Search results

The purpose of this paper is to show that distinguishing between gross and net tax shields arising from interest deductions is important to firm valuation. The distinction affects the interpretation but not valuation of tax shields for the famous Miller’s (1977) model with corporate and personal taxes. However, for the well-known Miles and Ezzell’s (1985) model, the authors show that the valuation of tax shields can be materially affected. Implications to the cost of equity and optimal capital structure are discussed.

This paper proposed a simple tax shield clarification that distinguishes between gross and net tax shields. Net tax shields equal gross tax shields minus personal taxes on debt. When an after-tax riskless rate is used to discount shareholders’ tax shields, this distinction affects the interpretation but not valuation results of the Miller’s model. However, when the after-tax unlevered equity rate is used to discount tax shields under the well-known Miles and Ezzell’s (1985) model, the difference between gross and net tax shields can materially affect valuation results. According to the traditional ME model, both gross tax shields and debt interest tax payments (i.e. net tax shields) are discounted at the after-tax unlevered equity rate. By contrast, the proposed revised ME model discounts gross tax shields at the unlevered equity rate but personal taxes on debt income at the riskless rate (like debt payments). Because personal taxes on debt are nontrivial, traditional ME valuation results can noticeably differ from the revised ME model to the extent that after-tax unlevered equity and debt rates differ from one another.

For comparative purposes, the authors provide numerical examples of the traditional and revised ME models. The following constant tax rates and market discount rates are assumed: T_c=0.30, T_pb=0.20, T_ps=0.10, r=0.06, and ρ=0.10. Table I compares these two models’ valuation results. Maximum firm value for the traditional ME model is 7.89 compared to 7.00 for the revised ME model. At a 50 percent leverage ratio, equity value is reduced from 3.71 to 3.49, respectively. Importantly, the traditional ME model suggests that firm value linearly increases with leverage and implies an all-debt capital structure, whereas firm value stays relatively constant as leverage increases in the revised ME model. These capital structure differences arise due to discounting debt tax payments with the unlevered equity rate (riskless rate) in the traditional ME (revised ME) model. Figure 1 graphically summarizes these results by comparing the traditional ME model (thin lines) to the revised ME model (bold lines).

Textbook treatments of leverage gains to firms or projects with corporate and personal taxes should be amended to take into account this previously unrecognized tradeoff. Also, empirical analyses of capital structure are recommended on the sensitivity of leverage ratios to the gross-tax-gain/debt-personal taxes tradeoff.

Financial managers need to understand how to value interest tax shields on debt in making capital structure decisions, computing the cost of capital, and valuing the firm.

The valuation of interest tax shields in finance is a long-standing controversy. Nobel prize winners Modigliani and Miller (MM) wrote numerous papers on this subject and gained fame from their ideas in this area. However, application of their ideas has changed over time due to the Miles and Ezzell’s (ME) model of firm valuation. The present paper adapts the pathbreaking ideas of MM to the valuation framework of ME. Students and practitioners in finance can benefit by the valuation results in the paper.

No previous studies have recognized the valuation issues resolved in the paper on the application of the popular and contemporary ME model of firm valuation to the MM valuation concepts. The new arguments in the paper are easy to understand and readily applied to firm valuation.

This paper analyses the direct relationship between budget deficits and economic growth, the channels through which budget deficits inhibit growth and finally, the Granger causality between budget deficit and economic growth in South Africa over the period 1975 to 2020.

In a bid to control for endogeneity that is common in economic growth regressions, the author employed the dynamic ordinary least squares (DOLS) approach.

Towards analysing the direct relationship between budget deficit and economic growth, results show that a 10-percentage rise in the budget deficit slows economic growth by 0.2 percentage points. Results show that the growth inhibiting consequences of the budget deficit in South Africa are principally driven by negatively affecting private and public physical capital accumulation growth, as well as a drop in gross national savings. However, results show no evidence of a deficit reduction effect through long term-real interest rate. The findings reveal a one-way Granger causality running from budget deficits to economic growth.

Based on the findings in this article, expanding the fiscal deficit to support growth is not a viable policy option for the South African economy.

The originality of this paper lies in establishing the Granger causality between budget deficit and economic growth, thus adding to the scant literature, as well as establishing the channels through which budget deficit retards economic growth for the South African economy.

The recent increase in aid to Africa, alongside increases in special-purpose aid, has revived interest in the question of the fungibility of aid – the notion that, if a donor gives aid for a project that the recipient government would have undertaken anyway, then the aid is financing some expenditure other than the intended project. That aid in this sense may be “fungible”, while long recognized, has recently been receiving some empirical support. This paper focuses on sub-Saharan Africa, the region with the largest GDP share of aid. It presents results indicating that aid may be partially fungible, and suggests some reasons why.

The purpose of this paper is to calculate regional contents in the exports of the major regional blocs to the world, Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership (TPP), and Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), respectively, to find the backward trade linkages between them instead of normal forward linkages.

To calculate “a region” content in intermediate and value-added exports, this paper uses OECD’s inter-country input-output table (ICIOT), and tries to decompose the contents of trade. Using the information of ICIOT, Koopman et al. (2014) and Wang et al. (2013) decompose gross exports of a country’s exports.

TPP is a loosely tied bloc featured by openness to the Asia-Pacific region. Trade linkages between members are stronger in RCEP than those in TPP, particularly in the trade of intermediate goods. Trades in RCEP are closely connected to exports to TPP, but the opposite direction is not clear.

