Question

In: Finance

Prove MM proposition 1 without tax with an Example

Prove MM proposition 1 without tax with an Example

Solutions

Expert Solution

The MM proposition 1 say that the value of the firm is independent of the percentage of debt or equity in its capital structure.The main idea of the MM theory is that the capital structure of a company does not affect its overall value.

Proof:

Consider a company with no debt(Company G).Company G has a required rate of return of 12.5% and 100 shares outstanding.Suppose that one of three things could happen next year.With probability 1/2,everything will be normal.With probability 1/8,there will be a recession.With probability 3/8 there will be a boom.Possible outcomes for company G

Recession Normal Boom
Operating Income($) 100 250 300
EPS($) 1 2.5 3

Expected EPS=1/8*1+1/2*2.5+3/8*3

=$2.5

Per share value of company with this expeccted EPS=Expected EPS/Required rate of return

=2.5/12.5%=$20

Total value of company G(VG)=100*20=$2000

Suppose Company H is identical to company G in every way.Company H decides that it wants to try to increase value by issuing $1000 of debt and using the proceeds to repurchase shares.Suppose Company H can issue debt at the risk free rate of 10%(like company G its earning are stable).With $1000,company H is able to purchase 50 shares,so there are 50 shares are outstanding.

Possible outcome for company H:

Recession Normal Boom
Operating Income($) 100 250 300
Interest($) 100 100 100
Equity earnings($) 0 150 200
EPS($) 0 3 4

We want to show that the value of comapny H remains exactly the same as before the repurchase,namely exactly the same as that of company G.First suppose that the value of company H under the new capital structure increases.That is VH>$2000

I will show that this is impossible by constructing two strategies with equal future cash flows but different initial outlays;

Strategy 1:Buy one shares in company H

Cost:(VH-Value of debt)/no. of shares>$1000/$50=$20

Cash flows: Recession Normal Boom

Dividends on H 0 3 4

Strategy 2;Buy two shares in company G and borrows $20 at the risk free rate to be paid back in perpetuity.

Cost of strategy2:$40 -$20=$20

Cash flows:

Recession Normal Boom

Dividends on G    2 5 6

Pay back loan -2 -2 -2

Total 0 3 4

These two strategies cannot exist in equilibrium,because all investors would choose the cheaper strategy and no investor would choose the more expensive strategy.Therefore no investor would buy shares in company H and its value would fall until it equaled $2000.Changing capital structures cannot increase value.


Related Solutions

Which of these statements apply MM Proposition II without taxes? I. The expected return on equity...
Which of these statements apply MM Proposition II without taxes? I. The expected return on equity is positively related to leverage. II. The value of a firm cannot be changed by changing its capital structure. III. Risk to equity holders increases with leverage. IV. The expected return on equity is affected by the firm's debt-to-equity ratio. A. I, II, and III only B. II and IV only C. I, II, III, and IV D. I, III, and IV only Tiger...
Produce an equivalent proposition without implications (">") and without not's ("-") using DeMorgan's Laws and the...
Produce an equivalent proposition without implications (">") and without not's ("-") using DeMorgan's Laws and the implication rule. -Ǝ x Ǝy ∀z [ [ ( -X>Z ) > (Z > -Y)] + -(Y + Z )]
Prove the Converse of Proposition 3.3 by using Betweenness Axiom 1. The converse is Given B...
Prove the Converse of Proposition 3.3 by using Betweenness Axiom 1. The converse is Given B ? C ? D and A ? B ? D, then A ? B ? C and A ? C ? D. Please do not use "by mapping of letters"
The reason that MM Proposition I hold in the presence of corporate taxation is because:
  The reason that MM Proposition I hold in the presence of corporate taxation is because: Levered firms pay less taxes compared with identical unlevered firms. Bondholders require higher rates of return than stockholders do. Debt is more expansive than equity. Dividends become a tax shield. According to MM Proposition II with tax, the: Return on assets is determined by financial risk. Required return on equity is a linear function of the firm’s debt-equity ratio. Cost of equity is inversely...
Use the laws of propositional logic to prove that the following compound proposition is a tautologies...
Use the laws of propositional logic to prove that the following compound proposition is a tautologies (¬? ∧ (? ∨ ?)) → ?
Prove Proposition 6.10 (Let f : X → Y and g : Y → Z be...
Prove Proposition 6.10 (Let f : X → Y and g : Y → Z be one to one and onto functions. Then g ◦ f : X → Z is one to one and onto; and (g ◦ f)−1 = f−1 ◦ g−1 ).
Be sure to write clear steps for your derivations Explain MM Proposition I and II for...
Be sure to write clear steps for your derivations Explain MM Proposition I and II for capital structure. Provide some examples of the costs and benefits associated with debt and equity under market imperfections, and explain the concept of optimal capital structure.
Prove the following stronger variant of Proposition 7.4. Suppose C is collection of connected subsets of...
Prove the following stronger variant of Proposition 7.4. Suppose C is collection of connected subsets of a metric space X and B ∈ C. Show, if for each A ∈ C, A ∩ B not equal ∅, then Γ = ∪{C : C ∈ C} is connected. [Suggestion: Consider the collection D = {C ∪ B : C ∈ C}].
MM Proposition I with corporate taxes states that: capital structure can affect firm value. by raising...
MM Proposition I with corporate taxes states that: capital structure can affect firm value. by raising the debt-to-equity ratio, the firm can lower its taxes and thereby increase its total value. firm value is maximized at an all-equity capital structure. all of the above. both A and B.
The Ricardian equivalence proposition suggests that a government deficit caused by a tax cut (a) causes...
The Ricardian equivalence proposition suggests that a government deficit caused by a tax cut (a) causes inflation. (b)causes a current account deficit. (c) raises interest rates. (d) doesn’t affect consumption.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT