When doing a DCF, should you be using the company's book depreciation, or tax depreciation? I assume tax, but wanted to check.
Trending Content - Investment Banking Forum
Career Resources
WSO Free Modeling Series - Now Open Through
July 31, 2026
9 Free Financial Modeling Lessons
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
+Bonus: Get 27 financial modeling templates in swipe file
+Bonus: Get 27 financial modeling templates in swipe file
High Finance Applications
Guaranteed
Get at least one offer GUARANTEED
- 1:1 support
- 92% success rate
- 2,000+ mentor network
- Unlimited Live bootcamps
- AI for resume + LinkedIn
- Networking automation tools
- HireVue simulation tool
- Full course library
- Private Slack community
- 20hrs of mocks
- + much more...
DCF is concerned with free-cash- flow, so yes tax depreciation should be used to get to cash taxes.
I dont think this is correct...FCF=EBIT*(1-t)+D&A-ChangeNWC-CapEx
>>>Use the depreciation given on the Cash Flow statement.
Also not sure why you would use book (do u mean accumulated?) depreciation as that is a stock not a flow variable
The depreciation on the CF statement should match that on the income statement. The difference between book depreciation and tax depreciation will show up in the CF as non-cash items (or DTA or DTL, usually a DTL because the tax depreciation is usually more favorable) in the operating cash flows section. When you calculate the FCF, you are implicitly using the tax depreciation because these other items incorporate that difference, even though what you see is the "book" depreciation.
To expand on it, if there were some one-off items that were making the numbers weird and you wanted to exclude them (i.e. the other stuff in NWC like the tax-related line itmes), then you might want to use the tax depreciation, so as to properly capture cash flows but not include tax-related one-time stuff.
Still, I would argue if that such minutia is actually making a difference decision-wise, that it's not a worthwhile investment. (Most of this modeling stuff is overkill. My view is always: "keep it simple, stupid").
Laborum in voluptates autem laudantium asperiores est unde. Aut praesentium explicabo ex laudantium ut. Id sunt qui sapiente quia nihil. Nostrum molestiae ratione eos libero.
Reprehenderit modi sed impedit ipsum. Quibusdam ipsum a fuga dolore molestiae. Minus incidunt possimus non quia id.
Aspernatur reiciendis id aliquid corrupti officiis quia labore. Ut tempora rerum sit voluptatum numquam quis nesciunt. Porro vero consequatur quia excepturi voluptas ad et. Et quibusdam quo incidunt reprehenderit est nemo earum. Officiis culpa et id eligendi.
Velit minus cupiditate ea soluta cumque assumenda. Assumenda quas modi ipsa magni. Necessitatibus ratione nobis ea. Quas aut earum corrupti repellendus. Aliquid numquam ipsum iste rerum est optio. Sed voluptatem quia tempore in.
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...