In theory, a company's rationale for implementing a capital reduction program is to optimize its capital structure for a better ratio of debt to cash reserves. Many domestic companies have recently carried out such reduction programs, but their success has come to figure large in the debate about corporate financial health and the state of the investment environment in Taiwan.
For companies that have suffered a complete erosion of their net worth -- such as last year's case involving workstation and server-equipment maker Cradle Technology Corp -- capital reduction constitutes one tool in a reorganization effort designed to enable a company to recover a part of its accumulated losses. This step is normally taken before the firm begins work on reorganizing its capital structure by raising fresh funds.
There are also companies that use capital reduction programs to generate the most efficient returns from capital resources, thus enhancing shareholder value.
Firms falling under this category include Sunplus Technology Co, which designs integrated circuits for electronic consumer applications, and Formosa International Hotels Corp, which runs Grand Formosa Regent Taipei. These companies announced earlier this month that they would reward shareholders with higher earnings per share through capital reduction schemes.
Other companies that have accumulated ballooning cash holdings -- like telecom operators Chunghwa Telecom Co and Taiwan Mobile Co -- are also considering capital reductions and other capital management initiatives to maintain high dividends.
Regardless of the motives that are behind capital reduction, most companies claim their financial position will remain strong afterwards, with leverage at a comfortable level. They also reassure shareholders they will receive an improved return on equity (ROE) because the number of issued shares decreases.
But from a long-term perspective, shareholders will not benefit if companies reduce capital out of a conservative outlook on future business performance. This concern is exacerbated when the rate of development in a prospective industry matures, if no new products are in the pipeline or if the nation's economic structure changes.
Capital reduction is not necessary for efficient capital utilization; companies can achieve greater improvements in their capital structure and cash flow by streamlining their business processes instead.
Returning capital to shareholders will only create a short-term ROE effect. After all, such reductions do not change the market's competitive environment.
The government should be wary of companies that undertake capital reduction programs to circumvent regulations governing the remittance of capital abroad, particularly to China. While the government maintains a firm 40 percent net value cap on Taiwanese companies' China-bound investments, it should not neglect the fact that many of these firms now require more capital for business expansion there than in the past, and it should be wary about attempts to do so through capital reduction.
The decision last month by Singapore-registered food producer Want Want Group to drastically cut its Taiwan subsidiary's capital from NT$450 million (US$13.5 million) to NT$10 million was just the latest in a string of cases that have raised concerns about a worsening investment environment for companies planning to invest across the Taiwan Strait.
As of the end of July, more than 140 Taiwan-listed companies had announced capital reduction plans. Coupled with the fact that some companies are looking to list their shares in Hong Kong instead of Taiwan, the government should give the issue urgent consideration.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry