unit 9 dividend theory module - 3 m o d u l e...

UNIT 9 DIVIDEND THEORY

MODULE - 3

M

O

D

U

L

E

-

1

Dividend Theory

Self-Instructional Material 293

NOTES

UNIT 9 DIVIDEND THEORY

Structure

9.0 Introduction9.1 Unit Objectives9.2 Issues In Dividend Policy9.3 Dividend Relevance: Walter’s Model

9.3.1 Growth Firm: Internal Rate More Than Opportunity Cost of Capital (r > k);9.3.2 Normal Firms: Internal Rate Equals Opportunity Cost of Capital (r = k);9.3.3 Declining Firms: Internal Rate Less Than Opportunity Cost of Capital (r < k)9.3.4 Criticism of Walter’s Model

9.4 Dividend Relevance: Gordon’s Model9.5 Dividends and Uncertainty: The Bird-in-the-hand Argument9.6 Dividend Irrelevance: The Miller-Modigliani (MM) Hypothesis9.7. Relevance of Dividend Policy Under Market Imperfections

9.7.1 Uncertainty and Shareholders’ Preference for Dividends;9.7.2 Transaction Costs and the Case Against Dividend Payments;9.7.3 Information Asymmetry and Agency Costs and the Case for Dividend Payments9.7.4 Tax Differential: Low-payout and High-payout Clientele9.7.5 Neutrality of Dividend Policy: The Black-scholes Hypothesis

9.8 Informational Content of Dividends9.9 Let us Summarize9.10 Key Concepts9.11 Illustrative Solved Problems9.12 Answers to ‘Check Your Progress’9.13 Questions and Exercises

9.0 INTRODUCTION

Dividend decision of the firm is yet another crucial area of financial management. The importantaspect of dividend policy is to determine the amount of earnings to be distributed to shareholdersand the amount to be retained in the firm. Retained earnings are the most significant internalsources of financing the growth of the firm. On the other hand, dividends may be considereddesirable from shareholders’ point of view as they tend to increase their current return. Dividends,however, constitute the use of the firm’s funds.

9.1 UNIT OBJECTIVES

Highlight the issues of dividend policy

Critically evaluate why some experts feel that dividend policy matters

Discuss the bird-in-the-hand argument for paying current dividends

Explain the logic of the dividend irrelevance

Identify the market imperfections that make dividend policy relevant

9.2 ISSUES IN DIVIDEND POLICY

In theory, the objective of a dividend policy should be to maximise a shareholder’s return so thatthe value of his investment is maximised. Shareholders’ return consists of two components:dividends and capital gains. Dividend policy has a direct influence on these two components ofreturn.

Financial Management

294 Self-Instructional Material

NOTES

Let us consider an example to highlight the issues underlying the dividend policy. Payout ratio—which is dividend as a percentage of earnings—is an important concept vis-à-vis the dividendpolicy. 100 per cent minus payout percentage is called retention ratio. Suppose two companies,Low Payout Company and High Payout Company, both have a return on equity (ROE) of 20 percent. Assume that both companies’ equity consists of one share each of Rs 100. High PayoutCompany distributes 80 per cent while Low Payout Company distributes 20 per cent of its earningsas dividends. As you may recall, growth rate is the product of return on equity (ROE) timesretention ratio (b):

bg

ROE

ratioRetentionROEGrowth

For Low Payout Company, the growth rate is:

16%or 16.080.020.0 g

For High Payout Company the growth rate will be:

4%or 04.020.020.0 g

It may be seen from Table 9.1 that High Payout’s dividend is initially four times that of LowPayout’s. However, over a long period of time, Low Payout overtakes High Payout’s dividendpayments. As shown in Figure 9.1, in our example, fourteenth year onwards Low Payout’s dividendexceeds that of High Payout. Note that Low Payout retains much more than High Payout, and asa consequence, High Payout’s earnings, dividends and equity investment are growing at 16 percent while that of Low Payout’s at 4 per cent only.

Table 9.1: Consequences of High and Low Payout Policies

Equity Earnings at 20% Dividends Retained EarningsYear Rs Rs Rs Rs

High Payout Company1 100.00 20.00 16.00 4.00

2 104.00 20.80 16.64 4.16

3 108.16 21.63 7.31 4.32

4 112.48 22.50 18.00 4.50

5 116.98 23.40 18.72 4.68

10 142.33 28.47 22.77 5.69

15 173.17 34.63 27.71 6.92

20 210.68 42.14 33.71 8.43

Low Payout Company

1 100.00 20.00 4.00 16.00

2 116.00 23.20 4.64 18.56

3 134.56 26.91 5.38 21.53

4 156.09 31.22 6.24 24.98

5 181.07 36.21 7.24 28.97

10 380.30 76.06 15.21 60.85

15 798.75 159.75 31.95 127.80

20 1,677.65 335.53 67.11 268.42

A low payout policy might produce a higher share price because it accelerates earnings growth.Investors of growth companies will realise their return mostly in the form of capital gains. Dividendyield—dividend per share divided by the market price per share—will be low for such companies.The impact of dividend policy on future capital gains is, however, complex. Capital gains occur indistant future, and therefore, many people consider them uncertain. It is not sure that low-payoutpolicy will necessarily lead to higher prices in reality. It is quite difficult to clearly identify theeffect of payout on share price. Share price is a reflection of so many factors that the long-runeffect of payout is quite difficult to isolate.

Dividend Theory


NOTES

Figure 9.1: Dividend per share under high and low payout policies

A high payout policy means more current dividends and less retained earnings, which mayconsequently result in slower growth and perhaps lower market price per share. As stated earlier,low payout policy means less current dividends, more retained earnings and higher capital gainsand perhaps higher market price per share. Capital gains are future earnings while dividends arecurrent earnings. Dividends in most countries are taxed more than capital gains.1 Therefore, it isquite plausible that some investors would prefer high-payout companies while others may preferlow-payout companies.

What does dividend policy imply? Paying dividends involves outflow of cash. The cash availablefor the payment of dividends is affected by the firm’s investment and financing decisions. Adecision to incur capital expenditure implies that less cash will be available for the payment ofdividends. Thus, investment decision affects dividend decision. If the firm’s value is affected, isit because of the investment decision or the dividend decision? Given the firm’s capital expenditure,and that it does not have sufficient internal funds to pay dividends, it can raise funds by issuingnew shares. In this case, the dividend decision is not separable from the firm’s financing decision.

The firm will have a given amount of cash available for paying dividends given its investment andfinancing decisions. Thus, a dividend decision involves a trade-off between the retained earningsand issuing new shares. It is essential to separate the effect of dividend changes from the effectsof investment and financing decisions. Do changes in dividend policy alone affect the value ofthe firm? What factors are important in formulating a dividend policy in practice?

On the relationship between dividend policy and the value of the firm, different theories havebeen advanced. These theories can be grouped into two categories: (a) theories that considerdividend decision to be irrelevant and (b) theories that consider dividend decision to be an activevariable influencing the value of the firm. In the latter, there are two extreme views, that is:(i) dividends are good as they increase the shareholder value; (ii) dividends are bad since theyreduce the shareholder value. The following is the critical evaluation of some important theoriesrepresenting these points of views.

9.3 DIVIDEND RELEVANCE: WALTER’S MODEL

Professor James E. Walter argues that the choice of dividend policies almost always affect thevalue of the firm.2 His model, one of the earlier theoretical works, shows the importance of therelationship between the firm’s rate of return, r, and its cost of capital, k, in determining the

1. In India, there is no personal tax on dividends and short-term capital gains while the long-term capitalgains as taxed at 10 per cent.

2. Walter, James E., Dividend Policy: Its Influence on the Value of the Enterprise, Journal of Finance, 18May, 1963, p. 280–91.

Check Your Progress

1. What is the most importantaspect of dividendmanagement?



NOTES

dividend policy that will maximise the wealth of shareholders. Walter’s model is based on thefollowing assumptions:3

Internal financing The firm finances all investment through retained earnings; that is, debtor new equity is not issued.

Constant return and cost of capital The firm’s rate of return, r, and its cost of capital, k, areconstant.

100 per cent payout or retention All earnings are either distributed as dividends or reinvestedinternally immediately.

Constant EPS and DIV Beginning earnings and dividends never change. The values of theearnings per share, EPS, and the dividend per share, DIV, may be changed in the model todetermine results, but any given values of EPS or DIV are assumed to remain constantforever in determining a given value.

Infinite time The firm has a very long or infinite life.

Walter’s formula to determine the market price per share is as follows:

k

kr

kP

/)DIVEPS(DIV (1)

where P = market price per share

DIV = dividend per share

EPS = earnings per share

r = firm’s rate of return (average)

k = firm’s cost of capital or capitalisation rate

Equation (1) reveals that the market price per share is the sum of the present value of two sourcesof income: (i) the present value of the infinite stream of constant dividends, DIV/k and (ii) thepresent value of the infinite stream of capital gains, [r (EPS – DIV)/k]/k. When the firm retains aperpetual sum of (EPS – DIV) at r rate of return, its present value will be: r (EPS – DIV)/k. Thisquantity can be known as a capital gain which occurs when earnings are retained within the firm.If this retained earnings occur every year, the present value of an infinite number of capital gains,r (EPS – DIV)/k, will be equal to: [r (EPS – DIV)/k]/k. Thus, the value of a share is the presentvalue of all dividends plus the present value of all capital gains as shown in Equation (1) whichcan be rewritten as follows:

k

krP

)DIVEPS()/(DIV (2)

Illustration 9.1: Dividend Policy: Application of Walter’s Model

To illustrate the effect of different dividend policies on the value of share respectively for the growth firm,normal firm and declining firm Table 9.2 is constructed.

Table 9.2 shows that, in Walter’s model, the optimum dividend policy depends on the relationship betweenthe firm’s rate of return, r and its cost of capital, k. Walter’s view on the optimum dividend–payout ratio isexplained in the next section.4

9.3.1 Growth Firm: Internal Rate More Than OpportunityCost of Capital (r > k)

Growth firms are those firms which expand rapidly because of ample investment opportunitiesyielding returns higher than the opportunity cost of capital. These firms are able to reinvestearnings at a rate (r) which is higher than the rate expected by shareholders (k). They willmaximise the value per share if they follow a policy of retaining all earnings for internal investment.It can be seen from Table 9.2 that the market value per share for the growth firm is maximum (i.e.,

3. Francis, Jack Clark, Investments: Analysis and Management, McGraw Hill, 1972, p. 344.4. Walter, op. cit., also, see Francis, op. cit.

Dividend Theory


NOTES

Rs 150) when it retains 100 per cent earnings and minimum (i.e., Rs 100) if it distributes allearnings. Thus, the optimum payout ratio for a growth firm is zero. The market value per share P,increases as payout ratio declines when r > k.

9.3.2 Normal Firms: Internal Rate Equals Opportunity Cost of Capital (r = k)

Most of the firms do not have unlimited surplus-generating investment opportunities, yieldingreturns higher than the opportunity cost of capital. After exhausting super profitable opportunities,these firms earn on their investments rate of return equal to the cost of capital, r = k. For normalfirms with r = k, the dividend policy has no effect on the market value per share in Walter’s model.It can be noticed from Table 9.2 that the market value per share for the normal firm is same (i.e.,Rs 100) for different dividend-payout ratios. Thus, there is no unique optimum payout ratio for anormal firm. One dividend policy is as good as the other. The market value per share is notaffected by the payout ratio when r = k.

Table 9.2: Dividend Policy and the Value of Share (Walter's Model)

Growth Firm, r > k Normal Firm, r = k Declining Firm, r < k

Basic Datakr = 0.15 kr = 0.10 kr = 0.08kk = 0.10 kk = 0.10 kk = 0.10

EPS = Rs 10 EPS = Rs 10 EPS = Rs 10Payout Ratio 0%DIV = Re 0 DIV = Re 0 DIV = Re 0

P = 0 + (0.15/0.10) (10 – 0)/0.10 P = 0 + [(0.10/0.10) (10 – 0)]/0.10 P = 0 +[(0.08/0.10)(10 – 0)]/0.10

= Rs 150 = Rs 100 = Rs 80Payout Ratio 40%DIV = Rs 4 DIV = Rs 4 DIV = Rs 4

P = [4 + (0.15/0.10) (10 – 4)]/0.10 P = [4 + (0.10/0.10) (10 – 4)]/0.10 P = [4 + (0.08/0.10)(10 – 4)]/0.10


P = [8 + (0.15/0.10) (10 – 8)]/0.10 P = [8 + (0.10/0.10) (10 – 8)]/0.10 P = [8 + (0.08/0.10)(10 – 8)]/0.10


P = [10 +(0.15/0.10)(10 – 10)]/0.10 P = [10 +(0.10/0.10)(10 – 10)]/0.10 P = [10 +(0.08/0.10)(10 – 10)]/0.10

= Rs 100 = Rs 100 = Rs 100

9.3.3 Declining Firms: Internal Rate Less Than OpportunityCost of Capital (r < k)

Declining firms do not have any profitable investment opportunities to invest the earnings.These firms would earn on their investments rates of return less than the minimum rate requiredby investors. Investors of such firm would like earnings to be distributed to them so that theymay either spend it or invest elsewhere to get a rate higher than earned by the declining firms. Themarket value per share of a declining firm with r < k will be maximum when it does not retainearnings at all. It can be observed from Table 9.2 that, when the declining firm’s payout ratio is 100per cent (i.e., zero retained earnings) the market value per share is Rs 100 and it is Rs 80 whenpayout ratio is zero. Thus, the optimum payout ratio for a declining firm is 100 per cent. The marketvalue per share, P, increases as payout ratio increases when r < k.

Thus, in Walter’s model, the dividend policy of the firm depends on the availability of investmentopportunities and the relationship between the firm’s internal rate of return, r and its cost ofcapital, k. Thus:



NOTES

Retain all earnings when r > k

Distribute all earnings when r < k

Dividend (or retention) policy has no effect when r = k.

Thus, dividend policy in Walter’s model is a financing decision. When dividend policy is treatedas a financing decision, the payment of cash dividends is a passive residual.5

9.3.4 Criticism of Walter’s Model

Walter’s model is quite useful to show the effects of dividend policy on all equity firms underdifferent assumptions about the rate of return. However, the simplified nature of the model canlead to conclusions that are not true in general, though true for the model. The following is acritical evaluation of some of the assumptions underlying the model.

No external financing Walter’s model of share valuation mixes dividend policy with investmentpolicy of the firm. The model assumes that retained earnings finance the investment opportunitiesof the firm and no external financing—debt or equity—is used for the purpose. When such asituation exists, either the firm’s investment or its dividend policy or both will be sub-optimum. Thisis shown graphically in Figure 9.2.6 The horizontal axis represents the amount of earnings, invest-ment and new financing in rupees. The vertical axis shows the rates of return and the cost of capital.It is assumed that the cost of capital, k, remains constant regardless of the amount of new capitalraised.

Figure 9.2

Thus, the average cost of capital ka is equal to the marginal cost of capital, km. The rates of returnon investment opportunities available to the firm are assumed to be decreasing. This implies thatthe most profitable investments will be made first and the poorer investments made last. In Figure9.2, I* rupees of investment occurs where r = k. I* is the optimum investment regardless ofwhether the capital to finance this investment is raised by selling shares, debentures, retainingearnings or obtaining a loan. If the firm’s earnings are E1, then (I* – E1) amount should be raisedto finance the investments. However, external financing is not included in Walter’s simplifiedmodel. Thus, for this situation Walter’s model would show that the owner’s wealth is maximisedby retaining and investing firm’s total earnings of E1 and paying no dividends. In a morecomprehensive model allowing for outside financing, the firm should raise new funds to financeI* investment. The wealth of the owners will be maximised only when this optimum investment ismade.

Constant return, r Walter’s model is based on the assumption that r is constant. In fact, rdecreases as more and more investment is made. This reflects the assumption that the mostprofitable investments are made first and then the poorer investments are made. The firm shouldstop at a point where r = k. In Figure 9.2, the optimum point of investment occurs at I* where r =

5. Solomon, Ezra, The Theory of Financial Management, Columbia Press, 1963, pp. 139–40.6. Francis, op. cit., p. 347.

Dividend Theory


NOTES

k; if the firm’s earnings are E2 it should pay dividends equal to (E2 – I)*; on the other hand,Walter’s model indicates that, if the firm’s earnings are E2, they should be distributed because r< k at E2. This is clearly an erroneous policy and will fail to optimise the wealth of the owners.

Constant opportunity cost of capital, k A firm’s cost of capital or discount rate, k, does notremain constant; it changes directly with the firm’s risk. Thus, the present value of the firm’sincome moves inversely with the cost of capital. By assuming that the discount rate, k, is constant,Walter’s model abstracts from the effect of risk on the value of the firm.

9.4 DIVIDEND RELEVANCE: GORDON’S MODEL

Myron Gordon develops one very popular model explicitly relating the market value of the firm todividend policy.7 Gordon’s model is based on the following assumptions:8

All-equity firm The firm is an all-equity firm, and it has no debt.

No external financing No external financing is available. Consequently, retained earningswould be used to finance any expansion. Thus, just as Walter’s model Gordon’s model tooconfounds dividend and investment policies.

Constant return The internal rate of return, r, of the firm is constant. This ignores thediminishing marginal efficiency of investment as represented in Figure 9.2.

Constant cost of capital The appropriate discount rate k for the firm remains constant.Thus, Gordon’s model also ignores the effect of a change in the firm’s risk-class and its effecton k.

Perpetual earnings The firm and its stream of earnings are perpetual.

