Answers - ACCA Global

If the target current ratio is 1·4 times, current liabilities = 12,164,384/1·4 = $8,688,846 The target quick ratio (acid test ratio) = 8,219,178/8,688...

3 downloads 317 Views 203KB Size
Answers

Fundamentals Level – Skills Module, Paper F9 Financial Management 1

(a)

June 2014 Answers

Calculation of NPV Year Sales income Variable cost Contribution Fixed cost Cash flow before tax Tax at 28% Depreciation tax benefit Cash flow after tax Scrap value Net cash flow Discount at 13% Present values

Sum of present values Initial investment Net present value

1 $000 5,670 (3,307) –––––– 2,363 (776) –––––– 1,587 –––––– 1,587

2 $000 6,808 (4,090) –––––– 2,718 (803) –––––– 1,915 (444) 350 –––––– 1,821

3 $000 5,788 (3,514) –––––– 2,274 (832) –––––– 1,442 (536) 263 –––––– 1,169

–––––– 1,587 0·885 –––––– 1,405 ––––––

–––––– 1,821 0·783 –––––– 1,426 ––––––

–––––– 1,169 0·693 –––––– 810 ––––––

4 $000 6,928 (4,040) –––––– 2,888 (861) –––––– 2,027 (404) 197 –––––– 1,820 400 –––––– 2,220 0·613 –––––– 1,361 ––––––

5 $000

(568) 479 –––––– (89) –––––– (89) 0·543 –––––– (48) ––––––

$000 4,954 5,000 –––––– (46) ––––––

Although the NPV of the project is negative and so financially it is not acceptable, the Board of OAP Co have decided that it must be undertaken as it strategically important. Workings Year Selling price ($/unit) Inflated selling price ($/unit) Sales volume (units/year) Sales income ($000/year)

1 450 472·50 12,000 5,670

2 475 523·69 13,000 6,808

3 500 578·81 10,000 5,788

4 570 692·84 10,000 6,928

Year Variable cost ($/unit) Inflated variable cost ($/unit) Sales volume (units/year) Variable cost ($000/year)

1 260 275·60 12,000 3,307

2 280 314·61 13,000 4,090

3 295 351·35 10,000 3,514

4 320 403·99 10,000 4,040

Year 1 2 3 4

Tax allowable depreciation 5,000,000 x 0·25 = $1,250,000 3,750,000 x 0·25 = $937,500 2,812,500 x 0·25 = $703,125 1,709,375*

Tax benefit 1,250,000 x 0·28 = 937,500 x 0·28 = 703,125 x 0·28 = 1,709,375 x 0·28 =

$350,000 $262,500 $196,875 $478,625

*5,000,000 – 1,250,000 – 937,500 – 703,125 – 400,000 Alternative calculation of cash flow after tax Year Cash flow before tax Tax allowable depreciation Taxable profit Tax at 28% Tax allowable depreciation Cash flow after tax

1 $000 1,587 (1,250) –––––– 337 1,250 –––––– 1,587

2 $000 1,915 (937·5) –––––– 977·5 (94) 937·5 –––––– 1,821

11

3 $000 1,442 (703) –––––– 739 (274) 703 –––––– 1,168

4 $000 2,027 (1,709) –––––– 318 (207) 1,709 –––––– 1,820

5 $000

(89) –––––– (89)

(b)

Calculation of maximum NPV Project Investment ($000) NPV ($000) PV of future cash flows Profitability index Ranking

A 2,500 1,000 –––––– 3,500 1·400 4

B 2,200 1,550 –––––– 3,750 1·705

C 2,600 1,350 –––––– 3,950 1·519 3

D 1,900 1,500 –––––– 3,400 1·789 2

E 5,000 nil –––––– 5,000 1·000 1

Project E has been ranked first as it must be undertaken. Project B cannot be undertaken if Project D is undertaken, as the two projects are mutually exclusive. Calculation of maximum NPV

