Introduction. the tax advantage that comes as a

Published by admin on


The purpose of this paper is to point out the relationship
between capital structure and a firm’s performance and profitability. Firms can
be broadly classified into financial and non-financial. According to Buser
(1981), there is no significant difference in the capital structure of the two
types of firm mentioned even though due to the unique nature and financial risk
of each firm’s business as well as variations in intra-firm business there is a
considerable inter industry differences in firms’ capital structure. This essay
will also attempt to answer two main questions; Does it matter if finance comes
from stocks or debt? and What determines choice between stocks and debt? (These
questions were taken from the lecture slides).

Financing decisions basically has to do with how a firm utilizes
different sources of finance to maximize shareholders’ wealth with minimum
risks as well as improve its competitiveness. Debt and equity financing are the
two primary sources of capital. By issuing debt instruments, a firm is able to
obtain fund to finance its operation. The purchasers of these instruments are
in return promised a stream of payment as well as a variety of other covenants
relating to corporate behavior e.g. the value and risk of a firm’s assets.
Through the covenant, the purchaser has the right to repossess collateral
presented by the issuer or force the issuer into bankruptcy in situations where
the firms fails to fulfill its obligation by not making payments. However, debt
refinancing allows shareholders to retain ownership and also the firm turns to
enjoy the tax advantage that comes as a result of interest being tax
deductible. On the other hand, the firm avoids the obligation of making regular
payments and the risk of being forced into bankruptcy when it uses equity
financing even though it leads to dilution of ownership. In regards to the
question does it matter if finance comes from equity or debt, this decision is
ultimately influenced by the type of firm in question. However these sources of
finance are not substitutes for each other, they are different in nature and
their impact of profitability vary.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

The concept of capital structure as described by Besley and
Brigham is blend of
long-term debt, preference shares and net worth used as a means of permanent
financing by any firm. Van Horne and Wachowicz also described capital structure
as a method of long term financing which is a mixture of long-term debt,
preference shares and equity. The concept of capital structure can be said to
be a mixture of debt and equity by a firm to finance its operation and growth.

Optimal capital structure is the right mix of debt and equity
that maximizes a firm’s return on capital thereby minimizing cost of borrowing
and maximizing profit and its value. One of the crucial decisions that affect
the profitability of a firm is capital structure choice. A wrong mix of debt
and equity may profoundly affect the performance and long term survival of the
firm. The decision of how a firm is financed is of vital importance to both the
insiders and outsiders of the firm hence they devote a lot of attention to its
structure. Due to the importance of capital structure, many studies and
scholars have tried to inspect and find evidence for the relationship between
capital structure and the performance of a firm. Among these is Modigliani and
Miller (M&M). According to them in a world without taxes, bankruptcy costs,
agency cost and under a perfectly competitive market conditions, the value of a
firm is free from the influence of how that firm is financed but rather the
value of a firm depends solely on its power of earnings. Shortly after making
this hypothesis, M&M restated that if we move to a world where there are
taxes with all other things being equal, due to tax advantage of debt thus
interest on debt is tax deductible, the firm’s value is positively related to
debt meaning a firm can increase its value by incorporating more debt into
capital structure. Based on the second hypothesis of M, optimal capital
structure is one that comprise of 100% debt.

However, there are debates on the fact that the assumptions
made by M are unrealistic and unpractical in the real world. In light of
this, other researchers have come up with several theories to explain the
relationship between capital structure and firm’s profitability.

Peking order theory by Myers believes that due to information
asymmetry between firms and investors there is no optimal capital structure
rather firms have particular preference of financing. Firms prefer to use
internal financing i.e. retained earnings to external financing and external
financing is only employed when the internal funds have been fully utilized.
Debt is preferred as external finance to equity in such cases according to Muritala.

According to Jensen and Meckling who developed agency theory,
debt and equity should be mixed in a proportion that minimizes total agency
cost. Agency cost can be divided into agency cost of debt and agency cost of
equity. Agency cost equity arises from the fact the goals of manager may differ
from maximizing shareholder’s fund so in order to keep managers in check
shareholders engage monitoring and control activities which comes at a cost. Debtholders
in order to prevent management from favoring shareholders at their expense also
give rise to agency cost

As a result of the debates with respect to the assumptions by
M, static trade-off theory was developed.   According to this theory by including tax in
M, earnings can be protected taking advantage of tax benefits from
interest payments. Brigham and Houston assert that optimal capital structure of
a firm is determined by the trading off between the tax advantage from
employing debt and the cost of debt such as agency cost, bankruptcy cost and as
a result the firms’ value is maximized and cost of capital is minimized. 