No taxes Corporate taxes do not exist.

Constant retention The retention ratio, b, once decided upon, is constant. Thus, the growthrate, g = br, is constant forever.

Cost of capital greater than growth rate The discount rate is greater than growth rate, k >br = g. If this condition is not fulfilled, we cannot get a meaningful value for the share.

According to Gordon’s dividend-capitalisation model, the market value of a share is equal to thepresent value of an infinite stream of dividends received by the shareholders. Thus:

12

210

)1(

DIV

)1(

DIV

)1(

DIV

)1(

DIV

tt

t

kkkkP (3)

However, the dividend per share is expected to grow when earnings are retained. The dividendper share is equal to the payout ratio, (1 – b) times earnings per share, EPS; that is, DIVt = (1 – b)EPSt where b is the fraction of retained earnings. It is assumed that the retained earnings arereinvested within the all-equity firm at the firm’s internal rate of return, r. This allows earnings togrow at g = br per period. When we incorporate growth in earnings and dividends, resulting fromthe retained earnings, in the dividend-capitalisation model, the present value of a share isdetermined by the following formula:

1

3

3

2

2

0

)1(

)+DIV(1

)1(

)+DIV(1

)1(

)+DIV(1

)1(

)+DIV(1

)1(

)+DIV(1

tt

t

k

g

k

g

k

g

k

g

k

gP

(4)

When Equation (4) is solved it becomes:

7. Gordon, Myron J., The Investment, Financing and Valuation of Corporation, Richard D. Irwin, 1962.8. Francis, op. cit., p. 352.

Check Your Progress

2. What are the basicassumptions of Waltermodel?



NOTES

gkP

1

0DIV

(5)

Substituting EPS1 (1 – b) for DIV1 and br for g, Equation (5) can be rewritten as

brk

bP

)1(EPS1

0 (6)

Equation (6) explicitly shows the relationship of expected earnings per share, EPS1, dividendpolicy as reflected by retention ratio, b, internal profitability, r, and the all-equity firm’s cost ofcapital, k, in the determination of the value of the share. Equation (6) is particularly useful forstudying the effects of dividend policy on the value of the share.

Let us consider the case of a normal firm where the internal rate of return of the firm equals its costof capital, i.e., r = k. Under this situation, Equation (6) may be expressed as follows:

)1()1(EPS1

0 brk

bAr

brk

bP

(7)

share)per assets=,=EPS since( ArA

If r = k, then

Ar

rA

kbrk

bAr

brk

bP

EPS)1()1(EPS10 (8)

Equation (8) shows that regardless of the firm’s earnings per share, EPS1, or risk (which determinesk), the firm’s value is not affected by dividend policy and is equal to the book value of assets pershare. That is, when r = k, dividend policy is irrelevant since b, completely cancels out ofEquation (8). Interpreted in economic sense, this finding implies that, under competitive conditions,the opportunity cost of capital, k, must be equal to the rate of return generally available toinvestors in comparable shares. This means that any funds distributed as dividends may beinvested in the market at the rate equal to the firm’s internal rate of return. Consequently,shareholders can neither lose nor gain by any change in the company’s dividend policy, and themarket value of their shares must remain unchanged.9

Considering the case of the declining firm where r < k, Equation (8) indicates that, if the retentionratio, b, is zero or payout ratio, (1 – b), is 100 per cent the value of the share is equal to:

)0=( 0 bk

rAP (9)

If r < k then r/k < 1 and from Equation (9) it follows that P0 is smaller than the firm’s investment pershare in assets, A. It can be shown that if the value of b increases, the value of the sharecontinuously falls.10 These results may be interpreted as follows:

If the internal rate of return is smaller than k, which is equal to the rate available in the market,profit retention clearly becomes undesirable from the shareholders’ standpoint. Each additionalrupee (sic) retained reduces the amount of funds that shareholders could invest at a higher rateelsewhere and thus further depresses the value of the company’s share. Under such conditions,the company should adopt a policy of contraction and disinvestment, which would allow theowner to transfer not only the net profit but also paid in capital (or a part of it) to some other, moreremunerative enterprise.11

Finally, let us consider the case of a growth firm where r > k. The value of a share will increase asthe retention ratio, b, increases under the condition of r > k. However, it is not clear as to what thevalue of b should be to maximise the value of the share, P0. For example, if b = k/r, Equation (6)reveals that denominator, k – br = 0, thus making P0 infinitely large, and if b = 1, k – br becomes

9. Dobrovolsky, Sergie P., The Economics of Corporation Finance, McGraw Hill, 1971, p. 55.10. Ibid., p. 56.11. Ibid.

Dividend Theory


NOTES

negative, thus making P0 negative. These absurd results are obtained because of the assumptionthat r and k are constant, which underlie the model. Thus, to get the meaningful value of theshare, according to Equation (6), the value of b should be less than k/r. Gordon’s model isillustrated in Illustration 9.2.

Illustration 9.2 : Application of Gordon’s Dividend Model

Let us consider the data in Table 9.3 on the next page. The implications of dividend policy, according toGordon’s model, are shown respectively for the growth, the normal and the declining firms.

It is revealed that under Gordon’s model:

The market value of the share, P0, increases with the retention ratio, b, for firms with growthopportunities, i.e. when r > k.

The market value of the share, P0, increases with the payout ratio, (1 – b), for declining firms with r <k.

The market value of the share is not affected by dividend policy when r = k.

Gordon’s model’s conclusions about dividend policy are similar to that of Walter’s model. Thissimilarity is due to the similarities of assumptions that underlie both the models. Thus the Gordonmodel suffers from the same limitations as the Walter model.

9.5 DIVIDENDS AND UNCERTAINTY:THE BIRD-IN-THE-HAND ARGUMENT

According to Gordon’s model, dividend policy is irrelevant where r = k, when all other assumptionsare held valid. But when the simplifying assumptions are modified to conform more closely toreality, Gordon concludes that dividend policy does affect the value of a share even when r = k.This view is based on the assumption that under conditions of uncertainty, investors tend todiscount distant dividends (capital gains) at a higher rate than they discount near dividends.Investors, behaving rationally, are risk-averse and, therefore, have a preference for near dividendsto future dividends. The logic underlying the dividend effect on the share value can be describedas the bird-in-the-hand argument. Kirshman, first of all, put forward the bird-in-the-hand argumentin the following words:

Table 9.3: Dividend Policy and the Value of the Firm

Growth Firm, r > k Normal Firm, r = k Declining Firm, r < kBasic Data

r = 0.15 r = 0.10 r = 0.08k = 0.10 k = 0.10 k = 0.10

EPS1 = Rs 10 EPS1 = Rs 10 EPS1 = Rs 10

Payout Ratio 40%

004 Rs01.0

409.010.0

)6.01(10

09.015.06.0

P

brg

001 Rs04.0

406.010.0

)6.01(10

06.010.06.0

P

brg

77 Rs052.0

4048.010.0

)6.01(10

048.008.06.0

P

brg

Payout Ratio 60%

150 Rs04.0

606.010.0

)4.01(10

06.015.04.0

P

brg

001 Rs06.0

604.010.0

)4.01(10

04.010.04.0

P

brg

88 Rs068.0

6032.010.0

)4.01(10

032.008.04.0

P

brg



NOTES

Payout Ratio 90%

061 Rs085.0

9015.010.0

)1.01(10

015.015.010.0

P

brg

001 Rs09.0

901.010.0

)1.01(10

01.010.010.0

P

brg

89 Rs092.0

9008.010.0

)1.01(10

008.008.010.0

P

brg

Of two stocks with identical earnings record, and prospects but the one paying a larger dividendthan the other, the former will undoubtedly command a higher price merely because stockholdersprefer present to future values. Myopic vision plays a part in the price-making process. Stockholdersoften act upon the principle that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush and for this reason arewilling to pay a premium for the stock with the higher dividend rate, just as they discount the onewith the lower rate.12

Graham and Dodd also hold a similar view when they state:

The typical investor would most certainly prefer to have his dividend today and let tomorrow takecare of itself. No instances are on record in which the withholding of dividends for the sake offuture profits has been hailed with such enthusiasm as to advance the price of the stock. Thedirect opposite has invariably been true. Given two companies in the same general position andwith the same earning power, the one paying the larger dividend will always sell at a higherprice.13 (Emphasis added)

Myron Gordon has expressed the bird-in-the-hand argument more convincingly and in formalterms. According to him, uncertainty increases with futurity; that is, the further one looks into thefuture, the more uncertain dividends become. Accordingly, when dividend policy is consideredin the context of uncertainty, the appropriate discount rate, k, cannot be assumed to be constant.In fact, it increases with uncertainty; investors prefer to avoid uncertainty and would be willingto pay higher price for the share that pays the greater current dividend, all other things heldconstant. In other words, the appropriate discount rate would increase with the retention rate asshown in Figure 9.2. Thus, distant dividends would be discounted at a higher rate than neardividends. Symbolically, kt > kt – 1 for t = 1, 2, 3, ... because of increasing uncertainty in the future.As the discount rate increases with the length of time, a low dividend payment in the beginningwill tend to lower the value of share in future.

