false

Textbook Notes
(368,448)

Canada
(161,882)

Ryerson University
(11,312)

Finance
(362)

FIN 300
(120)

John Currie
(13)

Chapter 10

Unlock Document

Description

CHAPTER 10
Making Capital Investment Decisions
Learning Objectives
LO1 How to determine relevant cash flows for a proposed project.
LO2 How to project cash flows and determine if a project is acceptable.
LO3 How to calculate operating cash flow using alternative methods.
LO4 How to calculate the present value of a tax shield on CCA.
LO5 How to evaluate cost-cutting proposals.
LO6 How to analyze replacement decisions.
LO7 How to evaluate the equivalent annual cost of a project.
LO8 How to set a bid price for a project.
Answers to Concepts Review and Critical Thinking Questions
1. (LO1) An opportunity cost is the most valuable alternative that is foregone if a particular project is undertaken.
The relevant opportunity cost is what the asset or input is actually worth today, not, for example, what it cost
to acquire.
2. (LO1) It’s probably only a mild over-simplification. Current liabilities will all be paid presumably. The cash
portion of current assets will be retrieved. Some receivables won’t be collected, and some inventory will not be
sold, of course. Counterbalancing these losses is the fact that inventory sold above cost (and not replaced at the
end of the project’s life) acts to increase working capital. These effects tend to offset.
3. (LO7) The EAC approach is appropriate when comparing mutually exclusive projects with different lives that
will be replaced when they wear out. This type of analysis is necessary so that the projects have a common life
span over which they can be compared; in effect, each project is assumed to exist over an infinite horizon of N-
year repeating projects. Assuming that this type of analysis is valid implies that the project cash flows remain
the same forever, thus ignoring the possible effects of, among other things: (1) inflation, (2) changing
economic conditions, (3) the increasing unreliability of cash flow estimates that occur far into the future, and
(4) the possible effects of future technology improvement that could alter the project cash flows.
4. (LO1) Depreciation is a non-cash expense, but it is tax-deductible on the income statement. Thus depreciation
causes taxes paid, an actual cash outflow, to be reduced by an amount equal to the depreciation tax shield t D.
c
A reduction in taxes that would otherwise be paid is the same thing as a cash inflow, so the effects of the
depreciation tax shield must be included to get the total incremental aftertax cash flows.
5. (LO1) There are two particularly important considerations. The first is erosion. Will the essentialized book
simply displace copies of the existing book that would have otherwise been sold? This is of special concern
given the lower price. The second consideration is competition. Will other publishers step in and produce such
a product? If so, then any erosion is much less relevant. A particular concern to book publishers (and producers
of a variety of other product types) is that the publisher only makes money from the sale of new books. Thus, it
is important to examine whether the new book would displace sales of used books (good from the publisher’s
perspective) or new books (not good). The concern arises any time there is an active market for used product.
6. (LO1) This market was heating up rapidly, and a number of other competitors were planning on entering. Any
erosion of existing services would be offset by an overall increase in market demand.
7. (LO1) Pistachio should have realized that abnormally large profits would dwindle as more supply of services
came into the market and competition became more intense.
10-1 Solutions to Questions and Problems
NOTE: All end of chapter problems were solved using a spreadsheet. Many problems require multiple steps. Due to
