본 연구의 대상기간은 2003년부터 2010년까지 8년간이며, 비상장 중소기업 3,794개, 코스닥 중소기업 414개, 유가증권시장 대기업 306개 등 총 4,514개 기업을 표본으로 선정하여 다중회귀분석을 하였다. 본 연구는 중소기업이 겪고 있는 만성적인 자금애로 현실에서 부채의 조달과 수익성(EBIT) 간의 관계규명을 새롭게 시도하였으며, 이를 기업환경이 다른 세 그룹 간 기업을 비교함으로써 자본구조와 관련된 연구영역의 지평을 넓혔다. 본 연구의 분석결과에서 그 특징은 다음과 같다.
첫째, 부채비율과 수익성(EBIT)의 관계에서 모든 기업 그룹에서 부채가 수익성에 부(-)의 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 이는 자본조달순위 이론을 지지하는 실증분석과 같은 결과이나 본 연구에서는 이러한 결과 보다는 우리나라의 금융여건에서 대출 금리의 상대적 차이와 차입금의존도 비중 문제가 기업의 수익성에 영향을미치는 것으로 판단되었다.
둘째, 부채의 결정요인을 분석한 모형에서 중소기업과 대기업이 기업규모, 비부채감세효과, 영업이익률, 업력 등에서 차이가 있는 것으로 분석되었다.
셋째, 이상의 분석결과에서 특히 자산의 담보가치는 중소기업과 대기업 모두에서 강한 정(+)의 영향을 미침으로써 금융기관의 담보위주 대출관행을 확인할 수 있었으며, 기업규모는 중소기업에서만 수익성(EBIT)에 부정적인 영향을 미치고 있는 것으로 나타났다. 변동성은 비상장 중소기업과 유가증권시장 대기업에서 영업활동에 커다란 영향을 받게 되어 수익성(EBIT)이 커진 반면, 코스닥 중소기업에서는 위험과 수익의 상반관계를 따르지 않는 것으로 분석되었다
This study is to analyze the effect of debts on the corporate profitability (EBIT; earnings before interest and taxes) based on the capital structure theory. This study also tries to find out the differences between SMEs (small and medium enterprises) and large companies and their causes based on the SMEs’ theory and effect of determinants of debt on the EBIT as well.
The subjects of this study period of eight years (2003~2010) and 3,794 from unlisted SMEs, 414 SMEs listed in KOSDAQ, including 306 large companies listed in KOSPI, with a total of 4,514 observations were selected as OLS (ordinary least squares) analysis.
The analysis showed that there are no significant differences between large companies and SMEs in terms of effect of debts on their profitability (EBIT). This study tried to find out the relation between financing and profitability (EBIT) in the environment where the SMEs suffer the chronic lack of funds for management. This study has a meaning in that by comparing the management environments among unlisted SMEs, SMEs listed in KOSDAQ and large companies listed in KOSPI, the scope of study has been broadened. The characteristics of the study are as follows.
First, in the relation between debt ratio and profitability (EBIT), the debts are found to negatively affect the profitability (EBIT) the group of all. but to support the pecking order theory and empirical analysis in this study, these results rather than results or financial condition from dependence on borrowing and capital cost rates relative difference in the proportion problems that affect the profitability of companies. This showed us that the Korea’s domestic financial environment affects the companies more than the pecking order theory. but It means that at least in Korea the comparative difference in capital cost and the weight of debts in funds affect profitability (EBIT) of companies.
Second, in the model analyzing the determinants of debt, there are difference between SMEs and large companies in terms of SIZE (company scale), NDTS (non-debt tax shields), PROF (rate of operating profits), and AGE (company age).
Third, it was found out that TGB (the value of assets for security) for loan positively affect the profitability (EBIT) of all companies, showing that the loans performed in Korea are usually based on the offer of assets as security or collateral. It also found that SIZE negatively affect the profitability (EBIT) for SME, It also found that VOL (volatility) does positively affect the risk-return trade off for unlisted SMEs and listed large companies but the VOL does not follow the risk-return trade off in SMEs listed in KOSDAQ. The long age of the companies are found to negatively affect the profitability for all groups.
Finally, to enhance the management profitability (EBIT), the companies shall control their dependence on debts to a proper level and thus alleviate the capital funding cost to a certain level and the government shall help SMEs to get proper funding through good support plan.
This finding may have some limitation for generalization of results because of manufacturing industry.
Nevertheless, This study is the first empirical study for not only the role of unlisted SMEs’ debt but also the difference between large companies and SMEs in terms of effect of debt ratio on their profitability (EBIT) in Korea.