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
| +168 | How to stop feeling like shit for not making it in IB? | 63 | 3h | |
| +121 | If Tik Tok is forced to sell, what banks do you think would be involved in the deal? | 59 | 9h | |
| +85 | Updated LA Banking Scene (2024) | 61 | 3h | |
| +40 | Ranking banks that went under | 24 | 5h | |
| +39 | Burnt Out M&A ASO | 22 | 1s | |
| +36 | Relevance of A-Levels for U.K. London recruiting | 25 | 3h | |
| +33 | A strategy for SA applicants late to the game like myself | 17 | 4h | |
| +27 | Series 79 Help / Tips to Pass The First Attempt | 11 | 2d | |
| +27 | Intern Ettiquette | 4 | 1d | |
| +23 | What are hours like at BBs in London? | 47 | 1d |
Career Resources
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").
Et magnam minus cumque possimus maxime sint sed. Ullam consequatur illum laudantium enim ut qui nulla. Fugit quia ratione tenetur sint minima illo minima. Dolore animi iste nam aut. Impedit aut nulla amet libero quis.
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...