When the discount rate is assumed to be increasing, Equation (3) can be rewritten as follows:

1

33

32

2

2

1

10

)1(

DIV

)1(

DIV

)1(

DIV

)1(

DIV

)1(

DIV

tt

t

t

nn

n

k

kkkkP

(10)

where P0 is the price of the share when the retention rate, b, is zero and kt > kt – 1. If the firm isassumed to retain a fraction b of earnings, dividend per share will be equal to (1 – b) EPS1 in thefirst year. Thus, the dividend per share is expected to grow at rate g = br, when retained earningsare reinvested at r rate of return. The dividend in the second year will be DIV0 (1 + g)2 = (1 – b)EPS1 (1 + br)2, in the third year DIV0 (1 + g)3 = (1 + b) EPS2 (1 + br)3 and so on. Discounting thisstream of dividends at the corresponding discount rates of k1, k2… we obtain the followingequation:

nn

n

bk

g

k

g

k

gP

)1(

)1(DIV

)1(

)1(DIV

)1(

)1(DIV 02

2

20

11

10

(11)

where Pb is the price of the share when the retention rate b is positive i.e., b > 0. The value of Pb

12. Krishman, John, E., Principles of Investment. McGraw Hill, 1933, p. 737; cf. in Mao, J.C.T., QuantitativeAnalysis of Financial Decision, Macmillan, 1969.

13. Graham, Benjamin and David L. Dodd, Security Analysis.; McGraw Hill, Inc., 1st ed., 1934, p. 327.

Dividend Theory


NOTES

calculated in this way can be determined by discounting this dividend stream at the uniform rate,k, which is the weighted average of kt:

14

brk

b

gk

k

g

k

g

k

gP

n

n

b

11

02

200

EPS)1(DIV

)1(

)1(DIV

)1(

)1(DIV

)1(

)1(DIV

(12)

Assuming that the firm’s rate of return equals the discount rate, will Pb be higher or lower than P0?Gordon’s view, as explained above, is that the increase in earnings retention will result in a lowervalue of share. To emphasise, he reached this conclusion through two assumptions regardinginvestors’ behaviour: (i) investors are risk averters and (ii) they consider distant dividends asless certain than near dividends. On the basis of these assumptions, Gordon concludes that therate at which an investor discounts dividend stream increases with the futurity of this dividendstream. If investors discount distant dividend at a higher rate than near dividends, increasing theretention ratio has the effect of raising the average discount rate, k, or equivalently loweringshare prices.

Thus, incorporating uncertainty into his model, Gordon concludes that dividend policy affectsthe value of the share. His reformulation of the model justifies the behaviour of investors whovalue a rupee of dividend income more than a rupee of capital gains income. These investorsprefer dividend above capital gains because dividends are easier to predict, are less uncertainand less risky, and are therefore, discounted with a lower discount rate.15 However, all do notagree with this view.

9.6 DIVIDEND IRRELEVANCE: THE MILLER-MODIGLIANI (MM) HYPOTHESIS

According to Miller and Modigliani (MM), under a perfect market situation, the dividend policyof a firm is irrelevant, as it does not affect the value of the firm.16 They argue that the value of thefirm depends on the firm’s earnings that result from its investment policy. Thus, when investmentdecision of the firm is given, dividend decision—the split of earnings between dividends andretained earnings—is of no significance in determining the value of the firm.

A firm, operating in perfect capital market conditions, may face one of the following three situationsregarding the payment of dividends:

The firm has sufficient cash to pay dividends.

The firm does not have sufficient cash to pay dividends, and therefore, it issues new sharesto finance the payment of dividends.

The firm does not pay dividends, but a shareholder needs cash.

In the first situation, when the firm pays dividends, shareholders get cash in their hands, but thefirm’s assets reduce (its cash balance declines). What shareholders gain in the form of cashdividends, they lose in the form of their claims on the (reduced) assets. Thus, there is a transferof wealth from shareholders’ one pocket to their another pocket. There is no net gain or loss.Since it is a fair transaction under perfect capital market conditions, the value of the firm willremain unaffected.

In the second situation, when the firm issues new shares to finance the payment of dividends,two transactions take place. First, the existing shareholders get cash in the form of dividends, butthey suffer an equal amount of capital loss since the value of their claim on assets reduces. Thus,

14. Mao, James C.T., Quantitative Analysis of Financial Decision, Macmillan, 1969, p. 482.15. Francis, op. cit., p. 354.16. Miller, Merton H. and Modigliani, France, Dividend Policy, Growth and Valuation of the Shares,

Journal of Business, XXIV (October 1961), pp. 411–33.



NOTES

the wealth of shareholders does not change. Second, the new shareholders part with their cash tothe company in exchange for new shares at a fair price per share. The fair price per share is shareprice before the payment of dividends less dividend per share to the existing shareholders. Theexisting shareholders transfer a part of their claim (in the form of new shares) to the new shareholdersin exchange for cash. There is no net gain or loss. Both transactions are fair, and thus, the valueof the firm will remain unaltered after these transactions.

In the third situation, if the firm does not pay any dividend a shareholder can create a “home-made dividend” by selling a part of his/her shares at the market (fair) price in the capital market forobtaining cash. The shareholder will have less number of shares. He or she has exchanged a partof his claim on the firm to a new shareholder for cash. The net effect is the same as in the case ofthe second situation. The transaction is a fair transaction, and no one loses or gains. The valueof the firm remains the same, before or after these transactions. Consider an example.

Illustration 9.3: Dividend Irrelevance: The Miller-Modigliani Hypothesis

The Himgir Company Limited currently has 2 crore outstanding shares selling at a market price of Rs 100per share. The firm has no borrowing. It has internal funds available to make a capital expenditure (capex)of Rs 30 crore. The capex is expected to yield a positive net present value of Rs 20 crore. The firm alsowants to pay a dividend per share of Rs 15. Given the firm’s capex plan and its policy of zero borrowing,the firm will have to issue new shares to finance payment of dividends to its shareholders. How will thefirm’s value be affected (i) if it does not pay any dividend; (ii) if it pays dividend per share Rs 15?

The firm’s current value is: 2 100 = Rs 200 crore. After the capex, the value will increase to: 200 + 20 =Rs 220 crore. If the firm does not pay dividends, the value per share will be: 220/2 = Rs 110.

If the firm pays a dividend of Rs 15 per share, it will entirely utilise its internal funds (15 2 = Rs 30 crore),and it will have to raise Rs 30 crore by issuing new shares to undertake capex. The value of a share afterpaying dividend will be: 110 – 15 = Rs 95. Thus, the existing shareholders get cash of Rs 15 per share in theform of dividends, but incur a capital loss of Rs 15 in the form of reduced share value. They neither gain norlose. The firm will have to issue: 30 crore/95 = 31,57,895 (about 31.6 lakh) shares to raise Rs 30 crore. Thefirm now has 2.316 crore shares at Rs 95 each share. Thus, the value of the firm remains as: 2.316 95 = Rs220 crore.

The crux of the MM dividend hypothesis, as explained above, is that shareholders do not necessarilydepend on dividends for obtaining cash. In the absence of taxes, flotation costs and difficulties inselling shares, they can get cash by devising “home-made dividend” without any dilution in theirwealth. Therefore, firms paying high dividends (i.e. high-payout firms), need not command higherprices for their shares. A formal explanation of the MM hypothesis is given in the following pages.

MM’s hypothesis of irrelevance is based on the following assumptions:17

Perfect capital markets The firm operates in perfect capital markets where investors behaverationally, information is freely available to all and transactions and flotation costs do notexist. Perfect capital markets also imply that no investor is large enough to affect the marketprice of a share.

No taxes Taxes do not exist; or there are no differences in the tax rates applicable to capitalgains and dividends. This means that investors value a rupee of dividend as much as a rupeeof capital gains.

Investment policy The firm has a fixed investment policy.

No risk Risk of uncertainty does not exist. That is, investors are able to forecast future pricesand dividends with certainty, and one discount rate is appropriate for all securities and all timeperiods. Thus, r = k = kt for all t.

Under the MM assumptions, r will be equal to the discount rate, k and identical for all shares. Asa result, the price of each share must adjust so that the rate of return, which is composed of therate of dividends and capital gains, on every share will be equal to the discount rate and beidentical for all shares. Thus, the rate of return for a share held for one year may be calculated asfollows:

17. Francis, op. cit.

Dividend Theory


NOTES0

01 )(DIV

price Share

loss)(or gains Capital+Dividends

P

PPr

r

(13)

where P0 is the market or purchase price per share at time 0, P1 is the market price per share at time1 and DIV1 is dividend per share at time 1. As hypothesised by MM, r should be equal for allshares. If it is not so, the low-return yielding shares will be sold by investors who will purchasethe high-return yielding shares. This process will tend to reduce the price of the low-return sharesand increase the prices of the high-return shares. This switching or arbitrage will continue untilthe differentials in rates of return are eliminated. The discount rate will also be equal for all firmsunder the MM assumptions since there are no risk differences.

