Bakgrund: Illikviditetsrabatten (DLOM) är en omdiskuterad rabatt som ofta leder till konflikt vid värdering. DLOM uppstår i en brist på säljbarhet och problematiken ligger i att denna rabatt inte är observerbar och kan även anses subjektiv. DLOM beror också på flertalet ofta unika faktorer vilket medför att rabatten kan skilja sig kraftigt från fall till fall. DLOM kan anta allt från negativa värden upp till 90 % vilket medför att bolagets slutgiltiga värde i stor grad beror av denna rabatt. Således blir det relevant att bestämma en korrekt nivå för denna rabatt utifrån vetenskaplig litteratur och praxis. Fallföretaget för denna studie, PwC, har efterfrågat en ny modell för att estimera DLOM. Detta på grund av ett ökat fokus från Skatteverket och Fallföretagets kunder att kontrollera om estimeringar av DLOM har utförts på ett korrekt och argumenterbart sätt. I dagsläget hävdar Fallföretaget att ämnet har givits bristande uppmärksamhet i branschen, varför en uppdatering av deras nuvarande metodik för att estimera DLOM är kritisk för sitt fortsatta arbete. Syfte: Denna studies syfte är att analysera och skapa en modell, grundad i validitet och praktisk genomförbarhet, som estimerar illikviditetsrabatten. Genomförande: På grund av att rabatten inte är observerbar uppstår ett behov av att identifiera substitut för rabatten och förstå sambandet mellan dessa och DLOM. Till hjälp har en omfattande sammanställningsstudie gjorts i ämnet tillsammans med en fallstudie av Fallföretagets nuvarande metodik. Baserat på detta och triangulering har en modell sedan utvecklats. Denna modell har sedan tillämpats på fyra värderingsfall som tillhandahållits av Fallföretaget. Utifrån detta följer sedan en analys på Fallföretagets metodik, den framtagna modellen och en jämförelse av dessa. Resultat: EMQ-modellen är en modell som bygger på tre metoder för att estimera DLOM. De tre metoderna är en empirisk metod, en matematisk metod och en kvalitativ metod. Två intervall för vad DLOM kan anta för värden utifrån bolagsspecifika data skapas utifrån den empiriska och matematiska metoden. Dessa intervall viktas sedan ihop till ett intervall med avseende på inlåsningsperioden för innehavet som ska värderas. Slutligen undersöks kvalitativa faktorer som ger ett bestämt värde inom intervallet för DLOM. De tre metoderna är valda utifrån att ta hänsyn till de faktorer som påverkar DLOM för att sedan överföra dessa till ett faktiskt värde för DLOM. Modellen är även skapad för att vara anpassningsbar till varje specifikt värderingsfall. / Background: The marketability discount (DLOM) is a controversial discount that has often led to conflict in valuation. DLOM is derived from a lack of marketability and the problem lies in the fact that DLOM is not observable and also considered subjective. Furthermore, DLOM depends on multiple often unique factors, which means that the discount can differ greatly from case to case. DLOM can assume values ranging from negative values and up to as much as 90%, which means that the company's final value to a great extent depends on this discount. Thus, it becomes relevant to determine a reasonable level of this discount based on scientific literature and practice. The case company for this study, PwC, has requested a new model to estimate DLOM. The reason behind the request is that the Swedish Tax Agency and customers of the case company have increased its effort on controlling whether estimates of DLOM have been carried out in a correct and arguably manner. Currently, the case company claims that the subject has been given a lack of attention in the industry, which is why an update of their current methodology for estimating DLOM is critical for their continued work. Aim: The aim of this report is to create and analyze a model, based on validity and practical feasibility, which estimates the marketability discount. Completion: Due to the fact that the discount is not observable creates a need for identifying proxies for the discount and an understanding of the connection between these and DLOM. An extensive literature study together with a case study on the case company has been made in order to achieve this. A model is then developed based on this and triangulation. The model is then used on four valuation cases, provided by the case company. After that follows an analysis of the methodology of the case company, the model of this study and a comparison between these two. Findings: The EMQ-model is a model that is based on three methods for estimating DLOM. The three methods are an empirical method, a mathematical method and a qualitative method. Two possible intervals for DLOM is created based on company-specific data by the empirical and mathematical method. These intervals are then weighted together into one interval with respect to the restriction period for the holding to be valued. Finally, qualitative factors that provide a definite value are investigated within the interval of DLOM. The three methods are chosen based on considering the factors affecting DLOM. The model is also created to enable adaptability to each specific valuation case.

A private company lacks a direct observable market value and several situations may require a practitioner to compute the value of a private company. Since most of the valuation methods in use are based on data derived from the public stock markets certain adjustments may be appropriate when valuing a private company. Marketability and liquidity is said to be one of the more observable differences between a public and a private company. This implies that the shares in a private company have a lack of marketability and liquidity in comparison to the shares in a public company, which practitioners may have to adjust for. Several quantitative studies are conducted on the subject in order reassure price differences between public and private companies, namely a private company discount (PCD). Furthermore, several quantitative studies strive to establish a general and standardized cost for lack of marketability (liquidity) expressed as the illiquidity discount or the discount for lack of marketability (DLOM). These studies have different perceptions and use different hypothesis to identify illiquidity, which in turn will lead to a large span of different discounts. Essentially, earlier research examines assets marketability and liquidity with the assumption of them being equal in all other aspects. Professional practitioners constantly seek guidance in these studies to justify their estimated and applied illiquidity discount/DLOM when performing a valuation on a privately held company. Furthermore, we have also observed survey-studies adopting a more qualitative method in order to appreciate the level of discounts applied in a valuation by professional practitioners. Consequently, this sea of studies provides the practitioner with a discount that ranges from 5% to 60% to take a stand on. The impossibility to determine the most adequate theory contributes to the inconsistency of how this issue is handled in reality by market participants and courts. In our study we first provide the reader with a rigorous literature study, which describes earlier research on the subject of illiquidity discount/DLOM. We conclude that research has gone one step too far when conducting all of these quantitative studies. This is why we conduct our own empirical data through semi-structured in-depth interviews with professional valuation experts on the Swedish market. This makes our approach a retake on the issue in order to generate suggestions to further studies. What we find is that all of the independent consultants, primarily, does not apply a discount when valuing a majority interest due to the paradigm on the Swedish market. In contrast, the private equity fund manager, which only acquires majority interest, can use this type of discounts in their dependent valuation of majority interests. However, when valuing a minority interest the independent valuation consultants use quantitative empirical studies to derive a starting point of the discount. The level of the discount is then estimated upon the purpose of the valuation and firm-specific variables, which all of the participant’s states to be the most important ones when estimating a illiquidity discount/DLOM. Based on these results we argue that one should be very careful when taking guidelines from quantitative empirical studies. Our interpretation is that the level of illiquidity/DLOM applicable depends on the level of attractiveness, which in turn has a bearing on all firm-specific variables. When it comes to applying the appropriate discount all of the participants argue in favor for a discount-on-value and not as some research suggest; a risk premium added to the discount rate. We also generate adequate suggestions to further studies based on these interviews. Since courts and in particular the Swedish tax-court is inconsistent when approving or rejecting illiquidity discounts/DLOM we suggest legal actions on the issue. Furthermore we suggest a survey-like study in order to catch consensus take on how to estimate the level of discount. In fact, this can be done every year in a similar way as PwC’s market risk premium study is conducted.