space and readability constraints, when these intermediate steps are included in this solutions manual, rounding
may appear to have occurred. However, the final answer for each problem is found without rounding during any
step in the problem.
Basic
1. (LO1) The $6 million acquisition cost of the land six years ago is a sunk cost. The $6.4 million current aftertax
value of the land is an opportunity cost if the land is used rather than sold off. The $14.2 million cash outlay
and $890,000 grading expenses are the initial fixed asset investments needed to get the project going.
Therefore, the proper year zero cash flow to use in evaluating this project is
$6,400,000 + 14,200,000 + 890,000 = $21,490,000
2. (LO1) Sales due solely to the new product line are:
19,000($13,000) = $247,000,000
Increased sales of the motor home line occur because of the new product line introduction; thus:
4,500($53,000) = $238,500,000
in new sales is relevant. Erosion of luxury motor coach sales is also due to the new portable campers; thus:
900($91,000) = $81,900,000 loss in sales
is relevant. The net sales figure to use in evaluating the new line is thus:
$247,000,000 + 238,500,000 – 81,900,000 = $403,600,000
3. (LO1) We need to construct a basic Statement of Comprehensive Income. The Statement of Comprehensive
Income is:
Sales $ 830,000
Variable costs 498,000
Fixed costs 181,000
Depreciation 77,000
EBT $ 74,000
[email protected]% 25,900
Net income $ 48,100
4. (LO3) To find the OCF, we need to complete the Statement of Comprehensive Income as follows:
Sales $ 824,500
Costs 538,900
Depreciation 126,500
EBIT $ 159,100
[email protected]% 54,094
Net income $ 105,006
The OCF for the company is:
OCF = EBIT + Depreciation – Taxes
OCF = $159,100 + 126,500 – 54,094
10-2 OCF = $231,506
The depreciation tax shield, also called the CCA tax shield, is the depreciation times the tax rate, so:
Depreciation tax shield =ct Depreciation
Depreciation tax shield = .34($126,500)
Depreciation tax shield = $43,010
The depreciation tax shield shows us the increase in OCF by being able to expense depreciation.
5. (LO3) To calculate the OCF, we first need to calculate net income. The Statement of Comprehensive Income
is:
Sales $ 108,000
Variable costs 51,000
Depreciation 6,800
EBT $ 50,200
[email protected]% 17.570
Net income $ 32,630
Using the most common financial calculation for OCF, we get:
OCF = EBIT + Depreciation – Taxes
OCF = $50,200 + 6,800 – 17,570
OCF = $39,430
The top-down approach to calculating OCF yields:
OCF = Sales – Costs – Taxes
OCF = $108,000 – 51,000 – 17,570
OCF = $39,430
The tax-shield approach is:
OCF = (Sales – Costs)(1 – t ) + t Depreciation
C C
OCF = ($108,000 – 51,000)(1 – .35) + .35(6,800)
OCF = $39,430
And the bottom-up approach is:
OCF = Net income + Depreciation
OCF = $32,630 + 6,800
OCF = $39,430
All four methods of calculating OCF should always give the same answer.
6. (LO1)
Sales $ 940,000
Variable costs 385,400
Fixed costs 147,000
CCA 104,000
EBIT $ 303,600
[email protected]% 106,260
Net income $ 197,340
10-3 7. (LO1, 2)
Cash flow year 0 = -990,000
Cash flow years 1 through 5 = 460,000(1 – .40) = $276,000
PV of CCATS = 990,000(.3)(.4) x (1 + .5(.15))
.15 + .3 1 + .15
= $246,782.61
NPV = -990000 + 276,000 x PVIFA (15%, 5) + 546,782.61
= -990,000 + 276,000 x {1 – [1/1+.15] /.15} + 246,782.61
= $181,977.42
8. (LO2)
Cash flow year 0 = -990,000 – 47,200 = -$1,037,200
Cash flow years 1 through 5 = 460,000(1 – .4) = $276,000
Ending cash flow = 100,000 + 47,200 = $147,200
PV of CCATS = 990,000(.3)(.4) x (1 + .5(.15)) –
.15 + .3 1 + .15
100,000(.3)(.4) x 1
.15 + .3 (1.15)5
= $233,524.56
5
NPV = -1,037,200+ 276,000 x PVIFA(15%, 5) + (147,200)/(1.15) + 233,524.56 = $194,703.78
9. (LO2) The NPV will be smaller because the Capital Cost Allowances are smaller early on.
PV of CCATS = 990,000(.25)(.4) x (1 + .5(.15)) –
.15 + .25 1 + .15
100,000(.25)(.4) x 1
