Excellent lecture,i couldnt understand the calcuation of the redeemable debt but no i do.

The only queston i have is on the fomula you used for IRR on example 8.

In the Kaplan text book it shows the formula as being IRR=L+ NL/(NL-NH)x(H-L)

Calculation in the example in the notes used x for the part NL/(NL x NH) although the result for the example was found using addition NL/(NL+NH) which you also used in the video lecture.

The text says minus sign NL/(NL-NH).

So whats the correct formula? Is it plus or minus?

Did you write a -ve 85 in year 0 because it is from the investor’s perspective? If so, Why did you deduct corporation tax from the interest income? Tax allowance is for the companies right?

We show the 85 as negative simply because we are used to calculating IRR’s for projects when the flow at time 0 is an outflow and is followed by inflows.
By all means show 85 as positive and all the other flows as negative – the IRR will obviously be exactly the same.

I only deducted the tax from the interest when calculating the cost of debt to the company – the company gets the tax saving.

Thanks very much for your teaching, which is super helpful.

I am just wondering in terms of Example 8. For a bond that will be redeemed at a premium, will the premium (say 10% in this case) tax deductible, as it is still part of the Finance Cost? Or, we just follow the rules that we always treat redemption as non-deductible?

They certainly do not just ask for the cost of debt – they want it as part of the calculation of the WACC 🙂

But yes, the cost of debt to the company is always calculated after accounting for the tax relief on the interest payments.

(However, the exam does also quite often ask for the calculation of a market value for the debt. This is calculated ignoring tax because it is the investors who determine the market value of the debt and company tax does not affect them.)

okay, your explanation at the last cleared my confusion. For one question (Sigra Co Dec 2012), I tried to follow your approach but the answer did not match. I am not sure where my calculation went wrong. Can you help me ?
Q:
Sigra Co is offering bond offer: 2% coupon bond redeemable in 3 yrs at par
Sigra Co’s non-current liabilties include a 6% coupon bond redeemable in 3 yrs at par currently trading at $104
Tax rate not given (probably because we need to calculate price of bond?)
A:
Year Cash flows($) 5% PV 10% PV
0 (104) 1 (104) 1 (104)
1-3 6 2.723 16.34 2.487 14.92
3 106 0.864 91.58 0.751 79.61
=+3.92 =-9.47

5% +3.92
10% -9.47
=5% = 13.39

Therefore, r=5%+ (10%-5%)*$3.92/$13.39=6.46% (but in recommended answer it is 4.55%)

Maybe this is more a tax question. but is it not inconsistent that interest is taxed, but the premium is not? Would companies not rather elect to structure instruments in such a way that interest is disguised as premium, in order to avoid tax payments on interest for the holders?

For the recipient it is likely to be taxed.
However personal tax is always ignored in the exam, and therefore the recipient receives the full interest and the full premium.

The only tax considered is the tax on the company (and it is considered then calculating the cost of debt to the company). Interest payments are allowable for the company and therefore save tax for the company, the repayment is not tax allowable and doesn’t save tax.

Planning to write this course in September and I just wanna start now pls lecturer is this advisable? Can 4 hours of dedication per day take me to the pass mark?

True – Kd is the return to investors which is pre-tax. The cost to the company is Kd(1-T) if it is irredeemable debt. However if (as is more likely in the exam) it is redeemable debt then it does not equal Kd(1-T) – we need to calculate the IRR of the after-tax flows (whereas Kd is the IRR of the pre-tax flows).

I am a little confused. You have mentioned that if debt is REDEEMABLE than it does NOT equal KDx(1-T). if that is the case than why in example 8 part 2 (redeemable debt) you have considered the coupon rate of 4.2 pa. That is $6 less 30%. If we were to follow your advise than the rate considered p.a should be 6% on nominal i.e. $6 because the example 8 states it is a redeemable debt.

Example 7 part a, the cost of debt (kd) is 8.89%. After calculating you said that if the same was to be issued in stock market, the investors would desire the same return, otherwise why would they invest.
I didn’t understand this.
Also why is Kd calculated? the cost of debt is already known i.e, 8%. So when Kd is calculated, there will be 2 cost of debt percentages i.e, 8% and 8.89% . What is it’s difference?

8% is not the cost of debt. It is the coupon rate (the interest on nominal). Maybe when the debt was originally issued, 8% was an attractive rate. However, if investors were to buy the debt now on the stock exchange they would get a return of 8.89%. So if new debt were to be issued only offering 8% nobody would buy it – the company will have to offer 8.89% for it to be attractive.

You may find the free F9 lectures on the cost of capital to be helpful.

Yes it is – in the same way as normal.
One positive and one negative gives a better approximation, but if you do end up with two positives (or two negatives) then you can still go ahead with them.

Very nice lectures, but i have a question plz help me to explain
eg 7 & 8 in chapter 7. which one has higher cost btw for Irredeemable debt and redeemable debt? and you guest discount rate in example 8 based on what criteria ?. Your result is far than 6%

I am not sure what you mean by the first part of your question – they are two separate examples and in example 7 the cost of debt is 6.22% whereas in the second example it is 10%.
The fact that one is irredeemable and the other redeemable just means that we do the arithmetic differently – it is not the reason that one has a higher cost that the other. Either of the two could have been higher.

In example 8, we need to calculate the internal rate of return and the approach is exactly the same as when you calculated IRR for projects in Paper F9 – we make two guesses and then approximate between them to find where the NPV is zero. I guessed at 5% and 10% for part (a), but I could have made any two guesses.
For part (b) I guessed at 10% (simply because 10% is in the middle of the tables). If the answer had not come so close to zero then I would have made a second guess and approximated in the same way as I did for part (a).

There is no reason that the answer should be close to 6% which is the coupon rate. What we are trying to calculate in part (a) is the return that investors are currently getting if they buy the existing debt on the stock exchange. Since they are currently getting 11.86%, then there is no way that they would lend more money to the company unless they were offered 11.86% (but it would actually cost the company less because they get tax relief on the interest, which is why workings (b) are necessary).

how does you got -0.77 i didn’t understand .from 1-5 year present value was 15.92 and at 5 year was 68.31 so what did you do to get -0.77.
other thing is suppose answer is no close to zero but still negative so should we have to guess other percentage less then 10%

-0.77 is the net present value of the flows: 15.92 + 68.31 – 85 = -0.77

We are calculating the Internal Rate of Return of the flows in exactly the same was as we do for projects (and as you did for F9) by making two guesses and then approximating between them (as we did in part (a) of this question).

For part (b) I was ‘lucky’ because the NPV was virtually zero at 10% and so I did not need a second guess. If it was not so close to zero then I would have had to make a second guess and approximate in the same sort of way as for part (a).

I have a question, too. Why the pricing in example 7 & 8 quoted in ex int (excluding interest?)

And I can’t remember the difference in various debts. I remember there was a exam question about vanila bond. Can you give me a more detailed information about different type of debts?

@annalla, Debt is always quoted ex int in the exam, unless you are told otherwise. Here the questions actually say that they are ex int (i.e. that interest has just been paid).

Vanilla debt is debt with no unusual features (so not convertible, no warrants attached, no premium on redemption – just interest each year and then repayment at par.)

janetkatembo01 says

Hi Sir,

Excellent lecture,i couldnt understand the calcuation of the redeemable debt but no i do.

The only queston i have is on the fomula you used for IRR on example 8.

In the Kaplan text book it shows the formula as being IRR=L+ NL/(NL-NH)x(H-L)

Calculation in the example in the notes used x for the part NL/(NL x NH) although the result for the example was found using addition NL/(NL+NH) which you also used in the video lecture.

The text says minus sign NL/(NL-NH).