Definition of Key Terms

Equity: Equity is used in reference to the value of an
ownership interest in a firm including shareholders’ equity. It is a firm’s
total assets less its total liabilities.

Debt: It is the amount owed by one party to the other. Large
purchases which firms could not have been able to make are made using debt.
Debt Arrangement permits the borrower to borrow money that is to be paid at a
later date with interest.

Equity financing: is when capital of firm is raised through
the sale of its shares or ownership interest.

Debt financing: It is a means by which firms raise capital by
selling debt instruments such as bonds, bills, and notes to investors.

Profitability: It is the ability of a firm to yield profit or
financial gain.

Cost of Capital: It is a firms cost of funding i.e. both cost
of debt and cost of equity. Cost of equity is the required rate return
shareholders expect on their investment while cost of debt is the effective
rate a firm pays on all its debts.

Agency Problem: It is the conflict of interest between
management of a firm and its shareholders.

Variables of Study

As a measure of a firm’s performance almost all authors used
the profitability ratios ROA, ROE, and EPS (dependent variable) and leverage
ratios STDTA, LTDTA, DC, TDTA as capital structure indicators (independent

Return on Asset (ROA) is shows how efficient a firm is at
using its assets to generate income. It is calculated as net income before
taxes divided by average total assets. Return on equity (ROE) reveals how much
profit a firm generates with the fund shareholders invested thus how well a
firm generates earnings growth using investments. It is derived by net profit
divided by average shareholder equity. Earnings per share (EPS) which is
computed by dividing net profit minus preference share dividend by number of
outstanding shares helps measure the amount of net income earned per firm’s
outstanding shares. 

The dependent variable is an important variable since the
financial risk faced by a firm is strongly affected by its profitability. The
likelihood of failure is lower when profits are high. Also high profit
increases the ability of a firm to borrow thereby increasing the use of tax
savings. From another angle, high profit implies firms will be able to finance
itself through retained earnings hence a decrease in the reliance on external
funding. As a result of the fact that firms with high profit have greater
capacity to borrow hence increasing the use of tax savings, there is a positive
relationship between profitability and leverage ratio in a capital structure of
a firm based on Trade off theory. However, based on Peking theory there is an
inverse relationship between profitability and leverage ratio in its capital
structure since high profits implies companies will resort to using internal
financing rather than external financing.

Leverage ratio helps measure the financial risk of a firm. It
helps determine the firm’s ability to meet its obligations. Short term debt to
total asset (STDTA) is short term debt divided by total assets of the firm.
Long term debt to total asset (LTDTA) is computed by dividing long term debt by
total assets of the firm. Debt to capital (DC) ratio is total debt (short term
and long term) divided by total capital (includes firm’s debt and shareholders’
equity). Total debt to total asset ratio (TDTA) is total debt divided by total
assets. The higher the ratios, implies high level of leverage hence high level
of financial risk.


Econometric model  

In order to examine the relationship between capital
structure and profitability, almost all the research papers utilized the
multiple regression, ordinary least squares estimator framework. The only
difference among the models used is the inclusion control variables such as
firm specific variables (firm size(SZ), growth opportunities of the firm (GOP)
which is calculated by assets of current period less assets of previous period
divided by assets of previous period), and some macro-economic variables
(inflation(INF) and economic growth (GDP)). The control variables seeks to single
out the impact of capital structure on firm’s performance. The performance of a
firm is usually influenced by its size, large firms turn to have greater
capacity and capabilities. By including firm specific variable in the model,
differences in the operating environment of the firm is controlled for. Also
the inclusion of macroeconomic variable controls for the effect of macroeconomic
state of affairs. Below is the regression model;

= ? +  +   +  +   +  +   +  +  + ?    


= ? +  +   +  +  + ?

 depending on whether
firm specific and macroeconomic variables are controlled for.   represents the firm’s
performance in terms of profitability ratios mentioned earlier for firm i
(1,2,3…) in period t (1,2,3…). , , , and represents the regression coefficient for the independent
variables,, , and, represents the regression coefficient for the bank specific
variables, and  and  represents the
regression coefficient for the macroeconomic variables. All these coefficients
are to be estimated using data.


 Empirical Evidence

Using data from the period of 2005 to 2013 on 72 industrial
Jordanian companies listed on the Amman Stock Exchange, Ramadan and Ramadan
(2015) applied unbalanced cross sectional pooled Ordinary Least Square (OLS)
regression model to identify the effect of capital structure on firms’
performance. Results from the study concluded that capital structure
represented by long-term debt to capital ratio, total debt to capital ratio and
total debt to total assets ratio has a significant inverse impact on the performance
represented by ROA of the Jordanian industrial companies listed on ASE.