First of all, the recent base year of the data on value added in trade is 2011, which can be regarded as a little bit out of date. Therefore, it should be cautious in interpreting the results in that it may not reflect the characteristics of current trade. Second, this paper uses ICOIT instead of world input-output table.

A large portion of trades in RCEP and TPP is triggered by a global production network (fragmentation, vertical specialization), different from traditional trade focusing on inter-industry trade or competition between countries. Thus, the formation of TPP or RCEP is predicted to stimulate trade of the other instead of discriminating nonmember countries.

In particular, the authors have special concern in the backward linkages between RCEP and TPP, the distinct characteristics of the two regional blocs and, finally, major countries’ preferences of the one over the other and industrial conflicts toward TPP or RCEP even in an economy.

Although this paper uses the approach by Baldwin and Lopez-Gonzalez, this paper is the first research on the analysis of the export contents in major trading blocs in the Asia-Pacific region.

Now that we have reviewed the basic reports, the published special reports and the discussions of the working groups let us see what can be high‐lighted as a conclusion. How has this Congress advanced the science of tourism applied to mega‐attractions and to mega‐events?

The purpose of this paper is to use a variety-expanding growth model embedded in the North–South framework to study the implementation of globally desirable protection of intellectual property rights (IPRs) in the emerging South.

The authors use a variety-expanding growth model with innovation-led economic growth in both North and South. As usual, imitations targeted equally at Northern and Southern innovations only occur in the South, and the authors focus on the design of Southern IPR protection.

Welfare-maximizing degrees of Southern IPR protection are explicitly derived for both North and South. There tends to exist a North–South conflict on the right degree of protection. To resolve this conflict, the Southern government can grant appropriate subsides to support domestic innovators. The authors derive the right rate of innovation subsidies such that the conflict is resolved.

This paper represents the first attempt to deal with the North–South conflict on the degree of Southern IPR protection within the variety-expanding growth model. And the novel perspective is to relax the North–South tension on IPR protection via additionally implementing an appropriate innovation subsidy policy.

The paper investigates the effects of global value chains (GVCs) and technological innovation on exports. The paper builds a new dataset from two database, the EORA and the OECD stan database. Using a pooled OLS and a two-stage quantile regression technique on a sample of 8 OECD countries, the results suggest that the effects of GVCs participation are heterogeneous across countries. We find that at the aggregate level, GVCs and forward participation are negatively associated with exports growth. However, we only find evidence of a positive effect of backward participation on exports in the case of France and Germany. At the disaggregated level, we find that: (a) an increase in GVCs participation in low technology intensive sectors is positively associated with exports’growth; (b) an increase in GVCs participation in high technology intensive sector is negatively correlated with exports’growth. The findings stress the importance of GVCs as a driving channel for subdue economic growth in low technological sectors.

This study aims to explore the firm's specific, opacity and economy-specific variables to explain the variation in South Asian market returns and indicate that how the difference in adoption of accounting standards refers to the effect of the movement in stock returns.

Following the scope of the study, factor analysis, fixed effect, Driscoll and Kraay standard errors (DKSE) and Panel Corrected standard error (PCSE) models have been inducted to determine the influence of firm-specific, opacity and economy-specific variables on stock returns. The sample of study comprises 1,885 firms from five countries located in the South Asia region with the period 2005–2018. To ensure the reliability of data, firm-specific data have been collected from DataStream International, while an international country risk guide was used to compile the data for economy-specific variables.

This study concluded that firm-specific variables showed a consistent and significant association with stock return except for beta, accrual and momentum while earning aggressiveness was the only factor in opacity measure to capture the variation in stock return. The implementation of international accounting standards seemed to be significant and proves to be helpful to enhance the quality of accounting information.

The limitations of this study comprised the estimation error by avoiding the firm's observations with negative equity in case of earning opacity and majority (more than 50%) of the observation belongs to a single market as India out of final sample which leads to having biasedness in findings.

This study helps the investors to consider the firms with smaller market capitalization and lower book to market ratio and avoid the momentum strategy under firm specific factors. Moreover, earning aggressiveness under opacity domain capture the variation in stock return and must be considered while investing funds.

The influence of adoption of international accounting standards along with firm and economy specific variable in South Asian Equity Markets return was the major contribution. Moreover, the inclusion of DKSE and PCSE models to examine the relevance of the financial and economic informational environment was also considered as a part of major contribution of this study.

The paper aims to examine the performance of Spanish mutual funds between 1999 and 2003.

The methodolgy uses the stochastic discount factor (SDF) framework across a variety of models developed in the recent asset pricing literature. This approach is a fairly recent innovation in the evaluation of investment performance.

The present work complements the research of Farnworth et al. and Fletcher and Forbes, adding a new issue to the SDF, the third co‐moment of asset returns. Recent asset pricing studies show the relevance of the component of an asset's skewness related to the market portfolio's skewness, the coskewness, and how it helps to explain the time‐variation of ex‐ante market risk premiums. It is found that the effects of adding coskewness to evaluate the performance is significant even when factors based on size, book‐to‐market and momentum are included.

The omission of a coskewness factor may lead to erroneous evaluations of a fund's performance, and therefore, issues such as the persistence of performance should be revised.

This paper explores, for the first time, the effects of incorporating a coskewness factor in the analysis of investment performance, both in an unconditional and a conditional framework using SDF models.