since interest payments will not be tax deductible. In this problem: TC TB =0 = 0.20
The change in the value of the firm is: Change in Value = [1 {(1 TC) / (1 - TB)}] * ($1) = [1 {(1 0) / (1 0.20)}] * ($1) = -$0.25 The value of the firm will decrease by $0.25 if it adds $1 of perpetual debt rather than $1 of equity.
16.12
a.
If OPC decides to retire all of its debt, it will become an unlevered firm. The value of an all-equity firm is the present value of the firms after-tax cash flow to equity holders. VU = {(EBIT)(1 - TC)(1 TS)} / r0 where VU EBIT TC TS r0 = the value of an unlevered firm = the firms annual earnings before interest and taxes = the tax rate on corporate income = the tax rate on equity distributions = the required rate of return on the firms unlevered equity
In this problem: EBIT TC TS r0 = $1,100,000 = 0.35 = 0.10 = 0.20
The value of OPC as an all-equity firm is: VU = {(EBIT)(1 - TC)(1 TS)} / r0 = {($1,100,000)(1 0.35)(1 0.10)} / 0.20 = $3,217,500 The value of OPC will be $3,217,500 if it decides to retire its debt and become an all-equity firm. b. The general expression for the value of a levered firm in a world with both corporate and personal taxes is: VL = VU + [ 1 {(1 TC)(1 TS) / (1 - TB)}] * B where VL VU B TC TS TB = the value of a levered firm = the value of an unlevered firm =the market value of a firms debt = the tax rate on corporate income = the personal tax rate on equity distributions = the personal tax rate on interest income
In this problem: VU B TC TS TB = $3,217,500 = $2,000,000 = 0.35 = 0.10 = 0.25
The value of OPC as a levered firm is: VL = VU + [ 1 {(1 TC)(1 TS) / (1 - TB)}] * B = $3,217,500 + [ 1 {(1 0.35)(1 0.10) / (1 0.25)}] * $2,000,000 = $3,657,500 The value of OPC will be $3,657,500 if it remains a levered firm. 16.13 a. The value of an all-equity firm is the present value of the firms expected cash flows to equity holders.
VU = Expected (Operating Income) / r0 The estimates of Frodos annual operating income and their respective probabilities are listed below: Operating Income $1,000 $2,000 $4,200 Probability 0.1 0.4 0.5
The expected value of Frodos operating income is the probability-weighted average of its earnings estimates: Expected Value = ($1,000)(0.10) + ($2,000)(0.40) + ($4,200)(0.50) = $3,000 Frodos expected operating income every year is $3,000. Since Frodos expected operating income will remain unchanged into perpetuity and the required return on the firms unlevered equity is 20%, the value of Frodo in a world without taxes is: VU = Expected (Operating Income) / r0 = $3,000 / 0 .20 = $15,000 The value of Frodo in a world without taxes is $15,000. b. i. Modigliani-Miller Proposition I states that in a world without corporate taxes: VL = VU where VL = the value of a levered firm VU = the value of an unlevered firm
Changes in capital structure have no effect on the value of a firm in a world without taxes. Therefore, if Frodo issues $7,500 of 10% debt and uses the proceeds to repurchase equity, the value of the firm will remain at $15,000 in a world without taxes. In a world without taxes, the value of Frodo will remain at $15,000. ii. The value of a levered firm equals the market value of its debt plus the market value of its equity. VL = B + S The total value of Frodo (VL) is $15,000, and the market value of the firms debt (B) is $7,500. Therefore, the value of Frodos equity is: S = VL B = $15,000 - $7,500 = $7,500 The market value of Frodos equity equals $7,500 in a world without taxes. iii. According to Modigliani-Miller Proposition II (No Taxes):
rS = r0 + (B/S)(r0 rB) where r0 = the required rate of return on the equity of an unlevered firm rS = the required rate of return on the equity of a levered firm rB = the cost of debt
In this problem: r0 = 0.20 rB = 0.10 B = $7,500 S = $7,500 The required rate of return on Frodos levered equity is: rS = r0 + (B/S)(r0 rB) = 0.20 + ($7,500 / $7,500)(0.20 0.10) = 0.20 + (1)(0.20-0.10) = 0.30 The required rate of return on Frodos levered equity is 30%. iv. In the absence of taxes, a firms weighted average cost of capital (rwacc) equals: rwacc where = {B / (B+S)} rB + {S / (B+S)}rS B = the market value of the firms debt S = the market value of the firms equity rB = the cost of debt rS = the required return on a firms equity.