.15 + .25 (1.15)5
= $218,929.28
Therefore with a 25% CCA rate, the
NPV = 194,703.79 + (218,929.28– 233,524.57) = $181,108.50
10. (LO1) Neither one is correct. What should be considered is the opportunity cost of using the land, at the very
least what the land could be sold for today.
11. (LO4) Generally, as long as there are other assets in the class, the pool remains open and there are no tax
effects from the sale. This fact does not hold here since we are told that there will be no assets left in the
class in 6 years.
th
Beyond the first year, the UCC at the beginning of the N year is given by the formula:
UCC C 1 d d N 2where C = installed capital cost; d = CCA rate. Note that the half-year rule has
N 2
been incorporated. In this case:
10-4 6-2
Uth =6$548,000 (1 – (0.2/2)) (1-0.2) = $202,014.72. This is the book value of the asset at the end of the
5 year (beginning of the sixth).
The asset is sold at a (terminal) loss to book value = $202,014.72 – $105,000 = $97,014.72. The terminal loss
acts as a tax shield which the company can use to reduce its taxes. The reduction in taxes is a cash inflow.
The tax shield = 0.35 $97,014.72 = $33,955.15
The after tax salvage value = $105,000 + $33,955.15 = $138,955.15 .
12. (LO2) A/R fell by $6,140, and inventory increased by $5,640, so net current assets fell by $500. A/P rose by
$6,930.
∆NWC = ∆(CA – CL) = –500 – 6,930 = – 7,430
Net cash flow = S – C – ∆NWC = 102,000 – 43,500 – (– 7,430) = $65,930
13. (LO3)
CCA =10.3($3.9M/2) = $585,000; CCA = 0.3(2.9M – $585,000) = $994,500;
CCA =30.3($3.9M – 585,000 – 994,500) = $696,150.
OCF =1(S – C)(1 – t )c+ t Dc= ($2.65M – $840K)(1 – 0.35) + 0.35($585,000) = $1,381,250
OCF =2(S – C)(1 – t )c+ t Dc= ($2.65M – $840K)(1 – 0.35) + 0.35($994,500) = $1,524,575
OCF =3(S – C)(1 – t )c+ t Dc= ($2.65M – $840K)(1 – 0.35) + 0.35($696,150) = $1,420,152.50
14. (LO2)
Initial Cash Flow year 0 = -$2,650,000
After-tax net revenue years 1-3 = (S – C)(1 – t C = ($2,650,000 – 840,000)(1 – 0.35) = $1,176,500
Ending cash flows (year 3) = salvage value = $1,624,350
PV of CCATS = 3,900,000(.3)(.35) x (1 + .5(.12)) –
.12 + .3 1 + .12
1,624,350 (.3)(.35) x 1
.12 + .3 (1.12) 3
= $633,722.80
3
NPV = – $3.9M + $1,176,500(PVIFA 12%, 3 + $633,722.80 + $1,624,350/1.12
= $715,657.53
15. (LO1, 2)
Cash Flow year 0 = -$3,900,000 – 300,000 = -$4,200,000
After-tax net revenue years 1-3 = (S – C)(1 – T c = ($2,650,000 – 840,000)(1 – 0.35) = $1,176,500
Ending cash flows (year 3) = recovery of NWC + salvage value = $300,000 + 210,000 = $510,000
PV of CCATS = 3,900,000(.3)(.35) x (1 + .5(.12)) –
.12 + .3 1 + .12
210,000(.3)(.35) x 1
3
.12 + .3 (1.12)
= $885,399.39
NPV = –$4.2M + $1,176,500(PVIFA 12%,3) + $885,399.39 + $510,000/1.12 = -$125,838.20
10-5 16. (LO1, 2)
Initial Cash Flow year 0 = -785,000 – 140,000 = -$925,000
After-tax net revenue years 1 through 5 = (13,500,000 – 11,700,000 – 215,000)(1 – .35) = $1,030,250
Ending cash flows (year 5) = $140,000
PV of CCATS = 785,000(.25)(.35) x (1 + .5(.19))
.19 + .25 (1 + .19)
= $143,645.55
NPV = -925,000 + 143,645.55 + 1,030,250 x PVIFA(19%,5) + 140,000/(1.19) 5
= $2,427,440.81
Since the NPV is positive, it is probably a good project.
17. (LO2) Assuming that all outstanding accounts receivable from the previous quarter are collected in the current
quarter, the amount of cash collections in the current quarter is:
$15,200 – 9,500 = $5,700
This can be seen by making collections from current quarter sales a plug number Y in the current quarter’s
cash flow summary for accounts receivable:
Opening balance of A/R X
Current quarter sales $15,200
Collections of outstanding A/R from previous quarter –X
Collections from current quarter sales –Y
Closing balance of A/R $15,200 - Y
This gives the equation: 15,200 – Y = X + 9,500
So the total cash collections in the current are:
X + Y = $5,700
18. (LO1) Management’s discretion to set the firm’s capital structure is applicable at the firm level. Since any one