Project Project Project Project

E D C A

Investment ($000) 5,000 1,900 2,600 500 ––––––– 10,000 –––––––

NPV ($000) nil 1,500 1,350 200 –––––– 3,050 ––––––

As Project A is divisible and only $500,000 (20%) of its $2,500,000 initial cost is available after cumulative investment in Projects E, D and C, the NPV from the project is $200,000 (20% of $1,000,000). (c)

When a company restricts or limits investment funds, it is undertaking ‘soft’ or internal capital rationing. Capital rationing means that a company is unable to invest in all projects with a positive net present value and hence it is not acting to maximise shareholder wealth. There are several reasons why the Board of OAP Co may have decided to limit investment funds for the next year. It may not wish to issue new equity finance in order to avoid diluting earning per share. Issuing new equity finance may also increase the risk of a company’s shares being bought by a potential acquirer, leading to a future takeover bid. The Board of OAP Co may not wish to issue new debt finance if it wishes to avoid increasing its commitment to fixed interest payments. This could be because economic prospects are seen as poor or challenging, or because existing debt obligations are high and so the Board does not wish to increase them. The Board of OAP Co may wish to follow a strategy of organic growth, financing capital investment projects from retained earnings rather than seeking additional external finance. The Board of OAP Co may wish to create an internal market for capital investment funds, so that capital investment proposals must compete for the limited funds made available in the budget set by the Board. This competition would mean that only robust capital investment projects would be funded, while marginal capital investment projects would be rejected.

2

(a)

Inventory days = 365 x (5,700/26,000) = 80 days Trade receivables days = 365 x (6,575/40,000) = 60 days Trade payables days = 365 x (2,137/26,000) = 30 days Working capital cycle of CSZ Co = 80 + 60 – 30 = 110 days The working cycle of CSZ Co is positive and the company pays its trade suppliers 110 days (on average) before it receives cash from its customers. This represents a financing need as far as CSZ Co is concerned, which could be funded from a short-term or long-term source. If the working capital cycle had been negative, CSZ Co would have been receiving cash from its customers before it needed to pay its trade suppliers. A company which does not give credit to its customers, such as a supermarket chain, can have a negative working capital cycle. Even if companies might generally prefer to be paid by customers before they have to pay their suppliers, the question of whether the working capital cycle should be positive or negative implies that companies are able to make such a choice, but this is not usually the case. This is because the length of the working capital cycle depends on its elements, which are inventory days, trade receivables days and trade payables, and these elements usually depend on the nature of the business undertaken by a company and the way that business is conducted by its competitors. The length of the working capital cycle is usually therefore similar between companies in the same business sector, but can differ between business sectors.

(b)

At the end of March 2015: Cost of sales = 40,000,000 x 0·6 = $24,000,000 Inventory using target inventory days = 24,000,000 x 60/365 = $3,945,206 Trade receivables using target trade receivables days = 40,000,000 x 75/365 = $8,219,178 Current assets = 3,945,206 + 8,219,178 = $12,164,384

12

If the target current ratio is 1·4 times, current liabilities = 12,164,384/1·4 = $8,688,846 The target quick ratio (acid test ratio) = 8,219,178/8,688,846 = 0·95 times Net current assets at the end of March 2015 = 12,164,384 – 8,688,846 = $3,475,538 Target sales/net working capital ratio = 40,000,000/3,475,538 = 11·5 times (c)

The current liabilities at the end of March 2015, calculated in part (b), can be divided into trade payables and the forecast overdraft balance. Trade payables using target trade payables days = 24,000,000 x 55/365 = $3,616,438. The overdraft (balancing figure) = 8,688,846 – 3,616,438 = $5,072,408 Comparing current assets and current liabilities:

Inventory Trade receivables Trade payables Overdraft Net current assets

March 2014 $000 $000 5,700 6,575 12,275 –––––– 2,137 4,682 6,819 –––––– –––––– 5,456 ––––––

March 2015 $000 $000 3,945 8,219 12,164 –––––– 3,616 5,072 8,688 –––––– –––––– 3,476 ––––––