Nassar S (2016) study aimed to investigate the impact of
capital structure on industrial companies listed under UXSIN index on the
Istanbul Stock Exchange (ISE). Data on 136 out 290 firms from the period of
2005-2012 was used. In this study firm’s performance was defined by EPS, ROA,
and ROE while capital structure was defined by total debt to total asset ratio.
The study concluded that there is a statistically significant negative
relationship between capital structure and profitability since using high level
of debt affects a firm’s ROA, EPS, and ROE negatively.

Using data from the period of 2005-2014 on 22 banks in
Bangledesh, the study by Siddik, Kabiraj and Joghee on impacts of capital
structure on performance of banks showed there are significant negative relationship
between capital structure and Bangladeshi banks’ performance. In their pooled
ordinary least square regression model, banks performance was defined by ROA,
ROE, and EPS while capital structure was defined by STDTA, LTDTA, TDTA. They
also included firm specific variables and macroeconomic variables mentioned
earlier for which they observed that growth opportunities, size, and inflation
have positive relationship while GDP has negative relationship with performance
of banks in developing economy, viz., Bangladesh.

The results from these studies mentioned above support the
Peking order theory, which states that highly profitable firms are less
dependent on external source of finance and thus there is an inverse
relationship between profitability and borrowing hence capital structure.

In contrast to the above empirical results of negative
impacts, other studies have also concluded on positive relationships between
capital structure and profitability. In attempt to analyze the impact of
capital structure on banks’ performance in the Tehran Stock Exchange using data
over the time period 2008-2012, S.F. Nikoo (2015) study results showed that
there is a significant positive relationship between capital structure
expressed by debt to equity ratio and bank’s performance expressed by ROE, ROA,
and EPS. In the study by Abor (2005) where the author investigated the effect
of capital structure on the profitability of listed firms on the Ghana Stock
Exchange during a five year period, it was evident that STDTA and TDTA had a
positive relationship with ROE while LTDTA has a negative relationship. In this
study ROE was the only measure of a firm’s performance. The study suggests that
profitable firms has debt as their main source of finance. The results from
these studies support the trade-off theory.

Some studies have also found out that there are no
significant relationship between capital structure and profitability of a firm.
Al-Taani (2013) in his study to identify the association of capital structure
with profitability using data from 2005-2009 on Jordanian listed companies
concluded that STDTA,LTDTA and TDTA which are capital structure indicators do
not have any significant relationship or effect on ROA and profit margin which
are indicators of firms’ performance. Based on data from 1997-2005 on
non-financial Egyptian listed firms with the aim of investigating the effect of
capital structure choice on the performance of firms in Egypt, the research
conclusion of Ibrahim El?Sayed Ebaid (2009) was there is weak-to-no impact of
capital structure choice on  firm’s
performance. The results from these studies support M&M capital structure
irrelevance theorem.

Equity over Debt?

Since it is empirically evident that debt financing does not
always lead to improved firms’ performance, before employing debt finance firms
should have exhausted shareholders’ funds as much as possible. As a result
risks associated with debt financing e.g. interest on debt exceeding the return
on assets financed by the debt will be minimized. In situations where firms
have exhausted equity financing and needs to finance the expansion of its
operation, reference should be made to the firm’s asset structure to ensure
that assets financed using debt financing earn higher returns than the interest
to be paid on the debt.

It could be said that capital structure is a vital key to the
profitability and survivability of firm. Obtaining an optimal capital structure
which maximizes shareholders value and minimizes cost of capital and risk is
therefore important. In order to achieve this, management needs to first analyze
whether the firm is over or under levered or has the right mix. Based on the
result of the analysis, decision on whether to move gradually or immediately
towards the optimal has to be made.

For over levered firms with the threat of bankruptcy, debt
should be reduced by embarking on equity for debt swaps. While without
bankruptcy threat reduction of debt can be based on whether the firm has good
projects i.e. ROE and ROC is greater than cost of equity and cost of capital
respectively. In cases where they are greater, the projects are financed
through retained earnings or new equity whereas in the cases where they are not
greater debts are paid off using retained earnings or issuance new equity.

For under levered firms which are takeover targets, leverage
is increased through debt for equity swaps       or
borrow money to buy shares. In case the firm is not a takeover target, and the
firm has good projects i.e. ROC greater is than cost of capital, the projects
are financed using debt otherwise dividends are paid to shareholders or the
firm buys back stocks.



This essay provides evidence from various researches that
analyze the impact of capital structure on profitability of a firm. Although
there is no clear cut conclusion as to whether it is a positive or negative
relationship it is important to note that optimal capital structure is vital
since wrong mix of debt and equity may profoundly affect the performance and
long term survivability of the firm.




Categories: Industry


I'm Iren!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out