From MM’s fundamental principle of valuation described by Equation (13), we can derive theirvaluation model as follows:

)1(

DIV

)1(

DIV

)(DIV

11110

0

011

k

P

r

PP

P

PPr

(14)

since r = k in the assumed world of certainty and perfect markets. Multiplying both sides ofEquation (14) by the number of shares outstanding, n, we obtain the total value of the firm if nonew financing exists:

)1(

)(DIV 110 k

PnPnV

(15)

If the firm sells m number of new shares at time 1 at a price of P1, the value of the firm at time 0 willbe:

)1(

)(DIV

)1(

DIV

)1(

)(DIV

111

1111

11110

k

PmPmnn

k

PmPmPnn

k

PmPmPnPn

(16)

MM’s valuation Equation (16) allows for the issue of new shares, unlike Walter’s and Gordon’smodels. Consequently, a firm can pay dividends and raise funds to undertake the optimuminvestment policy (as explained in Figure 9.1). Thus, dividend and investment policies are notconfounded in the MM model, like Walter’s and Gordon’s models. As such, MM’s model yieldsmore general conclusions.

The investment programmes of a firm, in a given period of time, can be financed either by retainedearnings or the issue of new shares or both. Thus, the amount of new shares issued will be:

1111111 DIV)DIV( nXInXImP (17)

where I1 represents the total amount of investment during first period and X1 is the total net profitof the firm during first period.

By substituting Equation (17) into Equation (16), MM showed that the value of the firm isunaffected by its dividend policy, Thus,

)1(

)(

)1(

)DIV()(DIV

)1(

)(DIV

111

11111

1110

k

XIPmn

k

nXIPmnn

k

PmPmnnPn



NOTES

A firm which pays dividends will have to raise funds externally to finance its investment plans.MM’s argument, that dividend policy does not affect the wealth of the shareholders, implies thatwhen the firm pays dividends, its advantage is offset by external financing. This means that theterminal value of the share (say, price of the share at first period if the holding period is one year)declines when dividends are paid. Thus, the wealth of the shareholders—dividends plus terminalprice—remains unchanged. As a result, the present value per share after dividends and externalfinancing is equal to the present value per share before the payment of dividends. Thus, theshareholders are indifferent between payment of dividends and retention of earnings.

Illustration 9.4 : Dividend Policy with and without Issue of Shares

The Vikas Engineering Co. Ltd., currently has one lakh outstanding shares selling at Rs 100 each. The firmhas net profits of Rs 10 lakh and wants to make new investments of Rs 20 lakh during the period. The firmis also thinking of declaring a dividend of Rs 5 per share at the end of the current fiscal year. The firm’sopportunity cost of capital is 10 per cent. What will be the price of the share at the end of the year if (i) adividend is not declared; (ii) a dividend is declared. (iii) How many new shares must be issued?

The price of the share at the end of the current fiscal year is determined as follows:

101

110

DIV)1(

)1(

DIV

kPP

k

PP

The value of P1 when dividend is not paid is:

110 Rs0)10.1(100 Rs1 P

The value of P1 when dividend is paid is:

105 Rs5 Rs)10.1(100 Rs1 P

It can be observed that whether dividend is paid or not the wealth of shareholders remains the same. Whenthe dividend is not paid the shareholder will get Rs 110 by way of the price per share at the end of the currentfiscal year. On the other hand, when dividend is paid, the shareholder will realise Rs 105 by way of the priceper share at the end of the current fiscal year plus Rs 5 as dividend.

The number of new shares to be issued by the company to finance its investments is determined as follows:

shares. 285,14105/000,500,1

000,500,1105

)000,500000,000,1(000,000,2105

)DIV( 11

m

m

m

nXIPm

9.7 RELEVANCE OF DIVIDEND POLICY UNDERMARKET IMPERFECTIONS

The MM hypothesis of dividend irrelevance is based on simplifying assumptions as discussedin the preceding section. Under these assumptions, the conclusion derived by them is logicallyconsistent and intuitively appealing. But the assumptions underlying MM’s hypothesis may notalways be found valid in practice. For example, we may not find capital markets to be perfect inreality; there may exist issue costs; dividends may be taxed differently than capital gains; investorsmay encounter difficulties in selling their shares. Because of the unrealistic nature of theassumptions, MM’s hypothesis is alleged to lack practical relevance. This suggests that internalfinancing and external financing are not equivalent. Dividend policy of the firm may affect theperception of shareholders and, therefore, they may not remain indifferent between dividendsand capital gains. The following are the situations where the MM hypothesis may go wrong.

9.7.1 Uncertainty and Shareholders’ Preference for Dividends

Many believe that dividends are relevant under conditions of uncertainty. It is suggested thatdividends resolve uncertainty in the minds of investors and, therefore, they prefer dividends

Check Your Progress

3. What is meant by arbitrage?

4. What does MM hypothesisholds?

Dividend Theory


NOTES

than capital gains. As explained earlier, Gordon and others have referred to the argument thatdividends are relevant under uncertainty as the bird-in-the-hand argument. Gordon asserts thatuncertainty increases with the length of time period. Investors are risk-averters and, therefore,prefer near dividends to future dividends. Thus, future dividends are discounted at a higher ratethan near dividends. This implies that the discount rate increases with uncertainty. As a result, afirm paying dividends earlier will command a higher value than a firm which follows a policy ofretention. This view implies that there exists a high-payout clientele who value shares of dividendpaying more than those which do not pay dividends.

The uncertainty argument is not very convincing. MM argue that, even if the assumption ofperfect certainty is dropped from their hypothesis, dividend policy continues to be irrelevant.They contend that the market prices of two firms with identical investment and capital structurepolicies and risk, cannot be different because they follow different dividend policies. These firmswill have the same cash flows from their investments despite the differences in dividendpolicies.The risk (uncertainty) of the firms’ shareholders is alike, given the similarities of their riskand investment and capital structure policies. Dividend policy does not change the amount andrisk of cash flows from investments; it simply splits these cash flows into dividend payments andretained earnings.

The current receipt of money in the form of dividends is considered safer than the uncertainpotential gain in the future. The reason for this safety is that it is cash in hand rather than that itis dividend income and not a capital gain. The shareholders can sell some of their shares to obtaincurrent cash if a firm does not distribute dividends. The risk-return trade-off will make shareholdersto expect lower returns from those firms that have high-payout ratios. Let us emphasise again thatgiven a firm’s investment and capital structure policies, paying dividends does not affect thefirm’s or shareholders’ risk. Thus the difference between current dividends and the future capitalgains does not alter the firm’s value under the efficient market conditions. However, there maystill exist a high-payout clientele, not because current dividends safer, but because someshareholders need a steady source of income, or because some will prefer to receive dividends asearly as possible since some firms do not provide reliable information about their investmentsand earnings.

Yet another reason for shareholders preferring current dividends maybe their desire to diversifytheir portfolios according to their risk preferences. Hence, they would like firms to distributeearnings. They will be able to invest dividends received in other assets keeping in mind their needfor diversification. Under these circumstances, investors may discount the value of the firms thatuse internal financing.

9.7.2 Transaction Costs and the Case against Dividend Payments

MM argue that internal financing (retained earnings) and external financing (issue of shares) areequivalent. This implies that when firms pay dividends, they can finance their investment plansby issuing shares. Whether the firm retains earnings or issues new shares, the wealth ofshareholders would remain unaffected. This cannot be true since the issue of shares involveflotation or issue costs, including costs of preparing and issuing prospectus, underwriting fee,brokers’ commission etc. No flotation costs are involved if the earnings are retained. The presenceof flotation or transaction costs makes the external financing costlier than the internal financingvia retained earnings. Thus, if flotation costs are considered, the equivalence between retainedearnings and new share capital is disturbed and the retention of earnings would be favoured overthe payment of dividends. In practice, dividend decisions seem to be sticky for whatever reasons.Companies continue paying same dividends, rather increasing it, unless earnings decline, in spiteof need for funds.

Under the MM hypothesis, the wealth of a shareholder will be same whether the firm paysdividends or not. If a shareholder is not paid dividends and she desires to have current income,she can sell the shares held by her. When the shareholder sells her shares to satisfy her desire forcurrent income, she will have to pay brokerage fee. This fee is more for small sales. Further, it isinconvenient to sell the shares, particularly for investors with small share holdings. Some emergingmarkets are not very liquid, and many shares are not frequently traded. Because of the transactions



NOTES

costs and inconvenience associated with the sale of shares to realise capital gains, shareholdersmay prefer dividends to capital gains.

