
- •Introduction
- •Investment Decisions
- •Capital Budgeting
- •Project and Parent Cash Flows
- •Economic Risk
- •Table 20.1
- •Financial Structure
- •Table 20.2
- •Reducing Transaction Costs
- •Global Money Management: the Tax Objective
- •Table 20.3
- •Moving Money Across Borders: Attaining Efficiencies and Reducing Taxes
- •Dividend Remittances
- •Royalty Payments and Fees
- •Transfer Prices
- •Benefits of Manipulating Transfer Prices
- •Problems with Transfer Pricing
- •Fronting Loans
- •Figure 20.1
- •Multilateral Netting
- •Figure 20.2a
- •Managing Foreign Exchange Risk
- •Translation Exposure
- •Economic Exposure
- •It may make sense to accelerate dividend payments from subsidiaries based in countries with weak currencies.
- •Reducing Economic Exposure
- •Developing Policies for Managing Foreign Exchange Exposure
- •Chapter Summary
- •Critical Discussion Questions
- •Closing Case
- •Accounts Receivable
- •Case Discussion Questions
Multilateral Netting
Multilateral netting allows a multinational firm to reduce the transaction costs that arise when many transactions occur between its subsidiaries. These transaction costs are the commissions paid to foreign exchange dealers for foreign exchange transactions and the fees charged by banks for transferring cash between locations. The volume of such transactions is likely to be particularly high in a firm that has a globally dispersed web of interdependent value creation activities. Netting reduces transaction costs by reducing the number of transactions.
Multilateral netting is an extension of bilateral netting. Under bilateral netting, if a French subsidiary owes a Mexican subsidiary $6 million and the Mexican subsidiary simultaneously owes the French subsidiary $4 million, a bilateral settlement will be made with a single payment of $2 million from the French subsidiary to the Mexican subsidiary, the remaining debt being canceled.
Under multilateral netting, this simple concept is extended to the transactions between multiple subsidiaries within an international business. Consider a firm that wants to establish multilateral netting among four European subsidiaries based in Germany, France, Spain, and Italy. These subsidiaries all trade with each other, so at the end of each month a large volume of cash transactions must be settled. Figure 20.2a shows how the payment schedule might look at the end of a given month. Figure 20.2b is a payment matrix that summarizes the obligations among the subsidiaries.
Figure 20.2a
Cash Flows before Multilateral Netting
|
|
Paying Subsidy
|
|
|
|||
Receiving Subsidy |
Germany |
France |
Spain |
Italy |
Total Reciepts |
Net Receipts * (payments) |
|
Germany |
- |
$3 |
$4 |
$5 |
$12 |
($3) |
|
France |
$4 |
- |
2 |
3 |
9 |
(2) |
|
Spain |
5 |
3 |
- |
1 |
9 |
1 |
|
ITALY |
6 |
5 |
2 |
- |
13 |
4 |
|
Total payments |
$15 |
$11 |
$8 |
$9 |
|
|
Figure 20.2b
Calculation of Net Receipts (all amounts in millions)
Figure 20.2c
Cash Flows after Multilateral Netting
Note that $43 million needs to flow among the subsidiaries. If the transaction costs (foreign exchange commissions plus transfer fees) amount to 1 percent of the total funds to be transferred, this will cost the parent firm $430,000. However, this amount can be reduced by multilateral netting. Using the payment matrix (Figure 20.2b), the firm can determine the payments that need to be made among its subsidiaries to settle these obligations. Figure 20.2c shows the results. By multilateral netting, the transactions depicted in Figure 20.2a are reduced to just three; the German subsidiary pays $3 million to the Italian subsidiary, and the French subsidiary pays $1 million to the Spanish subsidiary and $1 million to the Italian subsidiary. The total funds that flow among the subsidiaries are reduced from $43 million to just $5 million, and the transaction costs are reduced from $430,000 to $50,000, a savings of $380,000 achieved through multilateral netting.