Author
Listed:
- Thomas H. McInish
- Ronald J. Kudla
Abstract
The traditional application of the net present value method in capital budgeting involves the use of market derived discount rates such as the cost of capital. Justification of these discount rates stems from the separation principle that states that investment decisions can be made independent of shareholders' tastes and preferences. The purpose of this paper is to show that the separation principle does not hold for closely-held firms and small firms, and, accordingly, market-derived discount rates are inappropriate. Two capital budgeting techniques which are appropriate for these firms are presented. Accept/reject decisions for capital budgeting projects are often made using a technique known as “net present value†(NPV). 1 Using the NPV method, acceptable projects are those for which the project's cost is less than the present value of the project's cash flows discounted at the firm's cost of capital; in other words, acceptable projects have a positive NPV. The firm's cost of capital is usually taken to be the weighted average of the firm's cost of equity and debt as measured by investor returns in the capital markets. Justification for use of a discount rate, determined by reference to market-wide investor returns, is based on “the separation principle†which asserts that corporations can make capital budgeting decisions independently of their shareholders' views. 2 But because a critical assumption of the separation principle is that shares are readily marketable, it is likely that the separation principle and, hence, market-determined discount rates are inappropriate for closely-held firms and small firms. 3 In this paper, we discuss two capital budgeting approaches which are applicable to firms whose shares are not readily marketable. This paper is divided into five sections. First, we discuss the traditional net present value approach to capital budgeting and, then, we indicate in detail, why it may not be suitable for use by closely-held firms and small firms. In the third and fourth sections, we explain two capital budgeting techniques which may be appropriate for use by these firms. Finally, we summarize our conclusions.
Suggested Citation
Thomas H. McInish & Ronald J. Kudla, 1981.
"A New Approach to Capital Budgeting in Closely-Held Firms and Small Firms,"
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 5(4), pages 30-35, April.
Handle:
RePEc:sae:entthe:v:5:y:1981:i:4:p:30-35
DOI: 10.1177/104225878100500404
Download full text from publisher
Most related items
These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:entthe:v:5:y:1981:i:4:p:30-35. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.