9.7.3 Information Asymmetry and Agency Costs and theCase for Dividend Payments

Managers in practice may not share complete information with shareholders. This gap betweeninformation available with managers and what is actually shared with shareholders is calledinformation asymmetry. This leads to several agency problems, viz., conflicts between managersand shareholders. Managers may not have enough incentive to disclose full information toshareholders. They may act in their own self-interest and take away the firm’s wealth in the formof non-pecuniary benefits. Shareholders incur agency costs to obtain full information about acompany’s investment plans, future earnings, expected dividend payments etc. The shareholders-managers conflict can be reduced through monitoring which includes bonding contracts andlimiting the power of managers vis-à-vis allocation of wealth and managerial compensation.18

However, monitoring involves costs that are referred to as agency costs. Payment of dividendallocates resources to shareholders, and thus, alleviates the need for monitoring and incurringagency costs.

The high-payout policy of a company helps to reduce the conflict arising out of informationasymmetry.19 It is argued that companies which pay high dividends regularly may be raisingcapital more frequently from the primary markets. Therefore, the actors in primary markets like thefinancial institutions and banks would be monitoring the performance of these companies. If theprofessionals in the banks and financial institutions continuously do such monitoring,shareholders need not incur monitoring (agency) costs.

Dividend payout also allocates financial resources in favour of shareholders as against lenders.Lenders have prior claims over a company’s cash flows generated internally. The payment ofdividend changes this priority in favour of shareholders as they receive cash flows before theloan principals of lenders are redeemed. Thus, we observe that from the point of view of agencycosts, shareholders would generally prefer payment of dividend.

9.7.4 Tax Differential: Low-Payout and High-Payout Clientele

MM’s assumption that taxes do not exist is far from reality. Investors have to pay taxes ondividends and capital gains. But different tax rates are applicable to dividends and capital gains.Dividend income is generally treated as the ordinary income, while capital gains are speciallytreated for tax purposes. In most countries, the capital gains tax rate is lower than the marginal taxrate for ordinary income. From the tax point of view, a shareholder in high tax bracket shouldprefer capital gains over current dividends for two reasons: (i) the capital gains tax is less than thetax on dividends, and (ii) the capital gains tax is payable only when the shares are actually sold.The effect of the favourable tax differential in case of capital gains will result in tax savings. As aconsequence, the value of the share should be higher in the internal financing case than in theexternal financing one. Thus, the tax advantage of capital gains over dividends strongly favoursa low-dividend payout policy. This implies that investors will pay more for low-dividend yieldshares. Tax differential should attract tax clienteles. Investors in high-tax brackets should ownlow-payout shares, and those in low-tax bracket should own high-payout shares. In reality, mostinvestors may have marginal income tax rate higher than the capital gains tax rate. Thus, dividends,on an average, are considered bad since they will result in higher taxes and reduction in thewealth of shareholders. Tax differential generally favour low-payout clientele.

Consider an example. Two identical firms X and Y have different dividend policy. Both have aftertax profit, P of Rs 100. X pays 100 per cent dividend. Y does not pay any dividend and shareholders

18. Jensen, M.C. and Meckling, W.H., Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behaviour, Agency Costs andOwnership Structure, Journal of Financial Economics, October 1976.

19. Rozeff, M., Growth, Beta and Agency Cost as Determinants of Dividend Payout Ratios, Journal ofFinancial Research, Fall 1982, pp. 249–59.

Dividend Theory


NOTES

get capital gains. Assume further that capital gains from shares held at least for one year are taxedat 20 per cent and marginal income tax rate is 40 per cent. Suppose Y’s shareholders are in highesttax bracket and pay tax on dividend income at 40 per cent. X’s shareholders will receive dividendsof Rs 100 and their after tax dividend income will be: 100 (1 – 0.40) = Rs 60. Y’s shareholders willrealize capital gains of Rs 100 and their after tax capital gains will be: 100 (1 – 0.20) = Rs 80. Y’sshareholders are better off as they have tax advantage. Since the after tax equity income of Y’sshareholders is higher than X’s shareholders and since both firms are identical in all other respects,Y’s equity price will be higher. To match capital gain of Re 1 of Y’s shareholders, X’s shareholdersshould receive dividend of Rs 1.33:

1.330.80/0.60DIV

0.20)(1DIV0.40)(1

gain capitaltax-Afterdividendtax-After

If X’s shareholders get dividend of Rs 1.33 and Y’s shareholders get capital gain of Rs 1, both willhave after tax income of Rs 0.80.

If a tax system favours capital gains to dividend income, there may still be several investors whoare in lower tax brackets. These investors investing in shares will prefer dividend income rathercapital gains. Thus, there may exit high-payout clientele. In a tax system that treats dividendsmore favourably than capital gains, shareholders in high tax brackets will also prefer receivingdividends rather than capital gains. Under this tax system, dividends will be considered good andit will generally attract high-payout clientele. This situation prevails currently in India. There isno tax on dividend income in the hands of shareholders (both individuals and companies), butcompanies are required to pay tax at 12.5 per cent on dividends paid to shareholders. Capitalgains are taxed at 20 per cent. As a result of this system, shareholders in India will prefer to receivecurrent dividends rather than capital gains. Since companies paying dividends are required topay additional tax, this taxation system may create a conflict between shareholders and companies.Companies would like to pay no or low dividends to save additional tax while shareholders wouldlike to have more dividends as they have no tax liability on the dividend income. If the objectiveof the companies is to maximise the wealth of shareholders, the tax system augurs for payinghigher dividends.

India is an exception where dividends are not taxed but capital gains are. In most countries, taxsystems favour capital gains with no or low tax rates as compared to dividends. Thus, the preferencefor low-payout or high-payout shares will depend on the tax status of the individual investors. (SeeExhibit 9.1 for the different tax systems regarding dividends and capital gains.)

9.7.5 Neutrality of Dividend Policy: The Black-Scholes Hypothesis

We have just explained that the benefits of dividends for shareholders are that they satisfytheir desire for current income, avoid the need to sell shares and incur transaction costs andsignal the firm’s prospects and risk allowing them to make choices with regard to their investmentportfolios. The cost of dividends is the higher tax on dividend. Black and Scholes argue thatshareholders trade off the benefits of dividends against the tax loss. Based on the trade offsthat shareholders make, they could be classified into three clienteles: (i) a clientele that considersdividends are always good; (ii) a clientele that considers dividends are always bad; and (iii) aclientele that is indifferent to dividends. Shareholders in high tax brackets may belong to high-payout clientele since in their case the tax disadvantage may outweigh the benefits of dividends.On the other hand, shareholders in low tax brackets may fit in to low-payout clientele as theymay suffer marginal tax disadvantage of dividends. Tax-exempt investors are indifferent betweendividends and capital gains, as they pay no taxes on their income.

In a real world situation, all three clienteles exist as tax status and need for current incomes ofinvestors differ. There are several hundreds of companies that ‘supply’ dividends to meet thedemand of the three types of clienteles. Black and Scholes argue that since the supply of dividendsand demand for dividends match, there will be no gains if a firm changes its dividend policy; theinvestors have already made their choices or there already exist opportunities for shareholders toshift from one firm to another. How will companies determine whether change in dividend policy



NOTES

will affect their share prices? This is an empirical question and a difficult question to answer,given the problems with statistical techniques. However, the Black-Scholes hypothesis showsthat the tax disadvantage of dividends is not so great as made out by some academicians.

9.8 INFORMATIONAL CONTENT OF DIVIDENDS

It is contended that dividends are relevant because they have informational value. A companycan make statements about its expected earnings growth to inform shareholders in order to createa favourable impression on them. However, these statements would be paid better attention ifthey follow with a dividend action – a disbursement of cash. The cash payment for dividendsconveys to shareholders that the company is profitable and financially strong. When a firmchanges its dividend policy in a significant manner, investors assume that it is in response to anexpected change in the firm’s profitability which will last long. An increase in payout ratio signalsto shareholders a permanent or long-term increase in firm’s expected earnings. It is, therefore,argued that the announcement of changes in dividend policy influences shares prices, and thatmanagers use the dividend changes to convey information about the future earnings of theircompanies. They may also influence the perceptions of the investors about the risk of thecompany which follows a stable dividend policy. This sort of argument is also known as thedividend-signalling hypothesis.20 Solomon contends that dividends may offer tangible evidence

EXHIBIT 7.1: TAXES AND DIVIDENDS

Shareholders’ earnings are taxed differently in different countries. We can identify the followingfour tax systems regarding the taxation of shareholders’ earnings:

Double taxation: Under this system, shareholders’ earnings are taxed twice; first thecorporate tax is levied on profits at the level of the company, and then, the after-tax profitsdistributed as dividends are taxed as ordinary income in the hands of shareholders. Mostcountries have a higher marginal tax rate for dividend income than capital gains. Thewealthy shareholders with high personal tax rates will prefer capital gains to dividends. Anumber of countries such as USA follow the double (or two-tier) taxation system. Indiapractised this system until the change in the tax laws in 1997.

