The purpose of this study is to extend the analysis of estimation of the term structure. The ability of the exponential/polynomial present-value function of equation (5) to approximate the theoretical present-value function is analyzed empirically. This study confirms previous results that indicate that the function does not provide an acceptable fit using least squares regression. In most samples, the near end of the estimated term structure appears substantially in error. Lengthening the polynomial tends to improve the fit only at the far end. Since the data appear to be subject to maturity-related heteroschedasticity, we have generalized the disturbance variance specification to allow for this possibility.

Our correction permits determination of sample-specific degrees of heteroschedasticity. The reason is that the intensity of the heteroschedasticity appears to change from period to period. Although previous studies have attempted heteroschedasticity corrections (see [4]), the same specification was imposed on each sample in such studies. Maximum likelihood estimation was proposed and implemented in this paper. The results indicate that the difficulties of providing a good fit using the exponential/polynomial function are substantially eliminated.

Recent literature regarding term structure estimation emphasizes the selection of more sophisticated estimating functions to provide a reasonable fit throughout the entire maturity range. This study emphasizes more careful modeling of the pricing disturbances. The prior approach involves somewhat complicated estimating functions and a potential loss of efficiency due to the lack of influence that each portion of the term structure is able to exert on other portions (with spline functions, for example.) Our maximum likelihood approach is somewhat difficult to implement and computationally burdensome. Nevertheless, it appears to provide a useful term structure estimation procedure.

This paper provided a pure financial explanation for the existence of trade credit and for the values of the credit terms offered to customers. Two motives for extending trade credit were identified. The pure operating flexibility motive arises because the opportunity to change credit policy provides the seller an efficient way to respond to fluctuations in demand. This motive was eliminated from consideration in this paper by assuming constant demand. The seller must hold a liquid reserve when the financial markets are imperfect and the desire to earn an excess rate of return on this reserve explains the pure financial intermediary motive for trade credit.

The pure financial incentive to lend this liquid reserve to customers was examined by viewing a market borrowing rate of interest that exceeds the market lending rate of interest as a hindrance to trade or, equivalently, as a financial market tariff. This tariff imposes a wedge between the market prices paid and received for the product plus a loan and thereby inflicts a loss of surplus on the seller and buyers. Trade credit lending enables the seller and/or the buyers to recapture at least part of this loss when the source of the tariff does not apply to direct loans to customers. Financial market tariffs caused by transactions costs fulfill this requirement because the trade credit lender's familiarity with its customers and product provide it with information and collection cost advantages over financial intermediaries. Tariffs caused by financial intermediary rents fulfill this requirement as well because the parties to a trade credit loan do not employ the services of a financial intermediary.

Increasing opportunity costs and financial market imperfections in addition to the ones described above establish the limits of credit policy. The optimal amount of accounts receivable is derived from the condition that the marginal revenue of trade credit lending is equal to the marginal cost. This condition combined with factoring costs produces a unique, finite optimal credit period. Accrual accounting for income tax purposes imposes an additional restriction because the firm is taxed on the recovery of its opportunity costs. These limitations on credit policy were examined separately in this paper for clarity but they are in effect simultaneously in practice.

In recent articles, Myers, Dill, and Bautista [15] (MDB) and Franks and Hodges [7] (FH) provide valuable contributions to the leasing literature. MDB derive a simple formula for lease valuation in a Modigliani-Miller world with corporate taxes. The paper by FH presents a simpler derivation of the same formula. FH also extend MDB's analysis to consider the empirically significant case of a lessee company currently in a non-tax-paying position, but which expects to resume paying taxes at some (specified) future date. The work of FH is important here in laying bare the economics of leasing. Temporary non-tax-paying lessees joining tax-paying lessors in non-zero-sum contracts; however, their paper leaves the problem as a programming application. This paper explores the difference equations underlying the MDB-FH approach for finding the adjusted present value of the lease contract. It is found that the order of the system of difference equations depends on the treatment of taxation complexities. Also described is a simple procedure for solving these higher-order difference equations to find the appropriate adjusted discount rates to use in MDB's lease valuation formula, extending its application to these more complex tax situations. The paper is set out in six sections.

The Capital Asset Pricing Model has been challenged recently by several studies that point to certain anomalies in the capital market related to firm size. Banz [3] reported a nonlinear relation between the aggregate market value of a firm's common stock and the stock's mean return. He found that firms with small market values had large and positive residual returns over a period of at least 40 years. Reinganum [23] found that high earning-price (E/P) stocks had higher returns than low E/P-ratio stocks and that, after controlling for size, the E/P effect largely disappeared. Although they rejected the hypothesis that the anomalies are due to inefficiency in the capital market, the two authors are not able to identify the economic factors that might explain the effect of firm size on the functioning of the capital market.

Yitzhaki [19] recently developed two portfolio selection criteria (EG and EΓ) based on the mean and Gini's mean difference. Similar to mean-variance(EV), the EG criterion uses two summary statistics to describe the probability distribution of a risky prospect, the mean and one-half Gini's mean difference. Gini's mean difference is defined as the average of the absolute differences between all possible pairs of observations of a random variable. Yitzhaki's development concentrated on the theoretical aspects of EG and EΓ and the theoretical relationships among EG, EΓ, EV, and stochastic dominance (SD) selection criteria. He did not address either the empirical properties of EG and EΓ or the relationship between the empirical efficient sets of EG and EΓ and other portfolio selection criteria. Yitzhaki suggested that the next step in the development and application of his proposed selection criteria should be an empirical investigation of how the EG and EΓ criteria compare with other selection criteria.

This paper models the unobservable rate of return on money balances (r) as depending directly on the transactions velocity of money (ν). Approximating this relationship linearly, the efficient markets hyphothesis (EMH) is shown to imply that first differences of the log of ν should either be random or should show negative first-order serial correlation at most. The empirical evidence presented below is consistent with the EMH.

Foreign exchange risk and hence the demand for foreign assets depend on the objective and habitat of investors. The investment objective, in turn, is contingent upon how the consumption basket or its price is defined. If the investor is “domestic” in the sense that he or she spends all income on domestic goods, then the domestic price index should be used in defining the investment objective in real terms, regardless of whether returns are generated at home or abroad. However, for an investor who consumes a mix of foreign and home products, or for multinational firms with extensive operations outside their home countries, some sort of world price reflective of the relative importance of home and foreign goods in their consumption basket is the proper deflator.

The interest rate term structure refers to the array of discount rates on a collection of pure discount bonds that differ one from another only by the timing of their redemption. The most common approximation to the term structure is, of course, the yield to maturity curve, which is usually depicted as a smooth curve that relates rates of return on such bonds held to maturity to their term to maturity. Other expressions of the term structure also could be constructed, but underlying them all is the discount or present value function that we may denote δ(t). δ is the discount applied to a unitary payment to be made t periods hence. Expressing the term structure in this way does not necessarily imply that the term structure is itself driven by t, payment timings. Most economists would generally agree, however, that it is possible to draw smooth discount curves over the time axis. It is necessary to assume only that yield curves are continuous and smooth. By resort to arbitrage arguments implicit in equilibrium theories of the term structure, many economists are willing to live with these assumptions.