This paper addresses the differences between the Modigliani-Miller [M&M] model (1958, 1963) and the Miles-Ezzell [M&E] model (1980, 1985). The main difference between these two models concerns the stochasticity of the free cash flows. While M&M assumes a strictly stationary process, M&E's...

This paper addresses the differences between the Modigliani-Miller [M&M] model (1958, 1963) and the Miles-Ezzell [M&E] model (1980, 1985). The main difference between these two models concerns the stochasticity of the free cash flows. While M&M assumes a strictly stationary process, M&E's...

Farber, Gillet and Szafarz (2006) propose a general formula for the WACC in which the expected return on the tax shield appears explicitly. The classical Modigliani-Miller and Harris-Pringle WACC formulas for specific debt policies are then derived from the general formula after having...

In a forthcoming paper, Fernandez (2002) claims to derive a formula for the valuation of debt tax shields for firms with cash flows that grow perpetually at a constant rate. We show that his formula is incorrect and provide an example where his valuation would admit arbitrage.

Using no-arbitrage arguments in an M & M world, we show that in the N-period case, the appropriate discount rate for the tax shield is rho, the return to unlevered equity. We make no assumption about the appropriate discount rate for the tax shield. Instead, the appropriate discount rate for the...