particular project could be financed entirely with equity, another project could be financed with debt, and the
firm’s overall capital structure remains unchanged, financing costs are not relevant in the analysis of a
project’s incremental cash flows according to the stand-alone principle.
19. (LO1) The $7.2 million acquisition cost of the land seven years ago is a sunk cost, and so it is not relevant.
The $586,000 grading cost to make the land usable is relevant. The $962,000 current appraisal of the land is an
opportunity cost if the land is used rather than sold off. If the land is sold at $962,000 there will be a capital
loss of (7,200,000 – 962,000) $6,238,000 of which the company can write off 50% of it against any taxable
Capital Gains. This means that at a tax rate of 30% they would be able to write off 30% x $3,119,000 and thus
save $935,700 in taxes.
The $25 million cash outlay is the initial fixed asset investment needed to get the project going. Therefore, the
proper year zero cash flow to use in evaluating this project is = $0.962M + $25M + .586M - $.9357M=
$25,612,300.
20. (LO1) Currently the firm has sales of 23,000($14,690) + (38,600) ($43,700) = $2,024,690,000. With the
introduction of a new mid-sized car its sales will change by (28,500) ($33,600) + (12,500) ($14,690) – (8,200)
10-6 ($43,700) = $782,885,000. This amount is the incremental sales and is the amount that should be considered
when evaluating the project.
21. (LO1, 2)
Initial Cash Flow 0 = -560,000 – 29,000 = -$589,000
After-tax savings in Operating Costs years 1 through 5 = (165,000) (1 – .34) = $108,900
Ending cash flows (year 5) = $85,000 + 29,000 = $114,000
PV of CCATS = 560,000(.2)(.34) x (1 + .5(.10)) – 85,000(.2)(.34) x 1
.10 + .2 (1 + .10) .10 + .2 (1.10)5
= $109,200.55
5
NPV = -589,000 + 109,200.55+ 108,900 x PVIFA(10%, 5) + 114,000/(1.10)
= $3,802.26
22. (LO1, 2)
Initial cash flow net revenue year 0 = -720,000+ 110,000 = -$610,000
After-tax savings in order processing costs years 1 through 5 = (350,000)(1 – .35) = $227,500
Ending cash flows (year 5) = $280,000 – 110,000 = $170,000
PV of CCATS = $260,000
NPV = 0 = -610,000 + 260,000 + 227,500 x PVIFA(IRR%,5) + 170,000/(1+IRR) 5
NPV = 0 = -610,000 + 260,000 + 227,500 x ({1-[1/(1+IRR)] }/IRR) + 170,000/(1+IRR) 5
IRR = 61.85%
23. (LO1, 2)
$300,000 cost saving case
Initial Costs year 0 = -720,000+110,000 = -$610,000
After-tax savings in processing costs years 1 through 5 = (300,000)(1 – .35) = $195,000
Ending cash flows (year 5) = $280,000 – 110,000 = $170,000
PV of CCATS = $114,969.60
5
NPV = -610,000 + 114,969.60 + 195,000 x PVIFA(20%,5) + 170,000/(1+.20) = $156,458.15 Accept the
project.
$240,000 cost saving case
Initial cash flow year 0 = -$610,000
After tax savings in order processing costs years 1 through 5 = (240,000)(1 – .35) = $156,000
Ending cash flows (year 5) = $280,000 – 110,000 = $170,000
PV of CCATS = $114,969.60
5
NPV = -610,000 + 114,969.60 + 156,000 x PVIFA(20%,5) + 170,000/(1+.20) = $39,824.28 Accept the
project.
Required pretax cost saving case (RCS)
Initial cash flow year 0 = -$610,000
Ending cash flows (year 5) = $280,000 – 110,000 = $170,000
PV of CCATS = $114,969.60
5
NPV = 0 = -610,000 + 114,969.60 + RCS(1 – .35) x PVIFA(20%,5) + 170,000/(1+.20) Solve for RCS
10-7 RCS = Required pretax cost saving = $219,513.18.
24. (LO8)
Cash flow Year PV @ 20%
Capital Spending -1,300,000 0 -$1,300,000
Salvage 650,000 3 376,157.41
Additions to NWC -340,000 0 -340,000
340,000 3 196,759.26
Aftertax operating income 1 to 3 ?
Tax shield on CCA* 146,791.67
NPV 0
Solving for PV of after-tax operating income we obtain: $ 920,291.67
Dividing by PVIFA(20%,3) we find that annual after-tax operating income must be $436,885.71
Consequently, sales must be $436,885.71/ (1 – .36) + 89($96,000) = $9,226,633.93 in order to break even.
