Title: Chapter 15: Debt Policy
1Topic Financial Leverage/Capital Structure Policy
Objectives
- Examine the effect of financial leverage on EPS
and ROE - Introduce the concept of homemade leverage
- Demonstrate the Capital Structure Irrelevance
Proposition in a world with no taxes and perfect
capital markets
2The Effect of Financial Leverage An Example
- Goal show how financial leverage works through
EPS and ROE. Currently no debt. Proposal to issue
debt and use the proceeds to buy back equity (a
restructuring). Assume no depreciation and no
taxes. Keep share price fixed for now. -
- Current Proposed
- Assets 1,000,000 1,000,000
- Debt 0 500,000
- Equity 1,000,000 500,000
- Debt/equity ratio 0 1
- Share Price 20 20
- Shares outstanding 50,000
25,000 - Interest rate 10 10
3- Recession Expected Expansion
- Current capital structure No debt
- EBIT 20,000 60,000 120,000
- Interest 0 0 0
- Net income 20,000 60,000
120,000 - ROE 2 6 12
- EPS .4 1.2 2.4
- Proposed capital structure D/E 1
- EBIT 20,000 60,000 120,000
- Interest 50,000 50,000
50,000 - Net income -30,000 10,000
70,000 - ROE -6 2 14
- EPS -1.2 .4 2.8
4The Effect of Financial Leverage
- We conclude that
- The effect of financial leverage depends upon
EBIT - When EBIT is high, financial leverage raised ROE
and EPS - The variability of ROE and EPS is increasing with
financial leverage - Overall higher financial leverage magnifies the
effect of changes in EBIT on ROE and EPS. Using
more debt makes ROE and EPS more risky.
5Corporate Borrowing and Homemade Leverage
- Homemade leverage the use of personal
borrowing/lending to change the overall amount of
financial leverage to which the individual is
exposed. - Example Suppose the firm did not change its
capital structure. We will show that investors
can replicate the returns from the proposed
capital structure by borrowing on their own. - Suppose a shareholder wants to invest 100 in
the firm, and prefers the proposed rather than
the current capital structure. - If the proposed capital structure is not
adopted, he buys 5 shares with her own money, and
5 shares by borrowing 100 at 10 interest. So he
replicates the returns under the proposed capital
structure while the cost of the investment is the
same.
6Homemade Leverage An Example
- Recession Expected Expansion
- Proposed capital structure D/E 1
- EPS -1.2 .4
2.8 - Earnings for 5 shares -6 2
14 - Net cost 5 shares at 20 100
- Original capital structure and homemade
leverage - EPS .4 1.2
2.4 - Earnings for 10 shares 4 12
24 - Less Interest on 100 at 10 10 10
10 - Net earnings -6 2
14 - Net cost 10 shares at 20 Amount borrowed
- 200 - 100 100
7Homemade Leverage Main conceptual point
- Suppose that investors can borrow or lend at the
same rate as the corporation (perfect capital
markets). - Then they can always use homemade leverage to
undo in their own portfolios any change in a
firms capital structure choice. - Thus, they can attain the same cash flows that
they would have attained without the firms
leverage change. - Therefore, investors are indifferent to changes
in the firms capital structure, and so share
prices should be the same regardless of capital
structure.
8Modigliani and Millers Proposition I
- Assumptions
- A1. No taxes
- A2. No capital market imperfections
- A3. The firms cash flows are independent of how
it is financed - Then the value of the firm is independent of its
capital structure - Understanding MM Prop. I
- Consider 2 firms with the same operating income
X every year. However, firm L is levered and
firm U is not. - Value of L VL EL DL , Value
of U VU EU -
- MM Proposition I VL VU
9Proof by the Non-arbitrage Argument
- Consider 2 firms that exist for one year, and
have the same operating income X at the end of
that year, and then liquidate. However, firm L is
levered and firm U is not. - Notation
- EL equity of levered firm
- DL debt of levered firm
- EU equity of unlevered firm
- X net cash flows, is the same for both levered
and unlevered firm - I payment of interest and principal. It is the
same for borrowing at the corporate or individual
level
10Proof by the Non-arbitrage Argument
- Prove MM Proposition I by contradiction
- Logic of proof suppose that VL gt VU.. Then,
according to MM, firm L is overpriced relative to
U. Thus, show that there is an arbitrage
opportunity (smart investors can obtain a profit
from this situation). Since arbitrage
opportunities cannot persist in perfect capital
markets, then our assumption of VL gt VU. is
false. In a similar way, we can show that VL lt
VU. cannot be true either. Thus we can conclude
that VL VU. , which completes the proof. - For brevity, we will only show that VL gt VU.
cannot be true
11The Arbitrage Opportunity
Suppose VL gt VU , that is EL DL gt
EU Current action CF Today CF Tomorrow Sell
short 1 of EL .01xEL -.01x(X-I) Borrow
amount to 1 of DL .01xDL -.01xI Use
proceeds to buy 1 of EU -.01xVU
.01xX Net Cash Flow .01xELDL-VUgt0
0 Remember that from the terminal cashflow X,
bondholders receive interest I, and shareholders
get what is left, X-I. Thus VL VU.
