【正文】 t F = t h e effect i v e t ax rat e faced by th e fo rei g n co m p an y L = i n i t i al lu m p s u m pa y m en t r = th e rat e o f run n i n g roy al t y pe r un i t s al es α = eq u i t y s h are (p erce n t ag e) Afte r T ax Pro fi t E x p res s i o n s un d er D i ffere n t A s s u m p t i o n s Aft er Ta x P ro fit * Ca se Foreig ner Lo ca l Inv esto r Fo rei g n j o i n t ve n t u re。 [(PQ F vQ L PQ r) α + (L + PQ r)] (PQ F vQ L PQ r) ro y al t i es (1 t F ) (1 α ) (1 t E ) Arm ’ s le n g t h (L + PQ r) ( 1 t F ) (PQ F vQ L PQ r) l i cen s i n g (no eq u i t y ) (1 t E ) Onl y eq u i t y s h ari n g (PQ F vQ) ( α ) ( 1 t F ) (PQ F vQ) (1 α ) (1 t E ) Fo rei g n j o i n t ve n t u re。 [(PQ F vQ) (1 t E ) (L +PQr)] α [(PQ F vQ) (1 t E ) ro y al t i es no t de d u ct i b l e + (L + PQ r) (1 t F) (L +PQr)] (1 α ) P = 合資企業(yè)的產(chǎn)品單價 Q = 銷售數(shù)量 v = 生產(chǎn)的單位變量 F = 總固定成本 t E = 本地企業(yè)的有效稅率 t F = 外資企業(yè)面臨的有效稅率 L = 初始一次性付款 r = 單位銷售額的運(yùn)營許可費(fèi)率 α = 權(quán)益股本 ( 百分比 ) 不同的設(shè)想下的稅后利潤 稅后利潤 * 案例 外商 本地投資者 外國合資企業(yè) [(PQ F vQ L PQ r) α + (L + PQ r)] (PQ F vQ L PQ r) 許可費(fèi) (1 t F ) (1 α ) ( 1 t E ) 保持 距離 型 (L + PQ r) ( 1 t F ) (PQ F vQ L PQ r) 許可 ( 非權(quán)益 ) (1 t E ) 僅權(quán)益共享 (PQ F vQ ) ( α ) ( 1 t F ) (PQ F vQ ) ( 1 α ) (1 t E ) 外國合資企業(yè) 。 [(PQ F vQ ) (1 t E ) (L +PQ r)] α [(PQ F vQ ) (1 t E ) 不可扣除的許可費(fèi) + (L + PQ r) (1 t F) (L +PQ r)] (1 α ) Exercise A Thai pany had decided to acquire technology to manufacture a highly sophisticated telemunication product. According to the quotation offered by the German pany, the Thai pany would pay million marks right after the signing of the contract. Then the Thai pany would pay the German pany the remainder in royalty fees from the end of the third year to the end of eighth year. The selling price of this product was 100 marks per piece. The planned annual output for this product was 845,000 pieces. The technology recipient39。s gross profits should be 30% and the supplier39。s LSLP was set at %. (1 mark = US$ and i = 10%). The French quotation was based on a frontend lump sum payment schedule. The total quoted price was 75 million francs. The Thai pany would pay a down payment of 20% of the total, then pay 50% by the end of the first year. The remaining 30% would be paid by the end of the second year when the machinery began to produce quality products. (1 franc = US$, i = 10%). Question: Given that their technology was equally good for the Thai pany, which is more favorable to the Thai pany? 練習(xí) 一家泰國公司決定購買一項技術(shù)來生產(chǎn)一種高度復(fù)雜的通訊設(shè)備 ,根據(jù)德國公司的報價 ,公司在合同簽署后支付 440萬馬克 .然后剩下的泰國公司以支付技術(shù)所有權(quán)使用費(fèi)的形式從第三年年末直到第八年年末支付給德國公司 ,每件產(chǎn)品的銷售價格是 100馬克 ,計劃每年的產(chǎn)量是 84萬 5千件 , 技術(shù)接收方總的利潤是 30%,供給方的 LSLP設(shè)定為 %.(1馬克 = 利率 =10%). 一家法國公司的報價以一攬子前端資金支付計劃表為基礎(chǔ) ,總的報價為 750萬法郎 ,泰國公司將立即支付總金額的 20%,然后在第一年末支付 50%,剩下的 30% 在第二年末機(jī)器開始生產(chǎn)該品質(zhì)產(chǎn)品的時候支付 ,(1法郎 = ,率 =10%). 問題 : 假如這兩家公司的技術(shù)對泰國公司都是一樣好 ,那么泰國公司選擇那家公司的技術(shù)更有利 ? mf r a n c smF r e n c hmm a r k smG e r m a n$%)101(1%3075%)101(1%5075%2075$%)101(1%)101%(10%)101()%30%(22266????????????????????If other conditions are similar, the German quotation seems to be much more favorable, because the Thai licensee’s risk and financial burden are significantly lower, even though the two quotations do not lead to major present value differences. 百萬百萬法郎法國公司百萬百萬馬克德國公司$%)101(1%3075%)101(1%5075%2075$%)101(1%)101%(10%)101()8 4 0 0%30%(22266????????????????????如果其他條件相同德國公司的報價似乎更為可取 ,因為在這種情況下技術(shù)獲得方泰國 公司的風(fēng)險和財務(wù)負(fù)擔(dān)明顯較低 ,即使兩種報價最后在凈現(xiàn)值上沒有主要差別