The overdraft as a percentage of current liabilities will fall from 69% (4,682/6,819) to 58% (5,072/8,688). Even though the overdraft is expected to increase by 8·3%, current liabilities are expected to increase by 27·4% (8,688/6,819). Most of this increase is expected to be carried by trade payables, which will rise by 69·2% (3,616/2,137), with trade payables days increasing from 30 days to 55 days. At the end of March 2014, current liabilities were 56% of current assets (100 x 6,819/12,275), suggesting that 44% of current assets were financed from a long-term source. At the end of March 2015, current liabilities are expected to be 71% of current assets (100 x 8,688/12,164), suggesting that 29% of current assets are financed from a long-term source. This increasing reliance on short-term finance implies an aggressive change in the working capital financing policy of CSZ Co. (d)

Transaction risk relates to foreign currency transactions which are short-term in nature, such as payments expected by a company from foreign trade receivables, payments made by a company in settling foreign trade payables, and interest payments made by a company on foreign currency-denominated debt. Transaction risk can be managed by several internal methods. Currency of invoice One internal hedging method is for a company to invoice foreign customers in its domestic currency, thereby transferring the foreign currency risk to the foreign customers. This method is usually not commercially viable, however, as foreign customers will transfer their business to competitors who do invoice in the foreign currency, thereby avoiding the foreign currency risk. Matching The risk arising from foreign currency receipts and payments can be managed by matching. Receipts and payments in the same foreign currency can be matched, for example, by using a foreign currency bank account, so that there is no need to buy the foreign currency. Taking a longer-term view, assets and liabilities can be matched in order to hedge foreign currency risk. For example, a company expecting regular foreign currency income can use debt in the same currency to meet a financing need, so that the foreign currency interest on the debt can be met from the foreign currency income. Leading and lagging Transaction risk can be managed by leading and lagging, where foreign currency payments could be made in advance (leading) or in arrears (lagging), depending on the view of the paying company as to whether the currency of payment was expected to appreciate or depreciate against the domestic currency. Lagged payments to accounts payable should not exceed the credit period agreed with the supplier, however.

3

(a)

Cost of equity The current cost of equity can be calculated using the capital asset pricing model. Equity or market risk premium = 11 – 4 = 7% Cost of equity = 4 + (0·9 x 7) = 4 + 6·3 = 10·3% After-tax cost of debt After-tax interest payment = 100 x 0·07 x (1 – 0·2) = $5·60 per bond Year 0 1–7 7

Cash flow market value interest redemption

$ (107·14) 5·60 100·00

5% discount 1·000 5·786 0·711

PV ($) (107·14) 32·40 71·10 –––––– (3·64) ––––––

13

4% discount 1·000 6·002 0·760

PV ($) (107·14) 33·61 76·00 –––––– 2·47 ––––––

After-tax cost of debt = IRR = 4 + ((5 – 4) x 2·47)/(2·47 + 3·64) = 4 + 0·4 = 4·4% Market value of equity = 10,000,000 x 7·50 =$75 million Market value of Fence Co debt = 14 million x 107·14/100 = $15 million Total market value of company = 75 + 15 = $90 million WACC = ((10·3 x 75) + (4·4 x 15))/90 = 9·3% (b)

Since the investment project is different to business operations, its business risk is different to that of existing operations. A cost of equity for appraising it can be therefore be found using the capital asset pricing model. Ungearing proxy company equity beta Asset beta = 1·2 x 54/(54 + (12 x 0·8)) = 1·2 x 54/63·6 = 1·019 Regearing asset beta Market value of debt = $15m (calculated in part (a)) Regeared asset beta = 1·019 x (75 + (15 x 0·8))/75 = 1·019 x 87/75 = 1·182 Using the CAPM Equity or market risk premium = 11 – 4 = 7% Cost of equity = 4 + (1·182 x 7) = 4 + 8·3 = 12·3%

(c)

Portfolio theory suggests that the total risk of a portfolio of investments can be reduced by diversifying the investments held in the portfolio, e.g. by investing capital in a number of different shares rather than buying shares in only one or two companies. Even when a portfolio has been well-diversified over a number of different investments, there is a limit to the risk-reduction effect, so that there is a level of risk which cannot be diversified away. This undiversifiable risk is the risk of the financial system as a whole, and so is referred to as systematic risk or market risk. Diversifiable risk, which is the element of total risk which can be reduced or minimised by portfolio diversification, is referred to as unsystematic risk or specific risk, since it relates to individual or specific companies rather than to the financial system as a whole. Portfolio theory is concerned with total risk, which is the sum of systematic risk and unsystematic risk. The capital asset pricing model assumes that investors hold diversified portfolios, and so is concerned with systematic risk alone.

