M&M Pizza Case
M&M Pizza Case
M&M Pizza Case
M&M Pizza
FIN512
Introduction
M&M Pizza's decision to take on $500 in debt will have a positive impact on its capital
structure, irrespective of Francostan's corporate tax policies. In all scenarios, M&M
Pizza is better off leveraging debt to repurchase shares rather than maintaining an
all-equity capital structure. The new capital structure will generate greater dividends per
share as well as higher stock prices.
Impact WACC
First, we need to analyze the scenarios where there are no corporate taxes. Figure 1
illustrates M&M's financial breakdown in the first two scenarios: Scenario 1 with 100%
equity and no debt, and Scenario 2 with $500 in debt. As the company assumes more
debt, the overall risk of the firm increases. This heightened risk is expected to manifest
in the firm's weighted average cost of capital (WACC). In Scenario 2, the capital
structure changes from 100% equity-based with a debt-to-equity (D/E) ratio of 0 to 68%
equity and 32% debt with a D/E ratio of 0.471. This shift in capital structure is reflected
in the firm's beta, which increases from 0.80 to 1.18, signaling greater risk in relation to
the market. Furthermore, the higher beta affects M&M's cost of equity, which increases
from 0.08 to 0.10. Despite the increase in the cost of equity, the change in the firm's
capital structure offsets the higher beta, resulting in an unchanged WACC from
Scenario 1 to Scenario 2.
In a world where Francostan implements a 20% tax rate, M&M enjoys the added benefit
of a tax shield. Interest payments are expensed and deducted from M&M's taxable
income. Therefore, by borrowing funds and servicing the debt, interest expenses reduce
M&M's taxable income. In Scenario 3 and 4, we assess whether it is advantageous for
the firm to remain 100% equity-funded or to take on $500 in new debt for share
repurchases. In Figure 2, we immediately observe that, due to taxes, M&M's stock price
is $20 compared to $25 in Scenarios 3 versus 1, noted in Figure 1. This decrease is
expected, as a portion of earnings is paid to the government. Similar to the comparison
between Scenario 1 and Scenario 2, taking on additional debt results in an increase in
M&M's beta from 0.80 to 1.18. M&M's cost of equity, calculated using the Capital Asset
Pricing Model (CAPM) and beta, also rises from 0.8 to 0.10. Another noteworthy change
is the enterprise value of M&M in Scenario 4, which increases by $100 due to the tax
shield from the $500 in debt. The 20% tax rate, coupled with the $500 in total debt,
provides M&M with a $100 tax shield. The total enterprise value of the firm is the sum of
the enterprise value of a firm with 100% equity (which is $1,250 in this case) and the tax
shield, resulting in $1,350 for M&M in Scenario 4. From this total enterprise value, we
can determine the market value of equity, as we already know the market value of debt
($500). We then calculate the weights of equity and debt (0.63 and 0.37, respectively)
and factor the tax shield into the WACC calculation: Cost of Equity x Weight of Equity +
3
Our recommendation:
After analyzing M&M's WACC in all four scenarios, it is evident that, with or without
taxes, M&M should incorporate debt into its capital structure. In both tax and non-tax
situations, M&M witnesses an increase in dividends per share. Figure 10 illustrates the
rise in dividends from Scenario 1 to Scenario 2 and from Scenario 3 to Scenario 4. The
chart also shows changes in share prices in each scenario. While Scenario 1 and 2 see
no change in share price, and while Scenario 3 starts with a lower share price due to
taxes, we see that with the introduction of debt in Scenario 4, M&M's stock price
increased.
4
References
Figure 1
Figure 2
5
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
6
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8 (Scenario 4)
7
Figure 9
Figure 10
8
Figure 11