Question about levered and unlevered beta
Levered beta is equal to un-levered beta multiplied by (1+(1-t)D/E), where t represents the tax rate. We are applying a tax shield on debt to reflect the reduction in the debt by t*D(which is the present discounted value of all the tax benefits from interest expense). As a result of the leverage risk that debt poses, levered beta would always be greater than un-levered beta.
What I can't seem to understand here is why we only consider the value of debt i.e. (1-t)*D when considering leverage risk as opposed to considering both the value of debt and the value of interest payments the company makes. If I understand correctly, leverage risk is the risk that a company defaults on both its debt and interest payments so why don't we account for this when going from un-levered to levered beta?
Wdym both? Interest is directly derived from the value of debt so why would you bifurcate it?
I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying I don't have to add back all the interest payments to (1-t)*D?
Why would u have to add interest payments?
I think they should be added to reflect the total amount the debt would cost the company, thereby giving you a better idea of the leverage risk.
Et quos est mollitia corrupti nihil blanditiis. Omnis perferendis id nesciunt atque eligendi aspernatur voluptatem aut. Quia officiis architecto aliquid eius accusantium maiores iste. Assumenda modi sed aspernatur voluptatem sed vitae placeat. Voluptatem qui placeat veniam sit maiores molestiae qui. Mollitia blanditiis ut sint.
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...