12Aside short-selling
- An investor who sells stock short borrows shares
from a brokerage house and sells them to another
buyer. Proceeds from the sale go into the
shorter's account. He must buy those shares back
(cover) at some point in time and return them to
the lender.
13Aside short-selling
- Thus, if you sell short 1000 shares of Gardner's
Gondolas at 20 a share, your account gets
credited with 20,000. If the boats start
sinking---since David Gardner, founder and CEO of
VENI, knows nothing about their design---and the
stock follows suit, tumbling to new lows, then
you will start thinking about "covering" your
short there for a very nice profit. Here's the
record of transactions if the stock falls to 8. - Borrowed and Sold Short 1000 shares at 20
20,000 Bought back and returned 1000 shares at
8 -8,000 - Profit 12,000
14Aside Short-selling
- But what happens if as the stock is falling, Tom
Gardner, boatsmen extraordinaire, takes over the
company at his brother's behest, and the holes
and leaks are covered. As the stock begins to
takes off, from 14 to 19 to 26 to 37, you
finally decide that you'd better swallow hard and
close out the transaction. You do so, buying back
shares of TOMY (new ticker symbol) at 37. - Here's the record of transaction
- Borrowed and sold short 1000 shares at 20
20,000 Bought back and returned 1000 shares at
37 -37,000 - Loss -17,000
15Aside short-selling
- Ouch. So you see, in the second scenario, when I,
your nemesis, took over the company, you lost
17,000...which you'll have to come up with.
There's the danger....you have to be able to buy
back the shares that you initially borrowed and
sold. Whether the price is higher or lower,
you're going to need to buy back the shares at
some point in time.
16ExampleEBIT and Leverage
- Probit Inc. has no debt outstanding and total
market value of 80,000. Earnings before interest
and taxes, EBIT, are projected to be 4000, if
economic conditions are normal. If there is a
strong expansion in the economy, then EBIT will
be 30 higher. If there is a recession, then EBIT
will be 60 lower. Probit is considering a
35,000 debt issue with a 5 interest rate. The
proceeds will be used to repurchase shares of
stock. There are currently 2,000 shares
outstanding. Ignore taxes. - A. Calculate EPS for all economic conditions
before any debt is issued. Calculate the
changes in EPS when the economy expands or enters
a recession. - B. Repeat part A assuming the probit goes through
with recapitalization. What do you observe?
17ExampleEBIT and Leverage
- A. Normal conditions EBIT4000, EPS4000/20002
- Expansion EBIT5200, EPS5200/20002.6
- Recession EBIT1600, EPS1600/2000.8
- Normal to Expansion, change in EPS30
- Normal to Recession, change in EPS-60
- B. Interest paid to debtholders,I535,0001750
- NIEBIT-I, no shares left(.45/.8)20001125
- Normal conditions EBIT2250, EPS2250/11252
- Expansion EBIT3450, EPS3450/11253.07
- Recession EBIT-150, EPS-150/1125-0.13
- Normal to Expansion, change in EPS53.5
- Normal to Recession, change in EPS-106.5
18Degree of Financial Leverage
- Degree of Financial Leverage change in EPS/
change in EBIT
19Topic Financial Leverage/Capital Structure Policy
Objectives
- Develop Modigliani and Millers Proposition II
- Analyze the effect of debt financing on the risk
and required return of shareholders - Understand the concepts of RA and ?A
- Determine the effect of a change in capital
structure on - - RA and ?A
- - RE, ?E and RD, ?D
20Example A
- No corporate tax, U-firm has 100 shares
outstanding at 10/share.VU 1,000 EU. Future
cash flow will depend on the state of the
economy - Boom Recession
- Probability 1/2 1/2
- CFs to equity 1,400 900
- Return on equity
- Expected return on equity
- Standard deviation of return on equity 25
21Example A
- Introduce leverage L-firm has 300 face value of
1-period riskless bonds outstanding (rate is
10). VL 1,000, EL 700, DL 300. - Boom Recession
- Probability 1/2 1/2
- Total future CFs 1,400 900
- CFs to debt 330 330
- CFs to equity 1,070 570
- Return on equity
- Expected return on equity
- Standard deviation of return to equity 35.8
- Expected return to debt 10
- Leverage increases both the risk and expected
return on equity
22Introducing Debt on WACC (RA)
- Unlevered firm
- Levered firm
- Conclusion
23MM Proposition II
- Assuming no corporate taxes and zero probability
of bankruptcy, - As leverage (D/E) ?, RE ?
