Relevance or irrelevance of retention for dividend policy irrelevance
AbstractIn an interesting recent paper, DeAngelo and DeAngelo (2006) highlight that Miller and Modigliani's (1961) proof of dividend irrelevance is based on the assumption that the amount of dividends distributed to shareholders is equal or greater than the free cash flow generated by the fixed investment policy. They claim that, if retention is allowed, dividend policy is not irrelevant. This paper clarifies and reinterprets DeAngelo and DeAngelo's result: Retention itself has not to do with dividend irrelevance, which holds even in case of retention. The key assumption has to do with the NPV of the extra funds (either retained or raised): If NPV is zero, dividend irrelevance applies. Yet, the dichotomy retention/no-retention is useful, because if agency problems are present, managers tend to retain funds and invest them in negative-NPV projects, and therefore the zero-NPV assumption must be removed, so that dividend irrelevance does not apply any more.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 5591.
Date of creation: 04 Nov 2007
Date of revision:
Dividend policy; irrelevance; retention; zero-NPV; epistemology; agency theory;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- G35 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Payout Policy
- G0 - Financial Economics - - General
- G30 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - General
- G31 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Capital Budgeting; Fixed Investment and Inventory Studies
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2007-11-10 (All new papers)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- DeAngelo, Harry & DeAngelo, Linda, 2006. "The irrelevance of the MM dividend irrelevance theorem," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 293-315, February.
- Merton H. Miller & Franco Modigliani, 1961. "Dividend Policy, Growth, and the Valuation of Shares," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34, pages 411.
- Magni, Carlo Alberto, 2010.
"Residual income and value creation: An investigation into the lost-capital paradigm,"
European Journal of Operational Research,
Elsevier, vol. 201(2), pages 505-519, March.
- Magni, Carlo Alberto, 2007. "Residual income and value creation: An investigation into the lost-capital paradigm," MPRA Paper 6783, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Magni, Carlo Alberto, 2007. "Residual income and value creation: An investigation into the lost-capital paradigm," MPRA Paper 7335, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Magni, Carlo Alberto & Vélez-Pareja, Ignacio, 2009.
"Potential dividends versus actual cash flows in firm valuation,"
14509, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Carlo Alberto Magni & Ignacio Velez-Pareja, 2009. "Potential dividends versus actual cash flows in firm valuation," PROYECCIONES FINANCIERAS Y VALORACION 005516, MASTER CONSULTORES.
- Vélez-Pareja, Ignacio & Magni, Carlo Alberto, 2008. "Potential dividends and actual cash flows. Theoretical and empirical reasons for using ‘actual’ and dismissing ‘potential’, Or: How not to pull potential rabbits out of actual hats," MPRA Paper 7266, University Library of Munich, Germany.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.