So whats the correct formula? Is it plus or minus?

Kindly assist.Thanking you in advance

janetkatembo01 says

Hi John,

I was just double checking now again,i notice that that the present value @ 15% is -10.22 hence the addition nstead of minus.Am i right?

The only thing is the error i guess where in the solution its printed as x multiplication.

However i understand the reason behind the addition.

Thanks

John Moffat says

That is correct and I am pleased that you are now clear about it 🙂

Amer says

Did you write a -ve 85 in year 0 because it is from the investor’s perspective? If so, Why did you deduct corporation tax from the interest income? Tax allowance is for the companies right?

John Moffat says

We show the 85 as negative simply because we are used to calculating IRR’s for projects when the flow at time 0 is an outflow and is followed by inflows.

By all means show 85 as positive and all the other flows as negative – the IRR will obviously be exactly the same.

I only deducted the tax from the interest when calculating the cost of debt to the company – the company gets the tax saving.

Larry says

Dear Lecturer,

Thanks very much for your teaching, which is super helpful.

I am just wondering in terms of Example 8. For a bond that will be redeemed at a premium, will the premium (say 10% in this case) tax deductible, as it is still part of the Finance Cost? Or, we just follow the rules that we always treat redemption as non-deductible?

Thanks and look forward to your reply.

John Moffat says

No – for Paper F9 the whole of the repayment (including the premium) is not tax deductible.

accastudentofoman says

Lecture is superb!

Please find further comments over here: http://opentuition.com/?post_type=topic&p=362129

John Moffat says

Thank you very much (both for this comment and the other post) 🙂

SHEDRACH says

This is simply straight to point. Exam focused!!!

John Moffat says

Thank you for the comment 🙂

harihar says

Hello sir,

In exams generally they just simply ask to calculate cost of debt, then in that case are we adjusting for tax or not?

Thanks!

John Moffat says

They certainly do not just ask for the cost of debt – they want it as part of the calculation of the WACC 🙂

But yes, the cost of debt to the company is always calculated after accounting for the tax relief on the interest payments.

(However, the exam does also quite often ask for the calculation of a market value for the debt. This is calculated ignoring tax because it is the investors who determine the market value of the debt and company tax does not affect them.)

harihar says

okay, your explanation at the last cleared my confusion. For one question (Sigra Co Dec 2012), I tried to follow your approach but the answer did not match. I am not sure where my calculation went wrong. Can you help me ?

Q:

Sigra Co is offering bond offer: 2% coupon bond redeemable in 3 yrs at par

Sigra Co’s non-current liabilties include a 6% coupon bond redeemable in 3 yrs at par currently trading at $104

Tax rate not given (probably because we need to calculate price of bond?)

A:

Year Cash flows($) 5% PV 10% PV

0 (104) 1 (104) 1 (104)

1-3 6 2.723 16.34 2.487 14.92

3 106 0.864 91.58 0.751 79.61

=+3.92 =-9.47

5% +3.92

10% -9.47

=5% = 13.39

Therefore, r=5%+ (10%-5%)*$3.92/$13.39=6.46% (but in recommended answer it is 4.55%)

Thank you so much!

John Moffat says

In future you must ask this sort of question in the Ask the Tutor Forum, and not as a comment on a lecture.

Your interest flows are correct ($6 per year for 3 years) but the redemption in 3 years time is at par of $100 (not $106).

annchen says

Maybe this is more a tax question. but is it not inconsistent that interest is taxed, but the premium is not? Would companies not rather elect to structure instruments in such a way that interest is disguised as premium, in order to avoid tax payments on interest for the holders?

John Moffat says

For the recipient it is likely to be taxed.

However personal tax is always ignored in the exam, and therefore the recipient receives the full interest and the full premium.

The only tax considered is the tax on the company (and it is considered then calculating the cost of debt to the company). Interest payments are allowable for the company and therefore save tax for the company, the repayment is not tax allowable and doesn’t save tax.

OLUWATOSIN says

Planning to write this course in September and I just wanna start now pls lecturer is this advisable? Can 4 hours of dedication per day take me to the pass mark?

John Moffat says

This would be better posted on one of the forums rather than as a comment on a lecture!!

Yes – there is no reason why 4 hours a day should not be sufficient to be able to pass.

OLUWATOSIN says

Thank you

anonymous says

Sir, pls. correct me:

Kd is the return required by the investors, which is different from cost to the company because of the existence of tax- (1-t).

Ke though is the same as the cost of the company as there is no tax relief for equity.

Am I right?

John Moffat says

True – Kd is the return to investors which is pre-tax. The cost to the company is Kd(1-T) if it is irredeemable debt. However if (as is more likely in the exam) it is redeemable debt then it does not equal Kd(1-T) – we need to calculate the IRR of the after-tax flows (whereas Kd is the IRR of the pre-tax flows).

anonymous says

Thank you Sir. 🙂

JZ says

Hi John,

I am a little confused. You have mentioned that if debt is REDEEMABLE than it does NOT equal KDx(1-T). if that is the case than why in example 8 part 2 (redeemable debt) you have considered the coupon rate of 4.2 pa. That is $6 less 30%. If we were to follow your advise than the rate considered p.a should be 6% on nominal i.e. $6 because the example 8 states it is a redeemable debt.

Appreciate your clarification.

John Moffat says

The coupon rate gives the actual $ interest paid. This is allowable for tax and so the net payment is indeed $6 x 70% = $4.20.

This is not the cost of debt. The cost of debt is part 2 is 10% whereas in part 1 (without tax) the return to investors is 11.86%

The cost of debt does not equal the return to investors x 70%.

As I explain in the lecture, it is because although the interest is tax allowable, the repayment is not tax allowable.

Fabian says

Dear Sir,

Since the IRR is already after tax, can we pluck in this Kd into the WACC straight, without providing for another (1-T) as in the WACC formula?

John Moffat says

Correct 🙂

Fabian says

Thank you John!

John Moffat says

You are welcome 🙂

anonymous says

Hi Sir

Example 7 part a, the cost of debt (kd) is 8.89%. After calculating you said that if the same was to be issued in stock market, the investors would desire the same return, otherwise why would they invest.

I didn’t understand this.

Also why is Kd calculated? the cost of debt is already known i.e, 8%. So when Kd is calculated, there will be 2 cost of debt percentages i.e, 8% and 8.89% . What is it’s difference?

John Moffat says

8% is not the cost of debt. It is the coupon rate (the interest on nominal). Maybe when the debt was originally issued, 8% was an attractive rate. However, if investors were to buy the debt now on the stock exchange they would get a return of 8.89%. So if new debt were to be issued only offering 8% nobody would buy it – the company will have to offer 8.89% for it to be attractive.

You may find the free F9 lectures on the cost of capital to be helpful.

anonymous says

Thank you Sir, I understood now. 🙂

sogan0 says

Why is our aim to get NPV close to zero when we do the two guesses or is that the rule

John Moffat says

The market value is the present value of the future receipts, so the net present value needs to be zero.

kapils says

Hi Sir Good Evening,

I would like to clarify one point. Is it Possible to use two negative PV cash flows when doing an IRR Calculation?

John Moffat says

Yes it is – in the same way as normal.

One positive and one negative gives a better approximation, but if you do end up with two positives (or two negatives) then you can still go ahead with them.

kapils says

Thank you very much.

Saqlain says

how many hours required for p4 lectures ??

John Moffat says

Sorry, but I have no idea! Assume on average about 40 minutes per lecture.

Saqlain says

want to end these in 10 days .. is it possible??

vicool says

really helpful as i m doing selfstudiesi want tgo make sure which studyguide and revision kit useful 4 me whether kaplan or BPP.