In this problem: B = $7,500 S = $7,500 rB = 0.10 rS = 0.30 Frodos weighted average cost of capital is: rwacc = = = = {B / (B+S)} rB + {S / (B+S)}rS {$7,500 / ($7,500 + $7,500)}(0.10) + {$7,500 / ($7,500 + $7,500)}(0.30) (1/2)(0.10) + (1/2)(0.30) 0.20
Frodos weighted average cost of capital is 20%. c. i. Taxes will decrease the value of the firm because the government becomes a claimant on the firms assets. Recall that the size of the pie does not change, but now less is available for the firms stockholders and bondholders.
ii. Modigliani-Miller Proposition I states that in a world with corporate taxes: VL = VU + TCB where VL VU TC B = the value of a levered firm = the value of an unlevered firm = the corporate tax rate = the value of debt in a firms capital structure
The value of an all-equity firm is the present value of the firms after-tax cash flow to equity holders. VU = Expected (Operating Income)*(1 TC) / r0 = {$3,000*(1 - .40)} / 0 .20 = $9,000 Thus: VU = $9,000 TC = 0.40 B = $7,500
The value of Frodo in a world with corporate taxes is: VL = VU + TCB = $9,000 + (0.40)($7,500) = $12,000 The value of Frodo is $12,000 if corporate income is taxed at a rate of 40%. d. The general expression for the value of a levered firm in a world with both corporate and personal taxes is: VL = VU + [ 1 {(1 TC)(1 TS) / (1 - TB)}] * B Where VL VU B TC TS TB = the value of a levered firm = the value of an unlevered firm = the market value of a firms debt = the tax rate on corporate income = the personal tax rate on equity distributions = the personal tax rate on interest income
The value of an all-equity firm (VU) is the present value of the firms expected after-tax cash flows to equity holders. VU = {Expected (Operating Income)*(1 - TC)(1 TS)} / r0 where VU TC TS r0 = the value of an unlevered firm = the tax rate on corporate income = the tax rate on equity distributions = the required rate of return on the firms unlevered equity
In this problem: E(OI) TC TS r0 = $3,000 = 0.40 = 0.15 = 0.20
The value of Frodo as an all-equity firm in a world with both corporate and personal taxes is: VU = {Expected (Operating Income)*(1 - TC)(1 TS)} / r0 = {($3,000)(1 0.40)(1 0.15)} / 0.20 = $7,650 Thus: VU B = $7,650 = $7,500
TC TS TB
= 0.40 = 0.15 = 0.35
The value of Frodo as a levered firm in a world with both corporate and personal taxes is: VL = VU + [ 1 {(1 TC)(1 TS) / (1 - TB)}] * B = $7,650 + [ 1 {(1 0.40)(1 0.15) / (1 0.35)}]*$7,500 = $9,265 The value of Frodo as a levered firm is $9,265 in a world with both corporate and personal taxes. 16.14 a. The president is incorrect when he claims that common stock is the cheapest form of financing. While 9.5% is the lowest pre-tax rate that Mueller can obtain, the lowest after-tax rate that the firm can obtain is 11.05% [= (1 0.35)(0.17)] on the pollution-control bonds. Mr. Daniels is also incorrect. If there are personal taxes, the increase in the value of the firm is not simply TCB; rather, the increase in firm value would be [1 {(1 TC)(1 TS) / (1 - TB)}] * B. Ms. Henderson is also incorrect. Consider the following expression for the increase in firm value due to debt: V = [1 {(1 TC)(1 TS) / (1 - TB)}] * B
If the corporate bonds are issued: TC TS TB B V = 0.35 =0 = 0.15 = $100 million
= [1 {(1 TC)(1 TS) / (1 - TB)}] * B = [1 {(1 0.35)(1 0) / (1 0.15)}] * $100 million = $23.53 million
If the corporate bonds are issued, the value of the firm will increase by $23.53 million. If the pollution-control bonds are issued: TC TS TB B V = 0.35 =0 =0 = $100 million
= [1 {(1 TC)(1 TS) / (1 - TB)}] * B = [1 {(1 0.35)(1 0) / (1 0)}] * $100 million = $35 million
If the pollution-control bonds are issued, the value of the firm will increase by $35 million. Therefore, Ms. Hendersons claim that the debt choice does not matter is also incorrect. b. Mueller should not be indifferent about which financing plan it chooses. Issuing equity adds no value to the firm, and the two debt alternatives add different amounts to the value of the firm.