Therefore the selling price should be no less than $9,226,633.92 / 89 or $103,670.04 per system.
*PV of CCATS = 1,300,000(.2)(.36) x (1 + .5(.2))
.2 + .2 1 + .2
– 650,000(.2)(.36) x 1
3
.2 + .2 (1.2)
= $146,791.67
25. (LO3)
a. EBIT = Sales – cost – depreciation = $425,000 – $96,000 – $375,000 0.2 = $254,000
b. According to the bottom-up approach:
OCF = (S – C – D)(1 – T) + D = $254,000 (1 – 0.35) + $75,000 = $ 240,100
c. According to the tax shield approach:
OCF = (S – C)(1 – T) + TD = ($425,000 – $96,000) (1 – 0.35) + 0.35 $75,000 = $240,100
26. (LO3)
Depreciation = $280,000/2 .25 = $35,000
According to the top down approach:
OCF = (S – C) – (S – C – D) T = ($650,000 – $490,000) – (650,000 – $490,000 – $35,000) 0.38
= $112,500
According to the tax shield approach:
OCF = (S – C)(1 – T) + TD = ($650,000 – $490,000) (1 – 0.38) + 0.38 $35,000 = $112,500
27. (LO7)
Method 1: PV @ 13%(Costs) = -$6,700 – 400 PVIFA (13%, 3) = -$7,644.46
Method 2: PV @ 13%(Costs) = -$9,900 – 620 PVIFA (13%, 4) = -$11,744.17
Difference= $4,099.71 in favour of Method 1
Without replacement: On this basis we would need to know whether the benefit of 1 more year’s use is
sufficient to offset the additional cost of $4,099.71.
10-8 With replacement: Method 1: EAC = -7,644.46/PVIFA(13%,3) = -$3,237.60
Method 2: EAC = -11,744.17/PVIFA(13%,4) = -$3,948.32
On this basis, Method 2 is again more expensive.
28. (LO7)
Method 1: CF = 0$6,700
PVCCATS = (6,700)(.39)(.25)(1.065)/[(.13 + .25)(1.13)] = $1,620.19
PV(Costs) = -400(1 – .39)PVIFA (13%, 3) – 6,700 + 1,620.19 = -$5,655.93
EAC = -$5,655.93/PVIFA(13%, 3) = -$2,395.41
Method 2: CF = 0$9,900
PVCCATS = (9,900)(.39)(.25)(1.065)/[(.13 + .25)(1.13)] = $2,394.02
PV(Costs) = -620(1 – .39)PVIFA (13%, 4) – 9,900 + 2,394.02 = -$8,630.93
EAC = -$8,630.93/PVIFA(13%, 4) = -$2,901.67
Method 2 is more expensive.
29. (LO7) To calculate the EAC of the project, we first need the NPV of the project. Notice that we include the
NWC expenditure at the beginning of the project, and recover the NWC at the end of the project. The NPV of
the project is:
5
NPV = –$270,000 – 25,000 – $42,000(PVIFA 11%,5 + $25,000/1.11 = –$435,391.39
Now we can find the EAC of the project. The EAC is:
EAC = –$435,391.39 / (PVIFA 11%,5 = –$117,803.98
30. (LO7)
Assuming a carry-forward on taxes:
Both cases: salvage value = $40,000
Techron I: After-tax operating costs = $67,000(1 – 0.35) = $43,550
PVCCATS = (290,000)(.35)(.20)(1.05)/[(.10 + .20)(1.10)] – {[(40,000)(0.20)(0.35)/[0.10 + 0.20]]
(1/1.10) }= $57,578.64
3
PV(Costs) = -$290,000 – 43,550(PVIFA 10%,3 + (40,000/1.10 ) + 57,578.64 = -$310,671.17
EAC = -$310,671.17 / (PVIFA 10%,3 = -$124,925.48
Techron II: After-tax operating costs = $35,000(1 – 0.35) = $22,750
PVCCATS = (510,000)(.35)(.20)(1.05)/[(.10 + .20)(1.10)] – {[(40,000)(0.20)(0.35)/[0.10 + 0.20]]
5
(1/1.10) }= $107,795.64 5
PV(Costs) = -$510,000 – 22,750(PVIFA 10%,5 + (40,000/1.10 ) + 107,7795.64 = -$463,607.90
EAC = -$463,607.90 / (PVIFA 10%,5 = -$122,298.60
The two milling machines have unequal lives, so they can only be compared by expressing both on an
equivalent annual basis which is what the EAC method does. Thus, you prefer the Techron II because it has the
lower annual cost.
31. (LO7)
Pre-fab segments
Given: Initial cost = $6.5M; d = 4%; k = 11%; T = 35%; S = .25 x $6.5M = $1,625,000;
n = 25
PVCCATS = $565,442.71
Assuming end of year costs: PV(Costs) = -$150,000x(1-.35) x PVIFA(11%, 25) = -$821,120.11
10-9 Total PV(Costs) = -$6,500,000 – $821,120.11 + $565,442.71 + $1,625,000PVIF(11%, 25)
= -$6,636,064.25
EAC = -$6,636,064.25/PVIFA(11%, 25) = -$787,967.88
Carbo

More
Less
Related notes for FIN 300

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study

documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view

Continue

Continue
OR

By registering, I agree to the
Terms
and
Privacy Policies

Already have an account?
Log in

Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.