Merger Model - Advanced Flashcards
What is the difference between Purchase Accounting and Pooling Accounting in an M&A deal?
In purchase accounting the seller’s shareholders’ equity number is wiped out and the premium paid over that value is recorded as Goodwill on the combined balance sheet post-acquisition. In pooling accounting, you simply combine the 2 shareholders’ equity numbers rather than worrying about Goodwill and the related items that get created.
There are specific requirements for using pooling accounting, so in 99% of M&A deals you will use purchase accounting.
Walk me through a concrete example of how to calculate revenue synergies.
Let’s say that Microsoft is going to acquire Yahoo. Yahoo makes money from search advertising online, and they make a certain amount of revenue per search (RPS). Let’s say this RPS is $0.10 right now. If Microsoft acquired it, we might assume that they could boost this RPS by $0.01 or $0.02 because of their superior monetization. So to calculate the additional revenue from this synergy, we would multiply this $0.01 or $0.02 by Yahoo’s total # of searches, get the total additional revenue, and then select a margin on it to determine how much flows through to the combined company’s Operating Income.
Walk me through an example of how to calculate expense synergies.
Let’s say that Microsoft still wants to acquire Yahoo! Microsoft has 5,000 SG&A related employees, whereas Yahoo has around 1,000. Microsoft calculates that post-transaction, it will only need about 200 of Yahoo’s SG&A employees, and its existing employees can take over the rest of the work. To calculate the Operating Expenses the combined company would save, we would multiply these 800 employees Microsoft is going to fire post-transaction by their average salary.
How do you take into account NOLs in an M&A deal?
You apply Section 382 to determine how much of the seller’s NOLs are usable each year.
Allowable NOLs = Equity Purchase Price x Highest of Past 3 Months’ Adjusted Long Term Rates
So if our equity purchase price were $1bn and the highest adjusted long-term rate were 5%, then we could use $1bn x 5% = $50mm of NOLs each year.
If the seller had $250mm in NOLs, then the combined company could use $50 of them each each year for 5 years to offset its taxable income.
Why do deferred tax liabilities (DTLs) and deferred tax assets (DTAs) get created in M&A deals.
These get created when you write up assets - both tangible and intangible - and when you write down assets in a transaction. An asset write-up creates a deferred tax liability, and an asset write-down creates a deferred tax asset.
You write down and write up assets because their book value - what’s on the balance sheet - often differs substantially from their “fair market value.”
An asset write-up creates a deferred tax liability because you’ll have a higher depreciation expense on the new asset, which means you save on taxes in the short-term - but eventually you’ll have to pay them back, hence the liability. The opposite applies for an asset write-down and a deferred tax asset.
How do DTLs and DTAs affect the Balance Sheet Adjustment in an M&A deal?
You take them into account with everything else when calculating the amount of Goodwill & Other Intangibles to create on your pro-forma balance sheet. The formulas are as follows:
Deferred Tax Asset = Asset Write-Down x Tax Rate
Deferred Tax Liability = Asset Write Up x Tax Rate
So let’s say you were buying a company for $1bn with half-cash and half-debt, and you had a $100mm asset write-up and a tax rate of 40%. In addition, the seller has total assets of $200mm, total liabilities of $150mm, and shareholders’ equity of $50mm.
Here’s what would happen to the combined company’s balance sheet (ignoring transaction / financing fees):
- First, you simply add the seller’s Asset and Liabilities (but NOT Shareholders’ Equity - it is wiped out) to the buyer’s to get your “initial” balance sheet. Assets are up by $200mm and Liabilities are down by $150mm.
- Then, Cash on the Assets side goes down by $500mm.
- Debt on the Liabilities and Equity side goes up by $500mm.
- You get a new Deferred Tax Liability of $40mm ($100mm x 40%) on the Liabilities and Equity side.
- Assets are down by $300mm total and Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity are up by $690mm ($500 + $40 + $150).
- So you need Goodwill and Intangibles of $990mm on the Assets side to make both sides balance.
Could you use DTLs or DTAs in an asset purchase?
No, because in an asset purchase the book basis of assets always matches the tax basis. They get created in a stock purchase because the book values of assets are written up or written down, but the tax values are not.
How do you account for DTLs in forward projections in a merger model?
You create a book v. cash tax schedule and figure out what the company owes in taxes based on the Pretax Income on its books, and then you determine what it actually pays in cash taxes based on its NOLs and newly created amortization and depreciation expenses (from any asset write-ups).
Anytime the “cash” tax expense exceeds the “book” tax expense you record this as a decrease to the Deferred Tax Liability on the Balance Sheet; if the “book” expense is higher, then you record that as an increase to the DTL.
Explain the complete formula for how to calculate Goodwill in an M&A deal.
Goodwill = Equity Purchase Price - Seller Book Value + Seller’s Existing Goodwill - Asset Write-Ups - Seller’s Existing Deferred Tax Liability + Write-Down of Seller’s Existing Deferred Tax Asset + Newly Created Deferred Tax Liability
- Seller Book Value is just the Shareholder’s Equity Number
- You add the Seller’s Existing Goodwill because it gets written down to $0 in an M&A deal
- You subtract the Asset Write Ups because these are additions to the Assets side of the Balance Sheet - Goodwill is also an asset, so effectively you need less Goodwill to plug the hole
- Normally you assume 100% of the Seller’s existing DTL is written down
- The Seller’s existing DTA may or may not be written down completely
Explain why we would write down the seller’s existing Deferred Tax Asset in an M&A deal.
You write it down to reflect the fact that Deferred Tax Assets include NOLs, and that you might use these NOLs post-transaction to offset the combined entity’s taxable income.
In an asset or 338(h)(10) purchase you assume that the entire NOL balance goes to $0 in the transaction, and then you write down the existing Deferred Tax Asset by this NOL write-down.
In a stock purchase the formula is:
DTA Write-Down = Buyer Tax Rate x MAX(0, NOL Balance - Allowed Annual NOL Usage, x Expiration Period in Years)
This formula is saying, “If we’re going to use up all these NOLs post transaction, let’s not write anything down. Otherwise, let’s write down the portion that we cannot actually use post-transaction, i.e. whatever our existing NOL balance is minus the amount we can use per year times the number of years.”
What’s a Section 338(h)(10) election and why might a company want to use it in an M&A deal.
A Section 338(h)(10) election blends the benefits of a stock purchase and an asset purchase:
- Legally it is a stock purchase, but accounting-wise it’s treated like an asset purchase.
- The seller is still subject to double-taxation - on its assets that have appreciated and on the proceeds from the sale.
- But the buyer receives a step-up tax basis on the new assets it acquires, and it can depreciate / amortize them so it saves on taxes.
Even though the seller still gets taxed twice, buyers will often pay more in a 338(h)(10) deal because of the tax savings potential. It’s particularly helpful for:
- Sellers with high NOL balances (more tax-savings for the buyer because this NOL balance will be written down completely - and so more of the excess purchase price can be allocated to asset write-ups).
- If the company has been an S-corporation for over 10 years - in this case it doesn’t have to pay a tax on the appreciation of its assets.
The requirements to use 338(h)(10) are complex and bankers don’t deal with this - that is the role of lawyers and tax accountants.
What is an exchange ratio and when would companies use it in an M&A deal?
An exchange ratio is an alternate way of structuring a 100% stock M&A deal, or any M&A deal with a portion of stock involved.
Let’s say you were going to buy a company for $100mm in an all-stock deal. Normally you would determine how much stock to issue by dividing the $100mm by the buyer’s stock price, and using that to get the new share count.
With an exchange ratio, by contrast, you would tie the number of new shares to the buyer’s own shares - so the seller might receive 1.5 shares of the buyer’s shares for each of its shares, rather than shares worth a specific dollar amount.
Buyers might prefer to do this if they believe their stock price is going to decline post-transaction - sellers, on the other hand, would prefer a fixed dollar amount in stock unless they believe the buyer’s share price will rise after the transaction.
Walk me through the most important terms of a Purchase Agreement in an M&A deal.
- Purchase Price: Stated as per-share amount for public companies
- Form of consideration: Cash, stock, debt
- Transaction Structure: Stock, Asset, or 338(h)(10)
- Treatment of Options: Assumed by the buyer? Cashed out? Ignored?
- Employee Retention: Do employees have to sign non-solicit or non-compete agreements? What about management?
- Reps & Warranties: What must the buyer and seller claim is true about their respective businesses?
- No-Shop/Go-Shop: Can the seller “shop” this offer around and try to get a better deal, or must it stay exclusive to this buyer?
What’s an Earnout and why would a buyer offer it to a seller in an M&A deal?
An Earnout is a form of “deferred payment” in an M&A deal - it’s most common with private companies and start-ups, and is highly unusual with public sellers.
It is usually contingent on financial performance or other goals - for example, the buyer might say, “We’ll give you an additional $10mm in 3 years if you can hit $100mm in revenue by then.”
Buyers use it to incentivize sellers to continue to perform well and to discourage management teams from taking the money and running off to an island in the South Pacific once the deal is done.
How would an accretion / dilution model be different for a private seller?
The mechanics are the same, but the transaction structure is more likely to be an asset purchase or 338(h)(10) election; private sellers also don’t have Earnings Per Share so you would only have to project down to Net Income on the seller’s Income Statement.
Note that accretion / dilution makes no sense if you have a private buyer because private companies don’t have Earnings Per Share.
