Abstract
The primary aim of this study is to identify the firm-specific determinants of the capital structure of non-financial firms in Turkey and to test whether the determinants offered by financial theory are able to provide convincing explanations for non-financial firms in Turkey. Because the relationship between liquidity and capital structure is not well examined for Turkish market in the context of capital structure theories, we include liquidity as independent variable in our models in addition to profitability, growth, non-debt tax shields, size, tangibility, and risk. We use panel regression as econometric model and cover the period from 2009 to 2016. Our results show that profitability, non-debt tax shield, size, tangibility, and liquidity are significant determinants of the capital structure, size being the most robust one. On the other hand, growth and volatility are not significantly related with the leverage. Moreover, we conclude that capital structure decisions of non-financial firms in Turkey are mostly consistent with the hypothesis of pecking order theory rather than trade-off theory.
Highlights
In the past six decades, the linkage between the capital structure and the firm value has been largely investigated
The primary aim of this study is to identify the firm-specific determinants of the capital structure of non-financial firms in Turkey and to test whether the determinants offered by financial theory are able to provide convincing explanations for non-financial firms in Turkey
We conclude that capital structure decisions of non-financial firms in Turkey are mostly consistent with the hypothesis of pecking order theory rather than trade-off theory
Summary
In the past six decades, the linkage between the capital structure and the firm value has been largely investigated. Several financial theories on capital structure have been developed; each of them having their own perspectives for determining the optimal capital structure. The pecking order theory is based on asymmetry in information; free cash flow theory put an emphasis on agency cost; while trade-off theory underlines the tax benefit of leverage. Since each theory differs in its relative emphasis, the optimal capital structure provided by each of them is different. They do not arrive at a consensus or, as Myers (2001) puts, there is no universal theory for optimal capital structure. Each of them provides great benefits in identifying the possible determinants of the capital structure
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
