Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T07:42:22.343Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effects of Classifying Equity or Debt on the Value of the Firm under Tax Asymmetry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Abstract

This paper examines the effect of classifying a firm's equity or debt into subclasses of unequal seniority on the total expected tax burden of the firm and its security holders in a world with no agency and no bankruptcy costs. It is shown that, when positive income is taxed at a higher rate than that allowed on realized capital losses, expected taxes are minimized and the value of the firm is maximized if the firm has only one class of equity and, at most, one class of debt. This result helps to explain the common practice of issuing corporate bonds under open indentures. In fact, our empirical results indicate that before the advent of a differentiated capital gains tax in 1921, a great majority of publicly traded long-term industrial bonds were issued under closed indentures. By 1951, nearly all such debt was issued under single indentures (i.e., there was only one class of creditor).

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1]Aitchison, J., and Brown, J. A. C.. The Lognormal Distribution with Special Reference to Its Uses in Economics. University of Cambridge, Department of Applied Economics Monograph 5, Cambridge, England: Cambridge Univ. Press (1957).Google Scholar
[2]Capital Changes Reporter. Looseleaf Service. Clark, NJ: Commerce Clearing House, Inc.Google Scholar
[3]Carmen, V. Commissioner of Internal Revenue. 13T.C. 1029 (1949).Google Scholar
[4]Commercial and Financial Chronicle (01. 1914).Google Scholar
[5]Dewing, A. S. Corporate Securities. New York: Ronald Press (1934).Google Scholar
[6]Fama, E. F., and Miller, M.. The Theory of Finance. Hinsdale, IL: Dryden Press (1972).Google Scholar
[7]Kim, E. H.; McConnell, J. J.; and Greenwood, P. R.. “Capital Structure Rearrangements and Me–First Rules in an Efficient Capital Market.” Journal of Finance, 32 (06 1977), 789809.Google Scholar
[8]Modigliani, F., and Miller, M.. “The Cost of Capital, Corporation Finance, and the Theory of Investments.” American Economic Review, 48 (06 1958), 261297.Google Scholar
[9]Moody's Industrial Manuals. New York, NY: Moody's Investors Service (1914, 1919, 1951, 1981).Google Scholar
[10]Myers, S. “Determinants of Corporate Borrowing.” Journal of Financial Economics, 5 (11 1977), 147175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11]Poor's Manual of Industrials. New York, NY: Poor's Manual Co. (1914, 1919).Google Scholar
[12]Scott, J. H. JrBankruptcy, Secured Debt, and Optimal Capital Structure. Journal of Finance, 32 (03 1977), 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Scott, J. H. JrBankruptcy, Secured Debt, and Optimal Capital Structure: Reply.” Journal of Finance, 34 (03 1979), 247251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Smith, C., and Warner, J.. “On Financial Contracting: An Analysis of Bond Covenants. Journal of Financial Economics, 7 (05 1979), 117161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Smith, C., and Warner, J.Bankruptcy, Secured Debt, and Optimal Capital Structure: Comment.” Journal of Finance, 34 (03 1979), 247251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16]Taggart, R. A. Jr “Secular Patterns in the Financing of U.S. Corporations.” Corporate Capital Structures in the United States. Edited by Friedman, B.. Chicago, IL: National Bureau of Economic Research, The Univ. of Chicago Press (1985), pp. 1375.Google Scholar
[17]Tax Management. (BNA) #279–3rd (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[18]White, M. J.Bankruptcy Costs and the New Bankruptcy Code.” Journal of Finance, 38 (05 1983), 477488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar