Financial Appraisal
Financial Appraisal
Financial Appraisal
Structure
Objectives
Introduction
When to Undertake a Financial Analysis?
How to Value Project Benefits and Costs in a Financial Analysis?
The Cash Flow in the Financial Analysis
Discounting in Project Analysis
Let Us Sum Up
Key Words
References
Answers to Check your Progress Exercises
16.0 OBJECTIVES
After reading this unit, you should be able to:
16.1 INTRODUCTION
Financial appraisal is a method used to evaluate the viability of a proposed
project by assessing the value of net cash flows that result from its
implementation. Financial appraisals differ from economic appraisals in the
scope of their investigation, the range of impacts analysed and the methodology
used. A financial appraisal essentially views investment decisions from the
perspective of the organization undertaking the investment. It therefore measures
only the direct effects on the cash flow of the organisation of an investment
,decision.
market prices and valuations are used in.assessing benefits and costs, instead
of measures such as willingness to pay and opportunity cost;
the discount rate used represents the weighted average cost of debt and equity
capital, rather than the estimated social opportunity cost of capital; and
The discount rate and the cash flows to which it is applied are usually specified
on a nominal basis as the cost of debt and cost of equity are observed only in
nominal terms.
It is obviously very important to know whether the input and output projections
given by the proposing firm or agency are valued in current prices (normal) or
constant prices (real). This is necessary to ensure that the analysis is carried out
in a consistent set of prices, so that the total net value of the project ultimately
I calculated is a real figure.
Often, constant (say 1990) prices, rather thin current prices, are used in a
project's cash flow. A project's cash flow is merely the costs and benefits paid
and produced by the project over its lifetime in the years that they occur. The use
of constant prices simplifies the analysis, as it relieves the analyst of the need to
make projections about the anticipated inflation rate in the country over the life
of the project. This procedure is quite appropriate if input and output prices in
domestic currency are expected to increase at approximately the same rate over
the life of the project.
However, there are several situations where the use of constant prices may not be
appropriate. The first is when the analyst is drawing up project financing plans.
In this situation, the analyst will need to estimate expenditures in nominal terms
to ensure that planned sources of finance will be sufficient to cover all project
costs. The second is a situation where the investment is privately operated and
will pay company tax. The financial analysis will need to be carried out in both
nominal and real terms because the rate of inflation will affect the interest
payments, depreciation allowance and the cost of holding stocks. All these will
influence the firm's tax liability. Working capital requirements will also be
affected by the level of inflation. Finally, if input prices are expected to rise at
different rates over the life of the project, and vary from year to year, it will
usually be simpler to include all prices in current terms.
li interest.
, In the case of project outputs, they should therefore be valued at the market price
received for them at the project gate. Transport costs from the project to market
should be subtracted from the wholesale price received in the market. Project
inputs should also be valued at their market cost at the project gate. This price
will include the transport and handling cost of getting them there.
II Many a times project appraisals split costs (and sometimes benefits) between
locally incurred and foreign exchange costs and benefits. This is useful if policy
Investment of Public Funds makers wish to judge the impact of the project on the balance payments, or if
foreign financing agents such as aid agencies or multilateral banks wish to see
the distribution of items eligible for aid grants or loans.
Usually, even if local and foreign costs are identified, in a financial analysis all
costs and benefits are then expressed in local currency, converted at the official
exchange rate. However, the foreign currency costs may in some instances be
expressed in a common international currency like US Dollar, or in terms of the
local currency of a bilateral aid donor country.
In order to separate the cash flow into local and foreign prices, and also to predict
the future price of a project's tradable inputs and outputs, it may be necessary to
make projections about future exchange rates. To do this it will be necessary to
assess, inter alia, if local inflation rates are likely to diverge from average
international inflation rates, and particularly those of the host country's major
trading patterns. If local inflation is expected to be higher than the average for
major trading partners, devaluation of the local currency could be anticipated,
increasing both the costs of imported inputs and the local currency value of
exported outputs. If local inflation is expected to be lower than that of the
country's major trading partners, it is likely that the local currency will
appreciate over the life of the project. If this is a real appreciation, it will have the
effect of lowering imported input prices as well as lowering the local currency
receipts from exported outputs and/or reducing the international competitiveness
of these exports.
The following section paragraphs discusses about how the inputs and outputs of a
project that are valued in market prices should be incorporated into a project's
cash flow in order to undertake a financial analysis.
Financial Appraisal
16.4 THE CASH FLOW IN THE FINANCIAL
ANALYSIS
Project Life
Capital Costs
The capital costs of a project can be divided into fixed capital costs, or the cost of
acquiring fixed assets like plant and equipment, start-up costs, and working
capital, which finances the operating expenses of the enterprise. In a financial
analysis, all forms of capital expenditure should be entered in the financial cash
flow in the years in which the project actually has to pay for them. For example,
if the project receives a soft loan from the supplier of its equipment, which
involves a grace period before repaying the loan, the cost of this equipment will
not be included in the cash flow until it must be paid for by the project.
Operating Costs
The project's operating costs cover its recurrent outlays on labour services
(wages and salaries), raw materials, energy, utilities (water, waste removal, etc,),
marketing, transport, insurance, taxes and debt service over the life of the project.
Each operating cost is entered in the cash flow in the year (month or quarter) in
which it is incurred. Total operating costs may also be expressed in terms of
costs per unit of output. As was mentioned previously, unit operating costs are
likely to be somewhat higher in the first year or two of a project, so the
difference between start-up costs under capital costs, and steady state operating
Investment of Public Funds Treatment of Taxes
The taxable income of the project will be determined by subtracting all operating
costs, interest payments and allowable depreciation on the capital assets from the
firm's revenue earnings each year. The appropriate company income tax rate is
then applied to this taxable income to determine the project's taxation liability.
If the country gives incentives to new investments in the form of tax holidays or
accelerated depreciation of assets, these should be taken into account in the
project's taxable income and tax liability. The tax liability is subtracted from
taxable income to obtain the project's net of tax income.
Project Benefits
In a financial analysis, the project's benefits equal the cash receipts actually
received by the project from the sate of goods or services it produces, or the
market value equivalent of home consumed output in the case of non-marketed
output. This can be the revenue fi-om sales, rent or royalties, depending on the
nature of the project. Other revenue earned from, for example, bank deposits, the
sale of fixed assets or insurance claims, will also be included as separate items
under project receipts or benefits.
a Net Benefits
The project's net benefit stream is calculated as the difference between the total
revenue (or benefit) stream and its expenditure (costs) stream.
For example, suppose the project is expected to yield a stream of benefits equal
to BO, Bl, B2, .... Bn and to incur a stream of costs equal to CO, C1, C2,. .... Cn
in years 0, 1,2, ... n. Then in each period the net benefits (benefits minus costs)
of the project will be:
-
(BO-CO), (B 1-C I), (B2-C2), ... (Bn-Cn)
This is simply the project's net benefit flow.
Assuming that the discount rate, r, is constant, then the discounted cash flow of
the project can be represented as:
The net present value criterion of a project is the single most important measure
of the project's worth. If a project's NPV is positive (i.e. its discounted benefits
exceed its discounted costs), then the project should be accepted. If its NPV is
negative (its discounted costs exceed its discounted benefits), then the project
I should be rejected.
I
In the above table, an 8% discount rate is used to mechanically discount the net
benefits of a railway project. The project's NPV can then be estimated by just
adding up these discounted net benefits. Columns (I), (2) and (3) show the non-
discounted costs, benefits and net benefits (benefits-costs) of the railway project.
I Column (4) gives the discount factor, 1/(1+.08)t, by which the non-discounted
i
net benefits in column (3) are multiplied, to obtain the discounted value of these
i net benefits in each year, t, shown in column (5). These discounted net benefits
I can then be added together to obtain the total discounted net benefits, or net
present value, of the project.
The bottom line of the table shows that the NPV comes to $L10.4 million if an
8%.discount rate is used. A NPV greater than zero indicates that the discounted
benefits of the project are expected to be greater than its discounted costs and the
project will therefore be worth undertaking.
This example illustrates how crucially the estimation of a project's NPV depends
on the discount rate employed. A lower discount rate would have deflated future
income by less and increased NPV of the project. A higher discount rate would
have deflated future income more heavily and decreased the NPV of the project,
Investment of Public Funds possibly changing it from positive to negative. The selection of the appropriate
discount rate is therefore a very important issue in project appraisal.
In a financial analysis market prices are used to value project inputs and outputs,
even if these prices are distorted. Market prices are used so that the financial
profitability of the project to its implementer can be determined. The market
price of capital to the project implementer is the market interest rate, and this
represents the cost to the implementer of investing capital in the project. The
correct approach to determining the financial discount rate, the discount rate used
in the financial analysis, is therefore to estimate the actual cost of capital to the
project implementer This will vary depending on whether at the margin the
implementer is a borrower or lender of investible funds.