(d)

Capital market efficiency is concerned with pricing efficiency when weak form, semi-strong form and strong form efficiency are being discussed. In relation to pricing efficiency, the efficient markets hypothesis (EMH) suggests that share prices fully and fairly reflect all relevant and available information. Relevant and available information can be divided into past information, public information and private information. Weak form efficiency This form of pricing efficiency arises when share prices fully and fairly reflect all past share price movements. Past share price movements cannot therefore be used to predict future share prices in order to make an abnormal gain and share prices appear to follow a random walk, with share prices responding to new information as this arrives on the capital market. Semi-strong form efficiency This form of pricing efficiency arises when share prices fully and fairly reflect all relevant and available public information, which includes all past information. Public information cannot therefore be used to make an abnormal gain, since capital markets and share prices quickly and accurately respond to new information. Well-developed capital markets are held to be semi-strong form efficient. Strong form efficiency This form of pricing efficiency arises when share prices fully and fairly reflect all private information as well as public information. When capital markets are strong form efficient, no-one can make abnormal returns, even investors who possess private or insider information. This level of pricing efficiency is not found in the real world, which is why governments legislate against insider dealing. Significance of EMH to financial managers If the EMH is correct and share prices are fair, there is no point in financial managers seeking to mislead the capital market, because such attempts will be unsuccessful. Window-dressing financial statements, for example, in order to show a company’s performance and position in a favourable light, will be seen through by financial analysts as the capital market digests the financial statement information in pricing the company’s shares. Another consequence of the EMH for financial managers is that there is no particular time which is best for issuing new shares, as share prices on the stock market are always fair. Because share prices are always fair, there are no bargains to be found on the stock market, i.e. companies whose shares are undervalued. An acquisition strategy which seeks to identify and exploit such stock market bargains is pointless if the EMH is correct. It should be noted, however, that if real-world capital markets are semi-strong form efficient rather than strong form efficient, insider information may undermine the strength of the points made above. For example, a company which is valued fairly by the stock market may be undervalued or overvalued if private or insider information is taken into account.

14

4

(a)

Objective 1 MFZ Co has stated an objective to achieve growth in profit before interest and tax of 4% per year. Analysis shows that profit before interest and tax growth was 3·4% in 2014 (18·3m/17·7m) and 3·5% in 2013 (17·7m/17·1m). MFZ Co has therefore not achieved this objective in either year. Objective 2 Year Profit after tax Number of shares Earnings per share Annual growth

2014 $12·8m 12m 106·67c 3·2%

2013 $12·4m 12m 103·33c 3·3%

2012 $12·0m 12m 100·00c

MFZ Co has stated an objective to achieve growth in earnings per share of 3·5% per year. Analysis shows that growth in earnings per share was 3·2% in 2014 (106·67c/103·33c) and 3·3% in 2013 (103·33c/100·00c). MFZ Co has therefore not achieved this objective in either year. Objective 3 MFZ Co has stated an objective to achieve growth in total shareholder return (TSR) of 5% per year. Analysis shows that growth in TSR was 11·4% in 2014 and 11·7% in 2013. MFZ Co has therefore achieved this objective in both 2014 and 2013. Year Equity market value Number of shares Share price Dividends Number of shares Dividend per share

2014 $56·4m 12m $4·70 $5·1m 12m 42·5c

2013 $55·2m 12m $4·60 $5·1m 12m 42·5c

2012 $54·0m 12m $4·50 $4·8m 12m 40·0c

On a per share basis: 2014 TSR = 100 x (470 – 460 + 42·5)/460 = 11·4% 2013 TSR = 100 x (460 – 450 + 42·5)/450 = 11·7% Alternatively, using total values: 2014 TSR = 100 x (56·4m – 55·2m + 5·1m)/55·2m = 11·4% 2013 TSR = 100 x (55·2m – 54·0m + 5·1m)/54·0m = 11·7% (b)