Ranking the alternatives: Type of Financing 1. Pollution Control Bonds 2. Corporate Bonds 3. Common Stock Value Added $35 million $23.53 million $0
Note that this analysis only implies that debt adds value relative to equity. The absolute value of this firm is likely to fall with any of the three financing choices since pollution-control equipment represents a cash outflow. 16.15 a. The general expression for the value of a levered firm in a world with both corporate and personal taxes is: VL = VU + [ 1 {(1 TC)(1 TS) / (1 - TB)}] * B C(B) where VL VU B TC TB C(B) = the value of a levered firm = the value of an unlevered firm = the market value of the firms debt = the tax rate on corporate income = the personal tax rate on interest income = the present value of the costs of financial distress and agency costs
The value of an all-equity firm (VU) is the present value of the firms after-tax cash flows to equity holders. VU = {(EBIT)(1 - TC)(1 TS)} / r0 where VU EBIT TC TS r0 = the value of an unlevered firm = the firms earnings before interest and taxes = the tax rate on corporate income = the tax rate on equity distributions = the required rate of return on the firms unlevered equity
In this problem: EBIT TC TS r0 = $800,000 = 0.35 =0 = 0.10
The value of Weinberg as an all-equity firm in a world with both corporate and personal taxes is: VU = {(EBIT)(1 - TC)(1 TS)} / r0 = {($800,000)(1 0.35)(1 0)} / 0.10 = $5,200,000 Thus: VU B TC TS TB C(B) = $5,200,000 = $1,200,000 = 0.35 =0 = 0.15 = $60,000 (= 0.05 * $1,200,000)
The value of Weinberg as a levered firm in a world with both corporate and personal taxes is:
VL = VU + [ 1 {(1 TC)(1 TS) / (1 - TB)}] * B C(B) = $5,200,000 + [ 1 {(1 0.35)(1 0) / (1 0.15)}]*$1,200,000 - $60,000 = $5,422,353 The value of Weinberg as a levered firm is $5,422,353 in a world with both corporate and personal taxes. b. Since the value of Weinberg is $5,200,000 as an unlevered firm and $5,422,353 as a levered firm, the added value of including debt in the firms capital structure is $222,353 (= $5,422,353 - $5,200,000). The added value of the firms debt is $222,353. 16.16 a. Since NETC is an all-equity firm, its cost of capital is equal to the required return on its equity. Use the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) to determine the required return on NETCs unlevered equity. According to CAPM: where rS rf E(rm) S rS = rf + S{E(rm) rf}
= the required return on a firms equity = the expected return on a risk-free asset = the expected rate of return on the market portfolio = the beta of a firms equity
The beta of a firms equity is equal to: S = Cov(x, m) / 2m where Cov(x, m) = the covariance between the return on the firms common stock and the return on the market portfolio 2m = the variance of returns on the market portfolio
In this problem: Cov(x, m) = 0.048 2m = 0.04 The beta of NETCs equity is: S = Cov(x, m) / 2m = 0.048 / 0.04 = 1.2 Thus: rf = 0.10 E(rm) = 0.20 S = 1.2
The required return on NETCs capital is: rS = rf + S{E(rm) rf} = 0.10 + 1.2(0.20 0.10) = 0.22
NETCs overall cost of capital is 22%.
b.
