Chapter 14 Global Cost and Availability of Capital

Copyright 2010 Pearson Prentice Hall. All rights reserved.

Chapter 14

Global Cost and Availability of Capital

Thursday, May 28, 2015

Copyright 2010 Pearson Prentice Hall. All rights reserved. 14-


Global integration of capital markets has given many firms access to new and cheaper sources of funds beyond those available in their home markets.

If a firm is located in a country with illiquid, small, and/or segmented capital markets, it can achieve this lower global cost and greater availability of capital by a properly designed and implemented strategy.


KiddakronHighlight

KiddakronHighlight

KiddakronHighlight

KiddakronHighlight


Exhibit 14.1 Dimensions of the Cost and Availability of Capital Strategy




A firm that must source its long-term debt and equity in a highly illiquid domestic securities market will probably have a relatively high cost of capital and will face limited availability of such capital which will, in turn, damage the overall competitiveness of the firm.

Firms resident in industrial countries with small capital markets may enjoy an improved availability of funds at a lower cost, but would also benefit from access to highly liquid global markets.




Firms resident in countries with segmented capital markets must devise a strategy to escape dependence on that market for their long-term debt and equity needs.

A national capital market is segmented if the required rate of return on securities in that market differs from the required rate of return on securities of comparable expected return and risk traded on other securities markets.



Weighted Average Cost of Capital

A firm normally finds its weighted average cost of capital (WACC) by combining the cost of equity with the cost of debt in proportion to the relative weight of each in the firms optimal long-term financial structure:

kWACC = keE + kd(1-t)D V V




kWACC = weighted average after-tax cost of capital

ke = risk-adjusted cost of equity

kd = before-tax cost of debt

t = marginal tax rate

E = market value of the firms equity

D = market value of the firms debt

V = total market value of the firms securities (D+E)




The capital asset pricing model (CAPM) approach is to define the cost of equity for a firm by the following formula:

ke = krf + j(km krf)




ke = expected (required) rate of return on equity

krf = rate of interest on risk-free bonds (Treasury bonds, for example)

j = coefficient of systematic risk for the firm

km = expected (required) rate of return on the market portfolio of stocks




The normal procedure for measuring the cost of debt requires a forecast of interest rates for the next few years, the proportions of various classes of debt the firm expects to use, and the corporate income tax rate.

The interest costs of different debt components are then averaged (according to their proportion).

The before-tax average, kd, is then adjusted for corporate income taxes by multiplying it by the expression (1-tax rate), to obtain kd(1-t), the weighted average after-tax cost of debt.




The weighted average cost of capital is normally used as the risk-adjusted discount rate whenever a firms new projects are in the same general risk class as its existing projects.

On the other hand, a project-specific required rate of return should be used as the discount rate if a new project differs from existing projects in business or financial risk.




In practice, calculating a firms equity risk premium is quite controversial.

While the CAPM is widely accepted as the preferred method of calculating the cost of equity for a firm, there is rising debate over what numerical values should be used in its application (especially the equity risk premium).

This risk premium is the average annual return of the market expected by investors over and above riskless debt, the term (km krf).




While the field of finance does agree that a cost of equity calculation should be forward-looking, practitioners typically use historical evidence as a basis for their forward-looking projections.

The current debate begins with a debate over what actually happened in the past.



The Demand for Foreign Securities: The Role of International Portfolio Investors

Gradual deregulation of equity markets during the past three decades not only elicited increased competition from domestic players but also opened up markets to foreign competitors.

To understand the motivation of portfolio investors to purchase and hold foreign securities requires an understanding of the principals of:

portfolio risk reduction; portfolio rate of return, and foreign currency risk.




Both domestic and international portfolio managers are asset allocators whose objective is to maximize a portfolios rate of return for a given level of risk, or to minimize risk for a given rate of return.

Since international portfolio managers can choose from a larger bundle of assets than domestic portfolio managers, internationally diversified portfolios often have a higher expected rate of return, and nearly always have a lower level of portfolio risk since national securities markets are imperfectly correlated with one another.




Market liquidity (observed by noting the degree to which a firm can issue a new security without depressing the existing market price) can affect a firms cost of capital.

In the domestic case, a firms marginal cost of capital will eventually increase as suppliers of capital become saturated with the firms securities.

In the multinational case, a firm is able to tap many capital markets above and beyond what would have been available in a domestic capital market only.




Capital market segmentation is caused mainly by: government constraints; institutional practices, and investor perceptions.

While there are many imperfections that can affect the efficiency of a national market, these markets can still be relatively efficient in a national context but segmented in an international context (recall the finance definition of efficiency).




Some capital market imperfections include: Asymmetric information

Lack of transparency

High transaction costs

Political risks

Corporate governance issues

Regulatory barriers




The degree to which capital markets are illiquid or segmented has an important influence on a firms marginal cost of capital (and thus on its weighted average cost of capital).

In the following exhibit, the marginal return on capital at different budget levels is denoted as MRR.

If the firm is limited to raising funds in its domestic market, the line MCCD shows the marginal domestic cost of capital.

If the firm has additional sources of capital outside the domestic (illiquid) capital market the marginal cost of capital shifts right to MCCF.

If the MNE is located in a capital market that is both illiquid and segmented, the line MCCU represents the decreased marginal cost of capital if it gains access to other equity markets.


KiddakronHighlight


Exhibit 14.7 Market Liquidity, Segmentation, and the Marginal Cost of Capital



The Cost of Capital for MNEs Compared to Domestic Firms

Determining whether a MNEs cost of capital is higher or lower than a domestic counterpart is a function of the marginal cost of capital, the relative after-tax cost of debt, the optimal debt ratio and the relative cost of equity.

While the MNE is supposed to have a lower marginal cost of capital (MCC) than a domestic firm, empirical studies show the opposite (as a result of the additional risks and complexities associated with foreign operations).




This relationship lies in the link between the cost of capital, its availability, and the opportunity set of projects.

As the opportunity set of projects increases, the firm will eventually need to increase its capital budget to the point where its marginal cost of capital is increasing.

The optimal capital budget would still be at the point where the rising marginal cost of capital equals the declining rate of return on the opportunity set of projects.

This would be at a higher weighted average cost of capital than would have occurred for a lower level of the optimal capital budget.



Exhibit 14.8 The Cost of Capital for MNE and Domestic Counterpart Compared




In conclusion, if both MNEs and domestic firms do actually limit their capital budgets to what can be financed without increasing their MCC, then the empirical findings that MNEs have higher WACC stands.

If the domestic firm has such good growth opportunities that it chooses to undertake growth despite and increasing marginal cost of capital, then the MNE would have a lower WACC.



Exhibit 14.9 Do MNEs Have a Higher or Lower WACC Than Their Domestic Counterparts?


Chapter 14 Global Cost and Availability of Capital

Documents

Transcript of Chapter 14 Global Cost and Availability of Capital