John Moffat says

Kaplan and BPP Revision Kits are both good – it makes no difference which one you chose.

tsk1975 says

When I click on the p4 lecturers..the video that plays is for p5. What should I do to play the p4 videos.

John Moffat says

The lectures are all working fine – the problem must be at your end.

I suggest that you clear the cache and the history in your browser.

If that does not work then you will have to try another browser.

tsk1975 says

Thank you let me try…

buicuong says

Very nice lectures, but i have a question plz help me to explain

eg 7 & 8 in chapter 7. which one has higher cost btw for Irredeemable debt and redeemable debt? and you guest discount rate in example 8 based on what criteria ?. Your result is far than 6%

John Moffat says

I am not sure what you mean by the first part of your question – they are two separate examples and in example 7 the cost of debt is 6.22% whereas in the second example it is 10%.

The fact that one is irredeemable and the other redeemable just means that we do the arithmetic differently – it is not the reason that one has a higher cost that the other. Either of the two could have been higher.

In example 8, we need to calculate the internal rate of return and the approach is exactly the same as when you calculated IRR for projects in Paper F9 – we make two guesses and then approximate between them to find where the NPV is zero. I guessed at 5% and 10% for part (a), but I could have made any two guesses.

For part (b) I guessed at 10% (simply because 10% is in the middle of the tables). If the answer had not come so close to zero then I would have made a second guess and approximated in the same way as I did for part (a).

There is no reason that the answer should be close to 6% which is the coupon rate. What we are trying to calculate in part (a) is the return that investors are currently getting if they buy the existing debt on the stock exchange. Since they are currently getting 11.86%, then there is no way that they would lend more money to the company unless they were offered 11.86% (but it would actually cost the company less because they get tax relief on the interest, which is why workings (b) are necessary).

03217677395 says

how does you got -0.77 i didn’t understand .from 1-5 year present value was 15.92 and at 5 year was 68.31 so what did you do to get -0.77.

other thing is suppose answer is no close to zero but still negative so should we have to guess other percentage less then 10%

John Moffat says

-0.77 is the net present value of the flows: 15.92 + 68.31 – 85 = -0.77

We are calculating the Internal Rate of Return of the flows in exactly the same was as we do for projects (and as you did for F9) by making two guesses and then approximating between them (as we did in part (a) of this question).

For part (b) I was ‘lucky’ because the NPV was virtually zero at 10% and so I did not need a second guess. If it was not so close to zero then I would have had to make a second guess and approximate in the same sort of way as for part (a).

zain224 says

awsome lecture

njnierras says

i cannot load the video 🙁 please somebody help?

admin says

Please visit the support page: http://opentuition.com/support/

annalla says

Dear John,

Thank you very much for your reply.

krishnamr007 says

i have a small doubt.

Can i appear for the other ACCA optional specialisations which i didn’t attempt, even after completing my ACCA qualification.

John Moffat says

@krishnamr007, Yes you can – you can find out about it on the ACCA website.

desperatetopass says

I am not getting audio on the lectures. Is this problem unique to me? I need to revise n short on time.

annalla says

Dear lecturer,

Thank you for your lesson.

I have a question, too. Why the pricing in example 7 & 8 quoted in ex int (excluding interest?)

And I can’t remember the difference in various debts. I remember there was a exam question about vanila bond. Can you give me a more detailed information about different type of debts?

Thank you very much.

John Moffat says

@annalla, Debt is always quoted ex int in the exam, unless you are told otherwise. Here the questions actually say that they are ex int (i.e. that interest has just been paid).

Vanilla debt is debt with no unusual features (so not convertible, no warrants attached, no premium on redemption – just interest each year and then repayment at par.)

hassam2341912 says

How can I download this??? Coz I need to vew these in my office, i dont get time at home!!

Please tell!!!!

admin says

lectures are on line only

not downloadable

that’s the only way this site exists and is free

utn9 says

It is great lectures….