Debt write-down: 3 financial statements treatment
This got me slightly confused to be honest friends.
So, in one of the guides it says that debt write down would increase pre tax income by the amount of write down (let’s assume $100). I suppose it would be reflected as a gain on income statement? The explanation says “the debt is written down reflects the fact that cash flow, that literally would have been directed towards paying that debt, has been freed up”. This got me confused because I don’t think the explanation is properly formulated.
My thinking was that how can we reflected freed up cash for debt repayment on the income statement if we aren’t reflecting debt repayments on income statement at all. So my initial thought was to just adjust the income statement to the savings on interest expense but obviously that way balance sheet did not add up and I understand that the former methodologies is correct mechanically, but can someone please give me a more logical rationale behind that? Merci!
Take a step back, think of it intuitively. The debt is a liability on the company's balance sheet, so a write-down of a liability should be a gain, just as inversely a write-down of an asset would be a loss.
Let’s say you have a factory worth 100 that you financed half with equity half with debt. Your balance sheet will reflect the fact that you have an asset worth 100, and your lenders have a 50 claim on those assets. The residual is equity worth 50.
Let’s say that your lenders by the grace of god forgive your debt. You know assets haven’t changed (nothing happened to the factory), but liabilities went down by 50. So you know that your residual claim is now worth 100 (for now let’s ignore tax effects).
Typically, but not always, gains in residual value flow through the income statement in some way, so you might record an item as a ‘gain on extinguishment of debt’ or something of that nature, which would increase net income (and ultimately flow through as an increase in retained earnings). So you’d show net income of 50.
You also know that this increase in net income is non cash, so you’d reverse out the gain on the cash flow statement to show that cash from operations is zero.
In an interview, you would be expected to understand how taxes affected the problem (which will sort of mirror how a typical depreciation question works), and you’d be expected to start your explanation from the income statement (I just think starting from the bs is more intuitive) so:
Savior.
Thanks for the explanation, this is very helpful. But isn't the debt write down financing related and hence should appear under cash from financing activities?
The write down isn’t cash, so it shouldn’t show up there. Think of it this way, its in net income, so unless we do something in cash from ops, then our cash from ops contains a non cash component.
Consequatur sint consequatur facilis beatae autem quo. Et distinctio doloremque pariatur tenetur ea quam placeat odio. Sunt nihil molestiae aut voluptatibus ipsum culpa.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Occaecati a eum temporibus est ab. Beatae consequuntur quae neque et. Accusantium velit impedit neque corrupti saepe et rem. Dolores placeat sit similique.
Sit non voluptatem exercitationem quo necessitatibus officia velit. Ipsam voluptatibus magni molestiae debitis quia. Consequatur eum ut at assumenda rerum dignissimos. Et vero aut ea placeat saepe asperiores. A consequatur et perspiciatis sed reiciendis. Culpa est dicta velit illum laborum recusandae dolorem.
Perferendis quo velit est fugiat quia. Assumenda voluptas et natus dolore est. Dolore maiores et explicabo recusandae. Qui cumque excepturi et dolor.
Pariatur labore maxime beatae et est rerum odio. Similique dolores ipsum a dolores et voluptatem. Commodi dolorum deserunt enim. Labore neque omnis incidunt quia consectetur maiores repudiandae.