NETC should purchase the machine with the higher net present value (NPV). Remember that the firm will need a machine for the next four years. Since the economic life of the Heavy-Duty Model is four years, the firm will only need to purchase the machine once. NPVHEAVY DUTY = -Price + PV(Annual Cost Savings) + PV(Depreciation Tax Shield) The Heavy-Duty Model will generate $640 of cost savings every year for four years. This is equivalent to the firm generating $640 of additional earnings each year for four years. Because these earnings are subject to a corporate income tax of 34%, the annual after-tax cash flow created by the firms additional savings is $422.40 {= $640(1 0.34). Since the required return on NETCs equity is 22%, the firms after-tax annual cost savings can be valued as an annuity with four annual payments of $422.40, discounted at 22%. PV(Annual Cost Savings) = $422.40A40.22 = $1,053.31 NETC uses straight-line depreciation. Since the economic life of the Heavy-Duty Model is four years, NETC will recognize an annual depreciation expense of $250 (= $1,000 / 4 years). The annual tax shield provided by this added expense is $85 (= $250*0.34). The depreciation tax shield is valued as a four-year annuity with annual payments of $85, discounted at 22%. PV(Depreciation Tax Shield) = $85A40.22 = $211.96 The NPV of the Heavy-Duty Model is: NPVHEAVY DUTY = -Price + PV(Annual Cost Savings) + PV(Depreciation Tax Shield) = -$1,000 + $1,053.31 + $211.96 = $265.27 The NPV of the Heavy-Duty Model is $265.27. Since the economic life of the Light-Weight Model is only 2 years, the firm will need to buy one machine now and one in two years. The cash flows associated with the second purchase must be discounted by two years. NPVLIGHT WEIGHT = -Price + PV(Annual Cost Savings) + PV(Depreciation Tax Shield) + {(- Price + PV(Annual Cost Savings) + PV(Depreciation Tax Shield)} / (1.22)2
The Light-Weight Model will generate annual cost savings of $616 for two years. This is equivalent to the firm generating $616 of additional earnings each year for two years. Since these earnings are subject to a corporate income tax of 34%, the annual after-tax cash flow created by the firms additional savings is $406.56 {= $616(1 0.34). Since the required return on NETCs equity is 22%, the firms after-tax annual cost savings can be valued as a two-year annuity with annual payments of $406.56, discounted at 22%. PV(Annual Cost Savings) = $406.56A20.22 = $606.40 NETC uses straight-line depreciation. Since the economic life of the Light-Weight Model is two years, NETC will recognize an annual depreciation expense of $250 (= $500 / 2 years). The annual tax shield provided by this added expense is $85 (= $250*0.34). This depreciation tax shield is valued as a twoyear annuity with annual payments of $85, discounted at 22%.
PV(Depreciation Tax Shield) = $85A20.22 = $126.78 The NPV of the Light-Weight Model is: NPVLIGHT WEIGHT = -Price + PV(Annual Cost Savings) + PV(Depreciation Tax Shield) + {(- Price + PV(Annual Cost Savings) + PV(Depreciation Tax Shield)} / (1.22)2 = -$500 + $606.40 + $126.78 + {(-$500 + $606.40 + $126.78)} / (1.22)2 = $389.84 The NPV of the Light-Weight Model is $389.84. Since its NPV is higher, NETC should purchase the Light-Weight Model. c. i. Modigliani-Miller Proposition I states that in a world with corporate taxes: VL = VU + TCB where VL VU TC B = the value of a levered firm = the value of an unlevered firm = the corporate tax rate = the value of debt in a firms capital structure
In this problem: VU = $10 million B = $2 million TC = 0.34 The new value of NETC will be: VL = VU + TCB = $10,000,000 + (0.34)($2,000,000) = $10,680,000 The value of the NETC will be $10,680,000 if the CFOs plan adopted. ii. The value of a levered firm is the sum of the market value of the firms debt and the market value of the firms equity. VL = B + S In this problem: VL = $10,680,000 B = $2,000,000 Therefore, the value of NETCs levered equity must be: S = VL B = $10,680,000 - $2,000,000 = $8,680,000
The value of NETCs levered equity is $8,680,000.
d.
Since the value of NETC as a levered firm is $10,680,000 and costs of financial distress are 2% of this value, the NETCs costs of financial distress total $213,600 (= 0.02 * $10,680,000). This reduces the firms value to $10,466,400. Since this amount is greater than $10 million, the value of NETC as an unlevered firm, adding debt to the firms capital structure increases the firms value. NETC should not remain an unlevered firm.