If the project implementer is a net borrower, the interest rate at which the
enterprise can borrow is the opportunity cost of funds employed. This market
borrowing rate should be used as the financial discount rate for any project
appraisal undertaken by the enterprise. If the project implementer intends to draw
some funds from its own financial resources and some from market borrowings,
the weighted cost of the capital it obtains from these different sources will be the
appropriate financial discount rate.
If the firm or the government Considering a project is a net lender, in the absence
of the project it could invest these funds in the financial market and earn the
market lending rate. The opportunity cost of the funds to be used for the project
will therefore be the after tax market lending rate that it could earn on this
capital. The project must earn at least this market lending rate for it to be worth
doing and the after- tax lending rate should therefore be used as the financial
discount rate for any project appraisals undertaken by this enterprise. In reality
the enterprise will usually want to earn some margin above the market lending
rate if the project is considered a riskier use of the firm's funds than available
financial investments.
The two most commonly used discounted measures of a project's net benefit are
its net present value and internal rate of return. The domestic resource cost ratio,
benefit cost ratio and net benefit investment ratio are also be discussed below:
The NPV measure of project worth is the most useful and one of the most
commonly used criteria for determining whether a project should be
accepted.The net present value of a project is simply the present value, PV, of its
net benefit stream. It is obtained by discounting the stream of net benefits
produced by the project over its lifetime, back to its value in the chosen base
period, usually the present. The net present value formula is:
Where,
The internal rate of return, IRR, of a project is probably the most commonly used
assessment criterion in project appraisal. This is primarily because the concept of
an IRR is in some ways comparable to the profit rate of a project and is therefore
easy for non-economists to understand. Furthermore, it does not rely on the
selection of a predetermined discount rate.
The internal rate of return is the discount rate that, if used to discount a project's
costs and benefits, will just make the project's net present value equal to zero.
Thus the internal rate of return is the discount rate, r*, at which:
Since the internal rate of return is the discount rate internal to the project, its
calculation does not depend on prior selection of a discount rate. A project's
internal rate of return can therefore be thought of as the discount rate at which it
would be just worthwhile doing the project. For a financial analysis, it would be
the maximum interest rate that the project could afford to pay on its funds and
still recover all its investment and operating costs.
A project is potentially worthwhile if the IRR is greater than the test discount
rate. If projects are mutually exclusive, this rule would suggest that the project
with the highest IRR should be chosen.
The net benefit investment ratio, NBIR, is the most convenient selection criterion
to use when there is a single period budget constraint.
NBIR'of a project is the ratio of the present value of the project's benefits, net of
operating costs, to the present value of its investment cost. Its formula is given
by:
2
Where
/ The NBIR therefore shows the value of the project's discounted benefits, net of
Investment of Public Funds The decision rule for the net benefit investment ratio is that all projects that have
a net benefit investment ratio greater than unity should be selected. This selection
criterion is completely compatible with those for the net present value and the
internal rate of return of a project.
The benefit cost ratio was the earliest discounted project assessment criterion to
be employed. However, due to problems associated with its applied use, it is
rarely used in project appraisal today.
The benefit cost ratio is simply the ratio of the sum of the project's discounted
benefits to the sum of its discounted investment and operating costs. This can be
expressed mathematically as:
A project should be accepted if its BCR is greater than or equal to 1, that is, if its
discounted benefits exceed its discounted costs.
- - - -
16.8 REFERENCES
Dasgupta, A.K. and Pearce, D.W., 1972, Cost-Benefit Analysis-Theory and
Practice, Macmillan, London.
Layard, R (ed.), 1972, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Penguin, Harmonsworth.
Little, I.M.D. and Mirrlees, J.A., 1990. Project Appraisal and Planning for
Developing Countries, Heinemann Educational Books, London.
Pearce, D.W. and Nash, C.A., 1981. The Social Appraisal of Projects: A Text in
Cost Benefit Analysis, Macmillan, London.
Perkins, Frances. 1952, Practical Cost-Benefit Analysis: Basic Concepts and
Applications, Macmillan, Australia.
Squire, L. and Van der Tak, H.G., 1975, Economic Analysis of Projects, Johns
Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
UNIDO, 1972. Guidelinesfor Project Evaluation, United Nations, New York.
The NPV measure of project worth is the most useful and one of the
most commonly used criteria for determining whether a project should
be accepted.
The net present value of a project is simply the present value, PV, of
its net benefit stream. It is obtained by discounting the stream of net
benefits produced by the project over its lifetime, back to its value in
the chosen base period, usually the present. The net present value
formula is: