Central Equipment Company In the beginning of January 2020, Mr. L.C Tandon, Director of Finance of Central Equipment Company (CEC), was evaluating the pros and cons of debt and equity financing for the purpose of expansion of CECs existing production facilities. At a recent board of directors, a heated ddiscussion took place on the best method of financing the expansion. Mr. K.C. Soni, Chairman and Managing Director (CMD), had therefore directed Mr. Tandon to critically evaluate the points made by the various members of the board. He also asked him to prepare a report on behalf of the companys management to be presented at the board meeting to be held in the last week of January 2020. Background of the Company CEC was started in the late fifties as a government company. It is one of the important engineering companies in the public sector in India, manufacturing a wide range of products. CECs products include industrial machinery and equipment for chemicals, paper, cement and fertilizers industries, superheaters, economizers and solid material handling and conveying equipment. CEC had started with a paid-up capital of Rs. 10 million in 1959. As per the estimated balance sheet at the end of the financial year 2020, it has a paid-up capital of Rs.180 million (divided into 18 million shares of Rs.10 each) and reserves of Rs. 459.6 million. The companys sales have shown a general increasing trend in spite of a number of difficulties such as recessionary conditions, high input cost, frequent power cuts and unremunerative regulated prices of certain products. In the last decade, CECs sales have increased from Rs.1,804 million in the financial year 2011 to Rs.3,042 million in 2019. The sales for the year ending 31 March 2020 are estimated to be Rs.3,377 million. Net profit (profit after tax, PAT) has increased from Rs.171 million in FY 2011 to Rs.435 million in FY 2019. The company is projecting a profit after tax of Rs.503 million in FY 2020. Due to the recessionary and other economic factors, sales and profits of the company have shown a cyclical behaviour over the last decade. Table 14.13 gives sales and profit data since FY 2011. Table 14.13 Central Equipment Company Selected Financial Data for year ending 31 st March (Rs. Millions) FY Sales PBIT PAT Dividend EPS 2011 1804.4 343 171 90 9.50 2012 1707.8 155 78 90 4.33 2013 1894.0 412 206 90 11.44 2014 2270.8 522 261 90 14.50

2015 2520.0 580 290 108 16.11 2016 2775.0 666 333 108 18.50 2017 2949.2 768 384 144 21.33 2018 2433.8 -53 -53 90 -- 2019 3042.3 662 435 270 24.17 2020 $ 3376.9 775 503 270 27.94 $= Estimates The Expansion Project The need for expansion was felt because the market was fast-growing and the company has at times reached its existing capacity. The project is expected to cost Rs.200 million, and generate an average profit before interest and taxes (PBIT) of Rs.40 million per annum, for a period of ten years. It is expected that the new plant will cause a significant increase in the firms fixed costs. The annual total expenses of the company after expansion are expected to consist of 55% of fixed and 45% variable expenses. The companys financial condition during the financial year 2020-21 is expected as shown in Table 14.14 without and with the expansion. Table 14.14 Central Equipment Company Projected Sales and Profits without and with Expansion in FY 2020-21

(Rs. Millions) FY Sales PBIT PAT Dividend EPS Without Expansion

3579.5 850 595 300 33.06

With Expansion #

4032.3 1250 875 570 23.03

# Projections include financial impact of proposed expansion and equity financing Rs.10 per share is assumed.

The management has already evaluated the financial viability of the project and found it acceptable even under adverse economic conditions. Mr. Soni felt that there would not be any difficulty ln getting the proposal approved from the board and relevant government authorities. He also thought that the production could start as early as from April 2018. Financing of the Project CEC has so far followed a very conservative financing policy. All these years, the company has financed its growth through budgetary support from the government in the form of equity capital and internally generated funds. The company has also been meeting its requirements for working capital finance from the internal funds. The company has,

however, negotiated a standing credit limit of Rs.100 million from a large nationalized bank. In the past, it has hardly used the bank limit because of sufficient internal resources. As may be seen from the estimate d balance sheet as on 31 st March 2020 in Table 14.15 CECs capital employed included paid-up share capital and reserves without any debts. The CMD feels that given the governments current attitude whereby it would like profitable companies to raise funds from the capital markets for their investments, it may look odd for CEC to obtain budgetary support from the government. However, in his assessment, C EC being a profitable company, the government may agree to allow it to come up with an IPo, provided the governments Shareholding remains at least equal to 51% of the total paid-up capital and may also be willing to provide budgetary support for the project. More significantly, he felt that raising equity might be difficult and it may dilute equity earnings. The companys merchant banker suggested that in case it wants to go for IPO, it may be able to sell shares about 20 to 50% above its par value of Rs.10. Given these facts, CMD decided to reconsider the companys policy of avoiding long-term debt. It was thought that the use of debt could be justified by the expected profitable position of the company. Table 14.15 CEC: Estimated Balance Sheet as on 31 st March 2020 Capital Assets Sundry Creditors 151.8 Cash & Bank Balance

