Abstract
There has been substantial debate and disagreement over the appropriate debt maturity used in determining the cost of debt for use in access pricing decisions in Australia. Some regulators have used a debt maturity corresponding to the length of the regulatory reset period (typically five years). Others have used a longer maturity based on the argument that the assets being financed are long‐lived. In this article it is demonstrated that under the current Australian approach, to meet the objectives of access pricing, the assumed debt maturity should be set equal to the term of the regulatory reset period. Whether practical debt management difficulties for access providers suggest that an alternative approach, placing more emphasis on their actual debt costs (as occurs in some other jurisdictions) should be considered, is also discussed.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: 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.