Single taxation: Under this system, shareholders’ earnings are taxed only once at thecorporate level. Dividends received by shareholders are exempt from tax. India currentlyfollows this system. Companies in India pay tax on their profits at 35 per cent, and theywill have to pay additional tax at 12.5 per cent on the after-tax profits distributed asdividends to shareholders. Shareholders, both individuals and corporate, do not paytaxes on the dividend income. However, they do pay tax on short-term capital gains. Themarginal personal rate is 30 per cent and short-term capital gain tax rate is 10 per cent.Under this system, all investors will prefer dividends and long-term capital gains

Split-rate taxation: Under this system, corporate profits are divided into retainedearnings and dividends for the purpose of taxation. A higher tax rate is applied to retainedearnings and a lower rate to earnings distributed as dividends. Shareholders pay tax ondividends and capital gains. This system, but for a lower tax rate on dividend, is similar todouble taxation system. Tax-exempt and low-tax paying shareholders would preferdividends while shareholders in high tax brackets will prefer capital gains.

Imputation taxation: Under this system, shareholders’ earnings are not subjected todouble taxation. A company pays corporate tax on its earnings. Shareholders pay personaltaxes on dividends but get full or partial tax relief for the tax paid by the company. InAustralia, shareholders get full tax relief while in Canada they get partial relief. Under fulltax relief, a tax-exempt shareholder or a shareholder, who has a personal tax rate lower thanthe corporate tax rate, will get a tax refund.

20. Ross, S., The Determinant of Financial Structure: The Incentive-Signalling Approach, Bell Journal ofEconomics, spring 1977, pp. 23–40.

Check Your Progress

5. Write a brief note ontransactions costs?

6. What is the income taxprovision regardingdividends?

Dividend Theory


NOTES

of the firm’s ability to generate cash, and as a result, the dividend policy of the firm may affect theshare price. He states,

...in an uncertain world in which verbal statements can be ignored or misinterpreted, dividendaction does provide a clearcut means of ‘making a statement’ that ‘speaks louder than a thousandwords.21

The dividend-signalling hypothesis implies that the most valuable dividend policy is the one thatprovides information that cannot be effectively communicated through other means. The mostdividend policies are likely to be those that very closely reflect the firm’s long-term performance. Letus consider some examples. Suppose that a company has been following a dividend policy of payingRs 2 per share for quite sometime. Assume that the company’s current earnings of, say, Rs 4 per shareincreases to, say, Rs 7 per share. If the company does not increase dividend from Rs 2 per share, themessage conveyed to the shareholders will be that the increase in earnings is only a temporary,cyclical occurrence. Therefore, the market price of the share may not be affected very significantly.On the other hand, if the dividends were raised from, say, Rs 2 per share to Rs 3 per share, theshareholders would imply that management is expecting a long-term increase in the earning levels.This thinking of shareholders might have a favourable impact on the market value of the share. Themarket value of the share is affected not because of the change in dividends, but because of theinformation about change in the future expected earnings conveyed through the payment of higherdividends. Dividends per share do not affect the share value.The reaction of market to the information conveyed by the dividend action depends upon theestablished dividend policy of the company. If the long-established policy of the firm is to pay, say,50 per cent of earnings to shareholders and has increased dividends in the past only when earningsincreased to new levels on a permanent basis, an increase in dividends will communicate convincinginformation that the earnings of the company have grown. As a result, the market price of the sharemay be significantly influenced. On the other hand, if a company follows a dividend policy ofchanging dividends with every cyclical change in earnings, the market price may not be affected ormay be affected little because shareholders had the information.

The payout ratios of the companies may depend on the fact whether they are mature or growthcompanies. Mature companies may characterise high payout ratios as they may have few profitableinvestment opportunities. Shareholders of such companies are more concerned with dividendincome. Therefore, any change in the amount of dividend is immediately reflected in the marketprice of the share. Growth companies, on the other hand, have a low payout ratio as they haveenough internal investment opportunities to employ retained earnings. The shareholders ofgrowth companies are interested in capital gains than dividends. A steady increase in bothearnings and dividends coupled with a continuing low payout ratio gives the message that thefirm expects to keep growing. A greater increase in the dividends than the earnings may conveyto the shareholders that profitable investment opportunities of the firm are diminishing. Thisunderstanding of shareholders may depress the market price of the share in spite of an increasein the dividends.

MM accept the informational content of dividends. They contend that the price of the share isdetermined by the expected future earnings and the firm’s investment policy and not by thedividends. They argue that the informational value of dividends indicates that they are merely areflection of the firm’s investment policy and the expected earnings and do not have any impacton the value in their own accord.

Do dividends matter? The above discussion of market imperfections indicates that shareholdersmay not be indifferent as to how the earnings of the firms are divided between dividends andretained earnings. The tax differential effect and the presence of flotation costs favour the capitalgains resulting from the retention of earnings, while the existence of transactions costs, agencycosts, information asymmetry and desire for current income and diversification favour the paymentof dividends. The dividend policy may also become relevant because of the informational contentof dividend.

21. Solomon, Ezra, The Theory of Financial Management, Colombia University Press, 1963, p. 142.



NOTES

9.9 LET US SUMMARIZE

Earnings distributed to shareholders are called dividends. The percentage of earnings paidas dividends is called payout ratio.

A high payout ratio means more dividends and less funds for expansion and growth. A lowpayout, on the other hand, results in a higher growth.

Does dividend policy affect the market value of the firm? Whether dividend will increasevalue or not may depend on the profitable investment opportunities available tothe firm.

In Walter’s view it depends on the profitability of investment opportunities availableto the firm and the cost of capital. If the firm has profitable opportunities, its value willbe maximum when 100 per cent of earnings are retained.

Walter’s formula for the market price of shares is:

k

kr

kP

/)DIVEPS(DIV

where r is return on investment opportunities and k is the cost of capital.

Gordon also arrives at the same conclusion with the help of the following formula:

rbkP

1

0DIV

where b is the retention ratio and rb = g is growth in dividends.

Yet another view is that because of the uncertainty of capital gains, investors like more dividends.This implies that, the market price of shares of high-payout companies will command premium.

Miller and Modigliani do not agree with the view that dividends affect the market value of shares.According to them if the investment policy of the firm is given, then dividend policy is a trade-off between cash dividends and issue of ordinary shares. The share price will be adjusted by theamount of dividend distributed. Thus, the existing shareholder is neither better off nor worseoff. His wealth remains unchanged. For their view, M–M assume perfect capital market, notransaction costs and no taxes.

The practical world is not simple; there exist transaction costs as well as taxes. In such aworld, one view is that investors like cash dividends. Thus there is a clientele for high-payout shares.

Except tax-exempt investors, there does not seem to be a strong reason for investors to preferhigh-payout shares. In fact, in a tax-differential world, where capital gains are taxed at low rate,investors in high-tax brackets would prefer low-payout shares.

In an extreme situation like the one currently prevailing in India, where dividends are nottaxed while capital gains are taxed, investors will prefer dividends.

Thus, there does not seem to be a consensus on whether dividends matter or not. In practice,a number of factors will have to be considered before deciding about the appropriate dividendpolicy of the firm.

9.10 KEY CONCEPTS

Agency costs Declining firm Dividend signallingDividend yield Double taxation Growth firmHigh-payout clientele Imputation taxation Information asymmetryInformation content of dividends Low-payout clientele Payout ratioPerferct capital markets Retention ratio Single taxationSplit-rate taxation The bird-in-the-hand argument

Dividend Theory


NOTES

9.11 ILLUSTRATIVE SOLVED PROBLEMS

Problem 9.1: The earnings per share of a company are Rs 10. It has an internal rate of return of15 per cent and the capitalisation rate of its risk class is 12.5 per cent. If Walter’s model is used: (i)What should be the optimum payout ratio of the firm? (ii) What would be the price of the shareat this payout? (iii) How shall the price of the share be affected if a different payout wereemployed?

Solution

Walter’s model to determine share value is:

k

krP

)DIVEPS)(/(+DIV

(i) If r/k > 1, the value of the share will increase as EPS has increased. The price of the sharewould be maximum when the firm retains all the earnings. Thus, the optimum payout ratioin this case is zero.

(ii) When the optimum payout is zero, the price of the share is:

96 Rs125.0

12

125.0

)010)(125.0/15.0(0

P

(iii) If the firm, under the condition of r/k > 1, chooses a payout other than zero, the price of theshare will fall. Suppose the firm has a payout of 20 per cent, the price of the share will be:

80.92 Rs125.0

60.11

125.0

)210)(125.015.0(2

P

Problem 9.2: A company has a total investment of Rs 500,000 in assets, and 50,000 outstandingordinary shares at Rs 10 per share (par value). It earns a rate of 15 per cent on its investment, andhas a policy of retaining 50 per cent of the earnings. If the appropriate discount rate of the firm is10 per cent, determine the price of its share using Gordon’s model. What shall happen to the priceof the share if the company has a payout of 80 per cent or 20 per cent?