89 Tax Provision 30.3 Sundry Debtors 180.7 Other Current Liabilities 121.5 Inventory 41.1

Other Current Assets

47.1 Current Liabilities 303.6 Current Assets 357.9 Paid-up Share Capital

180.0 Gross Block 819.9

Reserves & Surplus 459.6 Accumulated Depreciation

234.6 Net Worth 639.6 Net Block 585.3 Total Capital 943.2 Total Assets 943.2 Mr. Tandon has determined that the company could sell Rs.1,000 denomination bonds for an amount of Rs.200 million either to the public or to the financial institutions through private placement. The interest rate on bonds will be 10.8% per annum, and they could be redeemed after seven years in three equal annual instalments. The bonds and interest thereon will be fully secured against the assets of the company. In Mr. Tandons view, the company will have to sell a large number of bonds to the financial institutions as CEC being a new company in the Capital Market, the public may not fully subscribe to the issue. The bond-holders shall have right to appoint one nominee director

on the board of the company, which shall, however, be exercised by the bond trustees only if the company defaults in the payment of interest or repayment on the due date. In Mr. Tandons opinion, the bond was a cheaper source of finance, since the interest amount was tax-deductible. Given the corporate tax rate of 35%, the 10.8% interest rate was equal to 7% from the companys point of view. On the other hand, he thought that equity capital would be costly to service, as CEC is currently paying a dividend of 15% on its paid-up capital. Further, as per the current tax laws in India, the company would have to pay tax on dividends. Thus, the bond alternative looked attractive to Mr.Tandon on the basis of the comparison of costs. The expansion proposal was discussed in the January 2020 meeting of the board. As most of the members were convinced about the profitability and desirability of the project, they did not take much time to approve it. Immediately after this decision, Mr. Tandon informed the members about the possibility of raising finance through a bond issue. He then presented his report highlighting the comparison between bond and equity financing. His conclusions clearly showed that bond financing was better for the company. Mr. Tandon was surprised to note substantial disagreement existed among the members regarding the use of bond. One Director questioned the correctness of Mr. Tandons calculation of the cost of the bond as he had ignored the implications of the repayment if loan. According to him, this would mean a higher cost of bond as compared to equity capital. Yet another director emphasised that a lot of annual cash outflow will also take place under the bond alternative. He felt that the issue of the bond would thus add to the companys risk by pressurizing its liquidity. Most Of the directors, however, were in agreement with the estimate of post- expansion profit before interest and taxes (PBIT) of Rs.1250 million. One of the directors argued that given the expected higher PBIT, the post-expansion equity return would significantly increase if the funds are raised by issuing bonds. He even emphasized that the job of the management should be to maximize the profitability of equity owners by taking reasonable risks. Another director countered this argument lay stating that the equity return could be diluted if the company was unable to earn sufficient profit from the existing business and the new project. The discussion on bond vs. equity financing was so involved that there did not seem to be any sign of a unanimous agreement being reached. At this juncture, Mr. Tandon suggested that the discussion on financing alternatives might be postponed until January end to allow him sufficient time to come up with a fresh analysis incorporating the various points raised in the current meeting. Mr. Tandon was wondering what he should do so that a unanimous decision could be reached

Discussion Questions

1. Calculate EPS under the alternatives of employing (a) Rs.200 million debt and no fresh equity, b) Rs.100 million debt and Rs.100 million equity and (c) Rs.200 million equity and no debt. Also make calculations for EPS. Draw a chart showing PBIT on x-axis and EPS and EPS on the taxis for the debt- equity mix. What inferences do you derive?

2. Debate the issues raised in the case for and against the use of debt. Why do a large number of board members seem to be against the use of debt? What are the real risks involved? How would you measure them?

3. In addition to profitability and risk factors, what are other considerations before CEC to decide about its debt policy? Should it employ debt to finance its expansion?