- MM proposition II the expected rate of return on
equity of a levered firm increases in proportion
to the debt to equity ratio
24MM I II with No Taxes
RE
Cost of capital
WACCRA
RD
D/E
25Understanding the diagram
- MM Proposition I (VU VL) is reflected in the
fact that WACC does not depend on D/E. So capital
structure is irrelevant! - Intuition given that cash flows do not depend on
D/E, the market value of the firm is independent
of D/E only if the cost of capital (WACC) used to
discount those cash flows is also independent of
D/E. - MM Proposition II is reflected in the positive
slope of RE. - Intuition the expected return on equity
increases linearly with the D/E ratio (with
riskless debt). RE business risk financial
risk - Even though RE increases with D/E, WACC stays the
same because we assign a lower weight to RE and a
higher weight to RD.
26What if debt becomes risky?
- At high levels of leverage, debt can become
risky, in the sense that there is a positive
probability of bankruptcy. - If leverage increases the risk of the debt,
debtholders demand a higher return on the debt.
This causes the rate of increase in RE to slow
down. - Holders of risky debt begin to bear part of the
firms operating risk. As the firm borrows more,
the more this risk is shifted form stockholders
to bondholders.
27MM III with No Taxes and Risky Debt
28Change in Capital Structure when TC0
29Change in Capital Structure when TC0
- Suppose more debt is issued
- RE, ?E both go up
- RD, ?D stay the same (assuming probability of
bankruptcy0 at the original D/E)
30Example B
- Nodebt, Inc. is a firm with all-equity financing.
Its equity beta is .80. The t-bill rate is 5
and the market risk premium is expected to be
10. What is the Nodebts asset beta? What is
Nodebts WACC? The firm is exempt from paying
taxes. - If D0, then
31Example C
- Now suppose that Nodebt issues a little debt so
little debt, in fact, that investors perceive the
bonds to be risk-free. After the issue, the debt
comprises 10 of the firms capital structure and
the equity comprises 90. - a) What is the beta and required rate of return
on the debt? - b) What must be the new beta of and required rate
of return on the firms equity? - c) Calculate the WACC of the firm under the new
financing mix. Has WACC changed? - d) Interpret your result. Calculate the
weighted-average asset beta given the new
financing mix. Has weighted-average beta changed?
32- Since debt is riskless, the ßD0, and RD5
(risk-free rate). - ßE ßA x (1D/E) .8x(11/9) .8889
- RE RA(RA-RD)x(D/E) 13 (13-5)x(1/9)
13.8889 - WACC .9 x 13.8889 .1 x 5 13 (no
change) - When debt is issued, the risk of equity
increases and so does the required return on
equity. But the weight on the cost of equity in
the WACC calculation falls from 1 to .9, and the
remaining weight is placed on the cost of debt,
which is lower. Since changes in D/E do not
affect firm value (MM Prop. I), and cash flows
are not affected, then the WACC used to discount
those cash flows is not affected either. - d) ßA D/V x ßD E/V x ßE .1 x 0 .9 x .8889
.8 (no change)
33Topic Financial Leverage/Capital Structure Policy
Objectives
- Introduce taxes in the MM analysis
- Optimal capital structure is determined by the
tradeoff between - - Taxes savings
- - Bankruptcy costs
- Describe Go-for-Broke behavior
- Explain the Underinvestment Problem
34Does Capital Structure Policy Matter?
- MM propositions suggest that capital structure
does not matter in perfectly functioning capital
markets with no taxes, and no bankruptcy costs.
No matter how much the firm borrows, the value of
the firm remains the same, and so does the WACC. - In reality, however, managers do worry about a
firms capital structure. They try to find the
right mix to optimize firm value and to reduce
its cost of capital. What is going on?
35Introducing Corporate Taxes
- Interest tax shield The tax saving attained by a
firm from interest expenses - This saving is usually valued by discounting at
RD (the tax shield has the same risk as D). In
the case of perpetual debt, - MM I with Taxes
36MM I with Taxes
Value of the firm, VL
TC
TC ?D
VU
VU
Total debt, D
37Implications of MM I with taxes
- 1. Debt financing always increases firm value, so
using debt is very attractive. Capital structure
matters a lot! - 2. The value of the corporate tax shield is
represented in the lower after-tax cost of debt - This means that WACC decreases in leverage. Value
increases because we are discounting the cash
flows with a lower WACC.
38MM II with taxes
- Note that now WACC decreases with D/E
- So formula for MM II with taxes cannot be derived
from previous equation of WACC. - Define RU to be the WACC when D0, so RU is the
unleveraged cost of capital - MM II with taxes
- Implications are similar to the case without
taxes
39Corporate Taxes and WACC
- With taxes capital structure matters a lot!
