Abstract The finance literature offers two major models about the capital structure of a firm. In the tradeoff model, firms tradeoff the costs and benefits of borrowing to identify their optimal capital structure and gradually move towards it. On the contrast, firms do not have an optimal capital structure in the pecking order model. The moving of the capital structure is simply the result of the financing hierarchy: retained earnings, safe debt, risky debt, and finally equity. The purpose of this study is to test whether the public firms in Taiwan have optimal capital structure. We address the question with cross-section regressions. If the tradeoff exists, moving towards the optimal capital structure will explain the change of capital structure. On the other hand ,the deficit-in funds¡]DEF¡^will explain the change of capital structure when the pecking order model exists. The empirical result shows that the public firms in Taiwan have optimal capital structure, and their realized capital structures are moving towards it, but the speed of adjustment is quite slow.

No description available.

A comparação entre duas teorias na área de finanças sobre estrutura de capital nas empresas é o objetivo deste trabalho. Usando testes desenvolvidos por Shyam-Sunder & Myers (1999) e Rajan & Zingales (1995), os dados de empresas brasileiras, não financeiras, de capital aberto foram analisados entre os anos de 2000 e 2010 para verificar se preferiram os comportamentos previstos na Static Trade-off Theory ou os da Pecking Order Theory. As maneiras de se financiar e as causas e conseqüências dessas decisões nas empresas são importantes questões que vêm sendo debatidas em inúmeros trabalhos acadêmicos. Este trabalho procurou analisar a bibliografia relacionada ao tema e replicar testes realizados no exterior, visando verificar as semelhanças, diferenças e os motivos relacionados a tais resultados. Os resultados obtidos apontam para a provável preferência do comportamento previsto pela Pecking Order Theory, isto é, as empresas estudadas, no período analisado, usaram, em primeiro lugar, recursos gerados internamente (caixa operacional), usando em segundo lugar recursos de terceiros, por meio de empréstimos bancários ou emissão de debêntures, somente emitindo ações como última alternativa. Outra conclusão foi que as empresas brasileiras de capital aberto provavelmente não procuram alcançar ou manter uma meta ideal de endividamento, que equilibre os custos e benefícios gerados pelos empréstimos. / The comparison between two theories in the finance area of capital structure in business is the goal of this work. Using tests developed by Shyam-Sunder & Myers (1999) and Rajan & Zingales (1995), the data of Brazilian non-financial publicly traded were analyzed between the years 2000 and 2010 to determine whether they preferred the expected behaviors in the Static Trade-off Theory or the Pecking Order Theory. The ways to finance and the causes and consequences of these decisions in organizations are important issues that have been discussed in numerous scholarly works. This study sought to examine the literature related to the theme and replicating tests performed abroad in order to verify the similarities, differences and the reasons related to such results. The results indicate the problabe preference behavior provided by Pecking Order Theory, ie the companies studied in the period analyzed, used, first, internally generated funds (operating cash), second using third-party funds through bank loans or issuance of bonds or issuance of bonds, sending shares only as a last resort. Another conclusion is that Brazilian companies traded problaby did not seek to achieve or maintain an ideal goal of indebtedness, wich balances the costs and benefits generated by the loans.

A comparação entre duas teorias na área de finanças sobre estrutura de capital nas empresas é o objetivo deste trabalho. Usando testes desenvolvidos por Shyam-Sunder & Myers (1999) e Rajan & Zingales (1995), os dados de empresas brasileiras, não financeiras, de capital aberto foram analisados entre os anos de 2000 e 2010 para verificar se preferiram os comportamentos previstos na Static Trade-off Theory ou os da Pecking Order Theory. As maneiras de se financiar e as causas e conseqüências dessas decisões nas empresas são importantes questões que vêm sendo debatidas em inúmeros trabalhos acadêmicos. Este trabalho procurou analisar a bibliografia relacionada ao tema e replicar testes realizados no exterior, visando verificar as semelhanças, diferenças e os motivos relacionados a tais resultados. Os resultados obtidos apontam para a provável preferência do comportamento previsto pela Pecking Order Theory, isto é, as empresas estudadas, no período analisado, usaram, em primeiro lugar, recursos gerados internamente (caixa operacional), usando em segundo lugar recursos de terceiros, por meio de empréstimos bancários ou emissão de debêntures, somente emitindo ações como última alternativa. Outra conclusão foi que as empresas brasileiras de capital aberto provavelmente não procuram alcançar ou manter uma meta ideal de endividamento, que equilibre os custos e benefícios gerados pelos empréstimos. / The comparison between two theories in the finance area of capital structure in business is the goal of this work. Using tests developed by Shyam-Sunder & Myers (1999) and Rajan & Zingales (1995), the data of Brazilian non-financial publicly traded were analyzed between the years 2000 and 2010 to determine whether they preferred the expected behaviors in the Static Trade-off Theory or the Pecking Order Theory. The ways to finance and the causes and consequences of these decisions in organizations are important issues that have been discussed in numerous scholarly works. This study sought to examine the literature related to the theme and replicating tests performed abroad in order to verify the similarities, differences and the reasons related to such results. The results indicate the problabe preference behavior provided by Pecking Order Theory, ie the companies studied in the period analyzed, used, first, internally generated funds (operating cash), second using third-party funds through bank loans or issuance of bonds or issuance of bonds, sending shares only as a last resort. Another conclusion is that Brazilian companies traded problaby did not seek to achieve or maintain an ideal goal of indebtedness, wich balances the costs and benefits generated by the loans.