Historical dividends per share have been 42·5c (2014), 42·5c (2013) and 40·0c (2012). There has therefore been zero growth in dividend per share in 2014, 6·25% growth in dividend per share in 2013, and an average dividend growth rate of 3·1% over the two-year period from 2012 to 2014. The same result could be found by considering total dividend paid rather than dividend per share, since the number of shares has been constant over the two-year period. If historical dividend per share growth is assumed to be an indication of future dividend per share growth, it seems reasonable to use a dividend growth rate of 3·1% or zero in the dividend growth model (DGM). Using zero future dividend growth, the 2014 share price using the DGM will be $3·54 per share (42·5/0·12) and the 2014 total equity market value will be $42·48m ($3·54 x 12m). Using 3·1% dividend growth, the 2014 share price using the DGM will be $4·92 per share ((42·5 x 1·031)/(0·12 – 0·031)) and the 2014 total equity market value will be $59·04m ($4·92 x 12m). The 2014 equity market value on the capital market is $56·4m. This is higher than the DGM value using zero future dividend growth and lower than the DGM value using 3·1% dividend growth. One reason for the difference between the 2014 equity market value and the values predicted by the DGM is that the capital market expects future growth in dividends to be different from the assumed value used in the DGM, e.g. slightly less than 3·1%. The future cost of equity of MFZ Co may also differ from the current cost of equity of 12% used in the DGM calculation and the current market price may reflect an expectation of a future change in the cost of equity.

(c)

Cash needed for investment = $9·2 million Cash to be raised = $9·2m + issue costs = $9·2m + $0·2m = $9·4 million Current share price = $56·4m/12m = $4·70 per share Rights issue price = 4·70 x 0·8 = $3·76 per share New shares to be issued = 9·4m/3·76 = 2·5 million shares Total number of shares after issue = 12m + 2·5m = 14·5 million shares Theoretical ex rights price = [(12m x 4·70) + (2·5m x 3·76) – 0·2m]/14·5m = $4·52 per share Alternatively, theoretical ex rights price = ($56·4m + $9·2m)/14·5m = $4·52 per share

(d)

There are a number of sources of long-term debt finance which may be available to a listed company such as MFZ Co, with a variety of characteristics.

15

Long-term bank loan MFZ Co could obtain the $9·2m which it needs for investment purposes via a bank loan, from either a single bank or from a syndicate of banks. Interest payments on the bank loan could be annual, twice yearly or quarterly, and at either a fixed rate or a floating rate of interest. Repayments of capital may be required along with interest payments and it is possible that a constant cash amount would be regularly paid, with the amount of interest in the payment declining and the amount of capital in the payment increasing over time. It is likely that the bank loan would be secured against particular non-current assets of MFZ Co, so that the bank could recover its loan if the company defaults on interest payments. Bonds or loan notes Bonds or loan notes may be redeemable or irredeemable (permanent), although in recent years irredeemable corporate bonds have been very rare. Fixed rate or floating rate interest is paid on the bonds, either annually or half yearly, with the interest being based on nominal (par) value of the bonds rather than on their market value. Bonds, like ordinary shares, are mainly traded on the capital markets and can be issued in a variety of foreign currencies. Redemption of a large bond issue can pose a serious cash flow problem for a company and may call for refinancing rather than outright redemption. The return required on debt finance (the cost of debt) is lower than the return required on equity (the cost of equity), and so MFZ Co could reduce its average cost of capital by issuing debt finance, as it is currently financed by equity alone. Convertible bonds or loan notes Convertible bonds or loan notes are bonds which, at the option of the holder, can be converted into a specified quantity of ordinary shares (the conversion ratio) on a specified future date (the conversion date). They have the advantage for the issuing company that, assuming conversion terms are set appropriately, conversion will occur and so redemption can be avoided. If conversion occurs, there can be a significant reduction in the gearing of the issuing company. The future option to convert into equity has value to investors and as a consequence, the interest rate on convertible debt is lower than that on ordinary bonds. Convertible bonds can pay interest annually or twice annually, at a fixed or a floating rate of interest. If conversion does not take place, however, redemption of the bonds or loan notes will be required. Deep discount bonds and zero coupon bonds The return to a bond holder consists of regular interest payments (income) and repayment of the principle amount on redemption (capital). Investors may accept lower interest payments (lower income) in exchange for an increase in capital return. This can be achieved if the bond is issued at a deep discount to nominal value, but redeemed at nominal value. This kind of financial security is called a deep discount bond and may be suitable for companies which do not expect an immediate return on invested capital. A zero coupon bond goes a step further and pays no interest (coupon) at all, so that the return to the investor is entirely in the form of capital appreciation. Bonds like these are useful for companies which expect cash flows from invested capital to occur mainly later in the life of an investment project, rather than more evenly throughout its life.