Solution:

The share valuation model of Gordon is:

brk

rAb

brk

b

gkP

)1(EPS)1(DIV 110

where A represents investment per share, which is Rs 10 in this case.

(i) At a payout of 50 per cent, the price of the share is:

30 Rs025.0

75.0

5.015.010.0

1015.0)5.01(0

P

(ii) At a payout of 80 per cent, the price of the share is:

71 Rs07.0

20.1

2.015.010.0

1015.0)2.01(0

P

(iii) When the payout is 20 per cent, the price of the share is determined as follows:

51 Rs02.0)(

30.0

8.015.010.0

1015.0)8.01(0

P

The price is negative. This is an absurd result and is due to some simplifying assumptions ofGordon’s model. For example, it is assumed that k and r constant and do not change withretention and uncertainty. If these factors are allowed in the model, we will not get negative priceof the share.



NOTES

9.12 ANSWERS TO ‘CHECK YOUR PROGRESS’

1. The most important aspect in dividend management is to determine the amount of earningsto be distributed to shareholders and the amount to be retained in the firm.

2. Internal financing, constant cost of capital and rate of return, 100 percent payout or retentionand constant EPS and DIV are the some assumptions of Walter model.

3. Arbitrage is the process of buying a security in one market at a cheaper price and selling it inanother market at a higher price.

4. Modiglani-Miller approach holds that under a perfect market situation, the dividend policyof a firm is irrelevant, as it does not affect the value of the firm.

5. Transaction/Floatation costs refer to the cost of issue of shares and include cost of prepar-ing and issuing prospectus, underwriting fee, broker’s commission etc.

6. As per current provisions of Income Tax Act 1961, Dividend is tax-free in the hands ofinvestor.

9.13 QUESTIONS AND EXERCISES

Review Questions

1. What are the essentials of Walter’s dividend model? Explain its shortcomings.

2. What are the assumptions which underlie Gordon’s model of dividend effect? Does dividendpolicy affect the value of the firm under Gordon’s model?

3. “Walter’s and Gordan’s models are essentially based on the same assumptions. Thus, thereis no basic difference between the two models.” Do you agree or not? Why?

4. “According to Walter’s model the optimum payout ratio can be either zero or 100 per cent.”Explain the circumstances, when this is true.

5. “The contention that dividends have an impact on the share price has been characterised asthe bird-in-the-hand argument.” Explain the essentials of this argument. Why is this argumentconsidered fallacious?

6. What is Miller-Modigliani’s dividend irrelevance hypothesis? Critically evaluate itsassumptions.

7. “The assumptions underlying the MM dividend irrelevance hypothesis are unrealistic.”Explain and illustrate.

8. Give arguments to support the view that dividends are relevant.

9. What is the informational content of dividend payments? How does it affect the share value?

10. What is the relationship between taxes and dividend policy? Explain by citing the impact ofdifferent tax systems.

Exercises

1. A company earns Rs 10 per share at an internal rate of 15 per cent. The firm has a policy ofpaying 40 per cent of earnings as dividends. If the required rate of return is 10 per cent,determine the price of the share under (i) Walter’s model, (ii) Gordon’s model.

2. Saraswati Glass Works has an investment of Rs 30 crore divided into 30 lakh ordinary shares.The profitability rate of the firm is 20 per cent and the capitalisation rate is 12.5 per cent. Whatis the optimum dividend payout for the firm if Walter’s model is used? What shall be the priceof the share at optimum payout? Shall your answer change if the profitability rate is assumedto be 15 per cent? What would happen if profitability rate is 10 per cent? Show computations.

Dividend Theory


NOTES

3. The following data relate to a firm: earnings per share Rs 10, capitalisation rate 10 per cent,retention ratio 40 per cent. Determine the price per share under Walter’s and Gordon’s modelsif the internal rate of return is 15 per cent, 10 per cent and 5 per cent.

4. Manex Company has outstanding 50 lakh shares selling at Rs 120 per share. The company isthinking of paying a dividend of Rs 10 per share at the end of current year. The capitalisationrate for the risk class of this firm is 10 per cent. Using Modigliani and Miller’s model you arerequired: (i) to calculate the price of the share at the end of the current year if dividends arepaid and if they are not paid; (ii) to determine the number of shares to be issued if thecompany earns Rs 9 crore, pays dividends and makes new investments of Rs 6.60 crore?

5. A company has outstanding 10 lakh shares. The company needs Rs 5 crore to finance itsinvestments, for which Rs 1 crore is available out of profits. The market price of per share atthe end of current year is expected to be Rs 120. If the discount rate is 10 per cent, determinethe present value of a share using the MM model.

6. The current market price of a company’s shares is Rs 125 per share. The expected earningsper share and dividend per share are Rs 10 and Rs 5 respectively. The shareholders’ expectedrate of return is 15 per cent. Suppose the company declares that it will switch to 100 per centpayout policy, issuing shares as necessary to finance growth. Use the perpetual-growthmodel to show that current price of share is unchanged.

7. The following data relate to a firm in the cotton textile industry:

Rs in crore

Share capital (at Rs 10 per share) 12.50

Reserve 7.50

Profit after tax 1.85

Dividends paid 1.50

P/E ratio 13.33

You are required (a) to comment on the firm’s dividend policy using Walter’s model; (b) todetermine the optimum payout ratio using Walter ’s model; (c) to determine theprice – earnings ratio at which dividend payout will have no effect on share price.

8. Turant Pharma is thinking of diversifying its business in the field of energy. The firm hasdecided to make a capital expenditure of Rs 35 crore in an energy project. The project isexpected to yield a positive net present value of Rs 25 crore. The firm is also considering apayment of dividends of Rs 20 crore. The internal funds available with the firm are Rs 10crore. It has a paid-up share capital of Rs 50 crore divided into 5 crore shares of Rs 10 each.The current price of the firm’s share is Rs 25. The firm has not borrowed funds in the past, andwould continue with this policy in the future.

Given the firm’s capital expenditure and the policy of zero borrowing, show the implicationsof the payment of dividends for the shareholder value. Will your answer be different if Turantdecides not to pay any dividends? Assume no taxes and no issue costs.

9. The share of X Company is selling for Rs 100. It is a no-tax paying company. The price of X’sshare is expected to be Rs 115 after one year. Company Y is identical to company X in termsof risk and the future earnings potential. It is a dividend paying company, and is expected topay a dividend of Rs 10 per share after one year. Assume dividend income is taxed at 35 percent and there is no tax on capital gains. What should be the current price of B’s share andhow much should be its before-tax expected return?

10. The shares of Firm A and Firm B have identical risk. Both have an after-tax required rate ofreturn of 15 per cent. Firm A pays no dividend, while Firm B is a high dividend paying firm.The price of Firm A’s share is expected to be Rs 60 after one year and the price of Firm B Rs50 with Rs 10 dividend per share. Assume that the income tax rate is 40 per cent and capitalgain tax rate is 20 per cent. Determine the current prices of Firm A’s and Firm B’s shares.



NOTES

11. The expected before-tax incomes (consisting of dividend and capital gains) on shares offirms X, Y and Z are given below:

Share Dividend income (Rs) Capital gain (Rs)

X 0 10

Y 5 5

Z 10 0

Suppose that the current price of each share is Rs 60. Further, an investor is in 50 per cent taxbracket and capital gain tax rate is 20 per cent. Which share will give highest after-tax returnto the investor? Now suppose that the each share was expected to have expected after-taxyield of 12 per cent for the investor. Determine the price of each share.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication which is material protected by this copyright noticemay be reproduced or transmitted or utilized or stored in any form or by any means now known orhereinafter invented, electronic, digital or mechanical, including photocopying, scanning, recordingor by any information storage or retrieval system, without prior written permission from the Publisher.

Information contained in this book has been published by VIKAS® Publishing House Pvt. Ltd. and hasbeen obtaine1d by its Authors from sources believed to be reliable and are correct to the best of theirknowledge. However, the Publisher, its Authors & Mahatma Gandhi University shall in no event beliable for any errors, omissions or damages arising out of use of this information and specificallydisclaim any implied warranties or merchantability or fitness for any particular use.

Vikas® is the registered trademark of Vikas® Publishing House Pvt. Ltd.

VIKAS® PUBLISHING HOUSE PVT LTDE-28, Sector-8, Noida - 201301 (UP)Phone: 0120-4078900 � � Fax: 0120-4078999Regd. Office: 576, Masjid Road, Jangpura, New Delhi 110 014Website: www.vikaspublishing.com � Email: [email protected]

UBS The Sampuran Prakash School of Executive EducationGurgaon, Haryana, Indiawww.ubs.edu.in

Copyright © Author, 2010

unit 9 dividend theory module - 3 m o d u l e...

Documents