This thesis studies different aspects of firm decisions by using a dynamic model. I estimate a dynamic model of the firm based on the trade-off theory of capital structure that endogenizes investment, leverage, and payout decisions. For the estimation of the model I use Efficient Method of Moments (EMM), which allows me to recover the structural parameters that best replicate the characteristics of the data. I start analyzing the question of whether target leverage varies over time. While this is a central issue in finance, there is no consensus in the literature on this point. I propose an explanation that reconciles some of the seemingly contradictory empirical evidence. The dynamic model generates a target leverage that changes over time and consistently reproduces the results of Lemmon, Roberts, and Zender (2008). These findings suggest that the time-varying target leverage assumption of the big bulk of the previous literature is not incompatible with the evidence presented by Lemmon, Roberts, and Zender (2008). Then I study how corporate income tax payments vary with the corporate income tax rate. The dynamic model produces a bell-shaped relationship between tax revenue and the tax rate that is consistent with the notion of the Laffer curve. The dynamic model generates the maximum tax revenue for a tax rate between 36% and 41%. Finally, I investigate the impact of financial constraints on investment decisions by firms. Model results show that investment-cash flow sensitivity is higher for less financially constrained firms. This result is consistent with Kaplan and Zingales (1997). The dynamic model also rationalizes why large and mature firms have a positive and significant investment-cash flow sensitivity.

This thesis examines capital structure theories and debt level determinants to develop a better understanding, and to establish the most appropriate theory to explain the behaviour of firms‟ debt and equity choices. It tests three major capital structure theories (e.g. the trade-off, pecking order and market timing theories) using static and dynamic statistical models and 13 capital structure determinants, based on three major capital structure theories. The study uses 4,598 sample companies from 11 countries and 27 industries over a 20 year period. This method provides a clear insight into firms‟ debt and equity choice behaviours. The static trade-off theory is tested by first searching for similarities and differences between industries, countries and time periods and, second, by observing whether firms change their capital structures towards optimal levels and whether the coefficient signs are the same as the predictions. The "stock price effect‟ on debt levels is used to examine the pecking order and market timing theories. The pecking order theory is likewise tested by confirming whether firms issue debt when they face a financial deficit. Furthermore, these theories are tested using cluster analyses. The sample examines 11 different characteristics, which include firm size, debt level, and bankruptcy probability. As each characteristic is related to one or more capital structure theories, the most appropriate theory can be derived, based on such characteristics. There are five main findings. First, firms which are financial stable issue relatively more debt. Second, they have a preference for moderate debt levels and thus limit their bankruptcy probability. They also try to exploit opportunities from overestimated stock price by issuing stocks to increase cash inflows. Third, the effects from bankruptcy costs are greater than transaction costs in terms of capital structure adjustment. Fourth, during the sample period, firms continuously decrease leverage levels. Fifth, firms‟ characteristics and macro-economic factors affect their capital structure. There are three main conclusions. First, the behaviour of firms appears generally aligned with the trade-off theory, although the pecking order and market timing theories also partially explain the equity issuance condition. Second, the "equity and debt choice modes‟ can likewise be explained by the use of a theoretically combined approach, using the three major capital structure theories. In this approach, firms increase their value by both increasing debt for tax benefits and low adverse selection costs, and by issuing equity when the stock price is high. Third, this second conclusion implies that the trade-off, pecking order and market timing theories can be combined on the assumption that firms maximise their values under conditions of the existence of asymmetric information, tax shields and bankruptcy probability.