16

Fundamentals Level – Skills Module, Paper F9 Financial Management

1

(a)

June 2014 Marking Scheme Marks 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ––––

Sales income Inflation of sales income Variable cost Inflation of variable cost Inflated fixed costs Tax liability Timing of tax liability Tax allowable depreciation years 1 to 3 Balancing allowance Tax allowable depreciation tax benefits Scrap value Calculation of present values Calculation of NPV Comment on financial acceptability

Marks

14 (b)

Calculation of profitability indices Ranking by profitability indices Allocation of funds to Project E Calculation of pro rata NPV on partial project Calculation of maximum NPV

1 1 1 1 1 –––– 5

(c)

Reasons for not raising equity finance Reasons for not raising debt finance Other relevant discussion

2–3 2–3 1–2 –––– Maximum

17

6 ––– 25 –––

2

(a)

Marks 0·5 0·5 0·5 0·5 4 ––––

Inventory days Trade receivables days Trade payables days Working capital cycle Discussion of working capital cycle

Marks

6 (b)

Cost of sales Inventory Trade receivables Current assets Current liabilities Target quick ratio Net working capital Target sales/net working capital ratio

0·5 0·5 0·5 0·5 0·5 1 0·5 1 –––– 5

(c)

(d)

3

(a)

Trade payables Overdraft Analysis of current asset and liability positions Comparison of current asset and liability positions Discussion of change in financing policy

1 1 1–3 1–3 1–3 –––– Maximum

Transaction risk Currency of invoice Matching Leading and lagging

1 1–2 1–2 1–2 –––– Maximum

Calculation of equity risk premium Calculation of cost of equity After-tax interest payment Setting up IRR calculation Calculating after-tax cost of debt Market value of equity Market value of debt Calculating WACC

8

6 ––– 25 –––

1 1 1 1 1 0·5 0·5 1 –––– 7

(b)

Ungearing proxy company equity beta Regearing equity beta Calculation of cost of equity

2 1 1 –––– 4

(c)

(d)

Risk diversification Systematic risk Unsystematic risk Portfolio theory and the CAPM

1–2 1–2 1–2 1–2 –––– Maximum

Nature of capital market efficiency Weak form efficiency Semi-strong form efficiency Strong form efficiency Significance of EMH for financial manager

1–2 1–2 1–2 1–2 2–3 –––– Maximum

18

6

8 ––– 25 –––

4

(a)

Marks 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ––––

Calculations of PBIT growth Comment on PBIT growth Calculations of EPS growth Comment on EPS growth 2014 total shareholder return 2013 total shareholder return Comment on TSR growth

Marks

7 (b)

Calculation of historical dividend growth rate Total equity market value using DGM Discussion of DGM value and equity market value

1 2 2 –––– 5

(c)

Cash to be raised Rights issue price New shares issued Theoretical ex rights price per share

1 1 1 2 –––– 5

(d)

Long-term bank loan Bonds or loan notes Convertible bonds or loan notes Deep discount bonds and zero coupon bonds Other relevant discussion

1–2 1–2 1–2 1–2 1–2 –––– Maximum

19

8 ––– 25 –––