- Now we know that the value of the tax shield
increases as D/E ratio increases. - Thus, with taxes firm value increases and the
cost of capital decreases with leverage - Big question why dont all business borrow as
much as they can? It seems that the optimal
capital structure is 100 debt! Having lots of
debt is always good?
40Optimal Capital Structure
- As D/E increases, the prob. of financial distress
also increases. One cost of having debt is
expected bankruptcy costs (legal and adm.
expenses difficulty of running a distressed
firm) - As the D/E ratio ?, the costs of financial
distress ? - The optimum capital structure is the D/E level at
which the PV of the tax shield from borrowing an
additional dollar is just offset by the increase
in the PV of financial distress costs - - This is the Static Theory of Capital Structure
41The Static Theory of Capital Structure
Firm Value, VL
PV(financial distress costs)
VL
PV(tax shields on debt)
Value of firm with no debt VU
VU
D
D
42Bankruptcy Costs
- Direct bankruptcy costs The costs that are
directly associated with bankruptcy, such as
legal and administrative expenses - Indirect bankruptcy costs The difficulties of
running a business that is experiencing financial
distress - Agency cost of equity can result from shirking by
owner-managers due to their diluted equity stake
at the firm. If the entrepreneur issues debt
rather than equity, then she has an incentive to
work harder (opposite direction as bankruptcy
costs).
43Examples of Bankruptcy Costs
- Go-for Broke behavior Shareholders of
financially distressed firms have the tendency to
invest in high risk, negative NPV projects (also
called risk-shifting) - Intuition if project succeeds, then shareholders
keep the benefit. If it fails, shareholders dont
lose anything due to limited liability. - Example
- Suppose a firm has 1,000 cash. The face value
due at the end of this year on the firms bonds
is 5,000. So if nothing happens the firm goes
bankrupt and is liquidated, bondholders get the
cash, and shareholders get nothing.
44Go-for-Broke Behavior Example
- Strategy A (safe) Firm could invest 1,000 in
government securities at 15. A the end of the
year the firms cash will be 1,150, the firm is
liquidated, bondholders get the cash,
shareholders still get nothing (but bondholders
get more). - Strategy B (very risky) Invest the 1,000 in a
project that will pay 20,000 with 2
probability, and zero otherwise. - But shareholders will typically prefer strategy B!
45Examples of Bankruptcy Costs
- Underinvestment Problem Shareholders of levered
firms forego investment in positive NPV projects
because debtholders will capture most of the
benefit (Debt overhang problem) - Suppose a firm has a very attractive project.
If it invests 2,000 now it will get back 11,000
for sure next year. The face value of debt due
next year is 10,000, R10 -
- NPV -2,000 11,000/1.1 8,000
-
46Underinvestment Problem
- A Suppose the firm has no cash and it cant
borrow via issuing debt due to its poor financial
condition and has to depend on the shareholders
for funding the project. - If shareholders fund the project, it will cost
them 2,000 now, and they will get 11,000 at the
end of the year. Since they have to pay 10,000
to bondholders, they will be able to recover only
1,000 of their original investment. So they will
not undertake the project even though it has a
positive NPV. - B Suppose the firm has 2,000 cash
- If they dont undertake the project,
shareholders lose the cash in liquidation. By
undertaking the project shareholders generate
11,000, of which 10,000 go to bondholders, so
they will keep 1,000, which is better than
nothing.
47Optimal Capital Structure A Recap
- Case I No taxes, no bankruptcy costs the total
value of the firm and its WACC are not affected
by capital structures - capital structure does
not matter. - Case II With corporate taxes and no bankruptcy
costs the value of the firm increases and the
WACC decreases as the amount of debt goes up
maximize borrowing - Case III With corporate taxes and bankruptcy
costs the value of the firm reaches a maximum
(WACC reaches a minimum) when the tax benefit
from an extra dollar in debt is exactly equal to
the increase in expected bankruptcy costs there
exists an optimal capital structure
48Examples
- Fordebtful Industries has a debt-equity ratio of
2.5. Its WACC is 12 and its cost of debt is 12.
The corporate tax rate is 35. - A) What is Fordebtfuls cost of equity capital?
- B) What is Fordebtfuls unlevered cost of equity
capital? - C) What would the cost of equity be if the
debt-equity ratio were 1.5gt - What if it were 1.0? What if it were 0?
49Examples
- QC corporation expects an EBIT of 7500 every
year forever. QC currently has no debt , and its
cost of equity is 17. The firm can borrow at
14. If the corporate tax rate is 38, what is
the value of the firm? What will the value be if
QC converts to 50 debt? To 100 debt?