Tests of the static trade-off theory that posits that firms move towards the optimum capital structure necessitate a joint hypothesis test - whether firms adjust toward target leverage, and whether the proxy used for target leverage is the true target leverage. Prior studies use the time-series mean leverage for each firm, the industry median leverage, an estimated cross-sectional leverage, and a tobit estimated leverage using the factors suggested by the static trade-off theory as proxies for the target leverage. In this dissertation, I examine whether these proxies are equivalent and test the consistency of the proxies with the theorized behavior of the true target leverage. My results indicate that the four proxies we examine have significantly different distributions and this holds across most industries. Further, the industry median leverage is the proxy which best exhibits behavior consistent with the true target leverage. Firm value is higher for firms closer to the industry median and lower for firms away from the industry median. A robustness check using Kmeans cluster analysis confirms the superiority of the industry median leverage over the other proxies of target leverage. This study complements the previous studies on the pecking order theory and the trade-off theory. The main purpose of this study is to investigate three issues that are not considered in the previous studies. The adequacy of the specification and the assumptions of the models used in testing the trade-off and the pecking order theory. The second issue examined in this study is the validity to putting the pecking order and the trade-off theories in a horse race. The final issue examined in this study is the factors driving firms to issue (repurchase) debt or equity or combination of both and simultaneously the factors affecting the size of issue (repurchase)

No description available.

The real estate industry is one of the oldest sectors in the world, having existed almost as long as humans have roamed around the earth. Despite the social system in place, the ownership of land and buildings has always been a great source of prosperity to their owner. In addition to creating profit, the real estate sector also contributes to the health of the economy and to the well-being of people by providing necessities such as properties to organizations and individuals and by facilitating economic activities. This panel data study fills a knowledge gap by examining the development of large Swedish real estate companies’ capital structures between the years 2009 and 2017. The research tries to comprehend how the structures have changed during the business cycle following the financial crisis. The sample, consisting of 901 large stock companies, also tries to explain why these changes have occurred by analyzing which factors determine the development of the capital structure. Variables Return of Equity (ROE), Return of Assets (ROA), Assets, Number of Employees, Cost of Debt, Debt Coverage ratio (ICR), Interest Rates, and Stock Index are statistically tested in order to identify relationships between leverage and the given variables. The findings concerning the development of leverage ratios indicate that the Swedish firms, regardless of the amount of debt they possess, are deleveraging. Although the growth trend changes are subtle, they give evidence against the common belief that firms are packing up more debt. Relationships between the variables were all significant except for the relationships between Leverage/Interest Rates and Leverage/Stock Index which yielded conflicting results. Positive relationships were identified between Leverage/Assets, Leverage/ROE, Leverage/ICR, and Leverage/Interest Rates. The associations between the variables Leverage/Employees, Leverage/ROA, Leverage/Cost of Debt, and Leverage/Stock Index were negative. Although most results are in line with the previous research, some surprises were also discovered. Considering the fact that the Swedish market is relatively poorly understood, the area of real estate capital structure determinants still requires further research to understand what truly drives firms to change their debt and equity composition.

Past literature attempts to resolve the issue of the motivation behind managers' choice of a given capital structure. Despite several decades of intensive research, there is still no consensus about which theory dominates capital structure decisions. The present study empirically investigates the relative importance of two prominent theories of capital structure- the trade-off and the pecking order theories by exploring the conditions under which each theory can explain the financing choices of firms. These conditions are defined along two dimensions: (i) a firm's degree of information asymmetry, and (ii) its observed leverage relative to target leverage. The results show that, in the short-run, pecking order theory has more explanatory power in explaining the financing choices of firms. The target leverage theory assumes limited importance: Over-leveraged firms, when faced with low adverse information, are more inclined to adapt to the trade-off policies. In the presence of high information asymmetry, however, firms appear to be more concerned about adverse selection costs and make financing decisions that are more consistent with the pecking order theory. An analysis of the market reaction to seasoned equity issuances during announcement periods reveals that firms with high information asymmetry are penalized more than firms with low information asymmetry. This may explain the contradiction when over-leveraged firms continue to issue debt. However, the situation is reversed in the long run. Firms' long term financing goals appear to follow the leverage re-balancing theory. An analysis of financial activities over a five-year period, subsequent to security issuance decisions when they appear to be inconsistent with trade-off theory, reveals that firms follow an active policy of moving closer to the target leverage. In sum, the notion of target capital structure appears to exist. In the short-term, the management's financing decisions are consistent with the modified version of the pecking order theory, leading to tactical deviations from the optimal capital structure. However, long-term analysis indicates that the pecking order effect is largely transitory in nature and firms actively pursue strategic reversals towards an optimal capital structure.