flowchart LR
CS[Capital Structure] --> NI[NI<br/>100% debt optimal]
CS --> NOI[NOI<br/>Value independent]
CS --> TR[Traditional<br/>U-shaped WACC]
CS --> MM[MM 1958<br/>arbitrage proof]
MM --> MMTax[MM 1963 with tax<br/>Tax shield = T×D]
CS --> PO[Pecking Order<br/>Myers-Majluf 1984]
CS --> TO[Trade-off<br/>Tax shield vs Distress]
classDef default fill:#003366,color:#ffffff,stroke:#ffcc00,stroke-width:3px,rx:10px,ry:10px;
30 Capital structure
30.1 Concept of Capital Structure
Capital structure is “the mix of long-term sources of funds — equity capital, retained earnings, preference capital and long-term debt — used by a firm”. The decision is how much debt and how much equity to employ. The objective is usually to find the optimal capital structure — the mix that minimises the weighted average cost of capital (WACC) and thereby maximises the market value of the firm. The theoretical literature on capital structure is dominated by four classical theories: the Net Income approach, Net Operating Income approach, Traditional approach, and the Modigliani-Miller (MM) approach.
30.2 Capital Structure vs Financial Structure
| Dimension | Capital Structure | Financial Structure |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Long-term sources only | All sources — long-term + short-term |
| Components | Equity, preference, debentures, term loans | Capital structure + current liabilities |
| Shown in | Liabilities side of balance sheet (long-term half) | Full liabilities side |
30.3 Theories of Capital Structure
30.3.1 Assumptions Common to All Four Theories
- Only debt and equity in the capital structure (no preference shares).
- No corporate or personal taxes (relaxed later).
- All earnings paid out as dividends; no retention.
- 100 % payout, perpetual cash flows.
- No transaction costs or flotation costs.
- Investors have homogeneous expectations.
- The firm’s operating risk is unchanged.
30.3.2 1. Net Income (NI) Approach — David Durand (1952)
- Both K_d and K_e are constant regardless of leverage.
- Since K_d < K_e, increasing debt lowers WACC and raises firm value.
- Optimal capital structure is 100 % debt.
30.3.3 2. Net Operating Income (NOI) Approach — Durand (1952)
- K_o (WACC) is constant — independent of leverage.
- K_e rises in exact proportion to leverage to compensate equity holders for higher financial risk.
- Firm value is independent of capital structure.
- This is the precursor to the MM Proposition I.
30.3.4 3. Traditional Approach (Ezra Solomon)
- Combines elements of NI and NOI.
- Phase 1: At low leverage, debt is cheap and K_e rises slowly → WACC falls.
- Phase 2: At moderate leverage, WACC is at minimum — optimal capital structure.
- Phase 3: At high leverage, both K_d and K_e rise sharply (financial distress) → WACC rises.
- The result: an U-shaped WACC with a definite optimum.
30.3.5 4. Modigliani-Miller (MM) Approach (1958, 1963)
Franco Modigliani and Merton Miller in 1958 published the foundational paper that won them Nobel Prizes (1985 and 1990).
| Proposition | Statement |
|---|---|
| MM I | The market value of the firm is independent of its capital structure |
| MM II | Cost of equity rises linearly with debt-equity ratio: K_e = K_0 + (K_0 − K_d) × (D/E) |
Under the assumption of no taxes, NOI approach is vindicated. The crucial arbitrage proof: if leveraged and unleveraged firms had different values, investors could home-leverage — borrow personally and buy unleveraged equity — to capture risk-free profit, restoring equality.
MM with Corporate Tax (1963)
- Interest is tax-deductible → debt creates a tax shield = T × D.
- Value of levered firm = Value of unlevered firm + Tax shield (T × D).
- Implication: firm value rises with debt → optimal capital structure is 100 % debt in the absence of financial distress.
Miller Model with Personal Taxes (1977)
When both corporate and personal taxes are considered (Miller alone, 1977), the tax shield is partly offset by differential personal taxes on dividend vs interest income.
30.4 Trade-Off Theory
The trade-off theory holds that the optimal capital structure balances: - Tax shield benefits of debt (positive). - Financial distress and bankruptcy costs (negative; rise with leverage). - Agency costs — between shareholders, managers, debt-holders.
The optimal D/E is where the marginal benefit of additional debt equals the marginal expected cost of distress.
30.5 Pecking Order Theory — Myers and Majluf (1984)
Stewart Myers and Nicholas Majluf (1984) proposed that firms follow a pecking order in financing:
- Internal funds (retained earnings) — preferred first; no flotation cost or information asymmetry.
- Debt — cheaper than external equity; little information signal.
- External equity — last resort; signals to the market that the firm may be over-valued.
This explains why profitable firms often have low leverage — they have ample internal funds and avoid external financing.
30.6 Other Theories
- Signalling theory (Ross 1977) — managers signal future prospects via leverage choice.
- Agency theory (Jensen-Meckling 1976) — debt disciplines managers (Jensen’s free-cash-flow hypothesis).
- Market-timing theory — firms issue equity when share price is high, debt when low.
- Stakeholder theory — capital structure considers non-investor stakeholders.
30.7 Determinants of Capital Structure
- Business risk — high operating leverage → low financial leverage.
- Tax position — higher tax rate → more value from interest deductibility.
- Financial flexibility — keep spare debt capacity.
- Asset structure — tangible assets support more debt (collateral).
- Growth opportunities — high-growth firms prefer equity (avoid debt overhang).
- Profitability — pecking-order: high-profit firms use less external financing.
- Size — larger firms borrow more easily.
- Industry norms — sector benchmarks.
- Control considerations — owners may avoid equity dilution.
- Cost of capital — minimise WACC.
- Cash flow stability — stable cash flows support more debt.
- Capital market conditions — issuance windows matter.
30.8 Operating, Financial and Combined Leverage
| Leverage | Formula | Measures |
|---|---|---|
| Degree of Operating Leverage (DOL) | Contribution / EBIT = % ΔEBIT / % ΔSales | Sensitivity of EBIT to sales |
| Degree of Financial Leverage (DFL) | EBIT / EBT = % ΔEPS / % ΔEBIT | Sensitivity of EPS to EBIT |
| Degree of Combined Leverage (DCL) | DOL × DFL = Contribution / EBT = % ΔEPS / % ΔSales | Sensitivity of EPS to sales |
A high DOL means business risk is high; high DFL means financial risk is high. High combined leverage amplifies sales-fluctuation impact on EPS.
30.9 EBIT-EPS Analysis
The EBIT-EPS framework compares alternative capital structures by plotting EPS against EBIT for each. The indifference EBIT level — where two financing plans yield the same EPS — helps the firm choose. Above the indifference level the more-leveraged plan gives higher EPS; below it, the less-leveraged.
PYQs sometimes confuse MM Proposition I (firm value independent) with MM with tax (firm value rises with debt). The original 1958 MM is without tax; the corrected 1963 version with corporate tax gives the tax shield.
30.10 Practice Questions
Under the Net Operating Income (NOI) approach to capital structure:
View solution
MM Proposition I (without tax) states:
View solution
The Modigliani-Miller (MM) propositions were originally published in:
View solution
Under MM with corporate tax (1963), the value of a levered firm equals:
View solution
The pecking-order theory of capital structure was proposed by:
View solution
Arrange the sources of finance in the pecking order suggested by Myers-Majluf:
View solution
The Traditional approach to capital structure asserts that the WACC curve is:
View solution
The trade-off theory balances tax shield against:
View solution
Degree of Financial Leverage (DFL) is computed as:
View solution
Degree of Operating Leverage is:
View solution
DOL = 1.5; DFL = 2. Degree of Combined Leverage:
View solution
Under the Net Income approach:
View solution
The "home-leverage / arbitrage" argument is central to:
View solution
Capital structure differs from financial structure in that:
View solution
Which is **not** a determinant of capital structure?
View solution
Match each theory with its principal author:
| Theory | Author | ||
| (i) | NI / NOI | (a) | Myers-Majluf |
| (ii) | Traditional | (b) | David Durand (1952) |
| (iii) | MM | (c) | Ezra Solomon |
| (iv) | Pecking order | (d) | Modigliani-Miller (1958) |
View solution
High operating leverage indicates:
View solution
MM Proposition II says K_e equals:
View solution
In the Myers-Majluf pecking order, issuing new equity is the *last* resort because it:
View solution
The "indifference EBIT" in EBIT-EPS analysis is the EBIT level at which:
View solution
30.11 Quick Recall
- Capital structure = mix of long-term sources (equity, preference, debt). Financial structure includes short-term.
- Four classical theories: NI (Durand 1952; 100 % debt optimal), NOI (Durand; value independent), Traditional (Solomon; U-shaped WACC with optimum), MM 1958 (value independent via arbitrage; Prop II — K_e rises linearly with D/E).
- MM 1963 with corporate tax: V_L = V_U + T × D — tax shield.
- Trade-off theory — balance tax shield against distress and agency costs.
- Pecking order (Myers-Majluf 1984) — Internal → Debt → External equity.
- Other theories: Signalling (Ross 1977), Agency (Jensen-Meckling 1976), Market-timing.
- Leverages: DOL = Contribution/EBIT; DFL = EBIT/EBT; DCL = DOL × DFL = Contribution/EBT.
- EBIT-EPS analysis — find indifference EBIT where two financing plans yield equal EPS.
- Practical determinants — business risk, tax, flexibility, asset structure, growth, profitability, size, industry norms, control, cash-flow stability, market conditions.