GLOBAL CASH 25: TOO MUCH OF A GOOD THING

TREASURY & CASH MANAGEMENT | GLOBAL FINANCE CASH 25


Table Of Contents


METHODOLOGY

The Global Finance Cash 25 ranks public companies by cash, cash equivalents and short-term securities on their balance sheets. Data is gathered from more than 70,000 public companies worldwide. It is a ranking of nonfinancial corporations—we exclude financial institutions from the list.

Top 25 Global Public Companies By Cash On Balance Sheet

 

Company

Country

Cash* ($mn)

Cash* ($mn) Previous Year

Cash* Change (YoY)

Total Assets ($mn)

Capex ($mn)

1

GENERAL ELECTRIC

United States

88,555

77,268

11,287

656,285

13,458

2

MICROSOFT

United States

76,775

63,040

13,735

142,431

4,257

3

VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS

United States

54,129

3,563

50,566

274,098

17,184

4

CISCO SYSTEMS

United States

50,610

48,716

1,894

101,191

1,160

5

PETRONAS

Malaysia

42,053

50,595

-8,542

159,669

N/A

6

APPLE

United States

40,546

29,129

11,417

207,000

9,076

7

ORACLE

United States

38,819

32,216

6,603

90,344

580

8

TOYOTA MOTOR

Japan

34,739

35,795

-1,056

376,881

N/A

9

PFIZER

United States

32,408

32,399

9

172,101

1,465

10

JOHNSON & JOHNSON

United States

29,206

21,089

8,117

132,683

3,595

11

GENERAL MOTORS

United States

28,993

27,410

1,583

166,344

9,819

12

DAIMLER

Germany

22,694

19,864

2,830

232,439

N/A

13

TOTAL

France

20,942

22,471

-1,529

239,298

N/A

14

THE COCA-COLA COMPANY

United States

20,268

16,551

3,717

90,055

2,550

15

INTEL

United States

20,087

18,162

1,925

92,358

10,747

16

VODAFONE

Great Britain

19,618

13,545

6,073

215,788

N/A

17

AMGEN

United States

19,401

24,061

-4,660

66,125

693

18

RENAULT

France

17,599

16,056

1,543

103,437

N/A

19

MERCK

United States

17,486

16,141

1,345

105,645

1,548

20

RAKUTEN

Japan

17,200

8,254

8,946

30,483

N/A

21

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS

South Korea

16,840

18,728

-1,888

202,838

N/A

22

TELEFÓNICA

Spain

16,681

15,462

1,219

163,948

N/A

23

CHEVRON

United States

16,516

21,913

-5,397

253,753

37,985

24

SONY

Japan

16,186

19,178

-2,992

150,890

N/A

25

MITSUBISHI

Japan

15,893

16,900

-1,007

153,061

N/A

 

Total

 

774,244

668,505

105,739

 

114,117


*Includes cash, cash equivalents and short-term securities (those maturing between three months and a year).
Data valid as of July 16, 2014.
Data provided by: Orbis by Bureau van Dijk

 


Table Of Contents


Corporate treasurers face new challenges this year, despite all their cash.

Corporate treasurers’ balance sheets these days are bulging with cash. Much of it is being held offshore for tax reasons. Domestic authorities are increasingly up in arms over that fact. Their actions as a result of that ire could make it more difficult for companies to fund operations at a time when interest rates are expected to rise. And the opportunities that rate increases should create for higher yields may be more difficult to exploit as a result of new financial regulations. Activist investors, such as Carl Icahn, are already discontented with companies’ sitting on all this cash, and that discontent is likely to intensify.

In response, experts say treasurers must review their practices to make sure they align properly with the new environment. But that’s easier said than done.

It’s no secret that many multinationals keep much of their cash in low-tax jurisdictions. Of the 14 US companies on the Global Finance Cash 25 ranking, nine that do disclose their foreign cash have the majority of it in foreign subsidiaries (when long-term investments are included), though the cash is reported as the parents’ in their consolidated financial statements (see table, right). And no deferred tax liability need be established, so long as a company claims the cash is “permanently invested” there.

But with so much cash out of the reach of the IRS and increasing complaints over that lost potential revenue being voiced in Congress, the prospect is growing that companies will end up having to pay tax on it at some point. That potential tax liability could make it more expensive for the companies to borrow.

Borrowing costs could rise in part because rating agencies are starting to take the possibility of tax rule changes into consideration when evaluating companies’ credit-worthiness. In a report in June, Fitch Ratings, for example, found that the tax benefits of undistributed foreign earnings accounted for 27% of the earnings per share of General Electric, the Global 25 company with the most cash on its balance sheet. For other members of the Global 25 ranking, including Johnson & Johnson, Microsoft and Oracle, the EPS impact ranged from 15% to 22%.

Fitch also found that leverage as a ratio of funds from operations would be anywhere from 100% to 175% higher for those companies if their foreign cash were subject to US tax. “The exemption flatters, in our view, post-tax earnings and so too credit metrics based on consolidated financial metrics,” the analysts wrote. And they cautioned credit investors not to count on companies’ avoiding a tax liability on foreign undistributed earnings despite existing rules. As a result, the analysts wrote, “investors may underestimate credit risk” in connection with foreign cash.

Some experts say the recent spate of US corporate inversions, under which acquisitions of foreign companies allow a shift in tax domicile, is being driven by the need to access that cash rather than by the prospect of lower tax rates abroad.

In a recent paper, Edward Kleinbard, an international tax expert on the faculty of the University of Southern California law school and former chief of staff of Congress’s Joint Committee On Taxation, suggests that inversions reflect a fear on the part of corporates that Congress would otherwise put that off-shore money out of reach. “The recent surge in interest in inversion transactions,” Kleinbard writes, “is explained primarily by US-based multinational firms’ increasingly desperate efforts to find a use for their stockpiles of offshore cash.” Among the Global Cash 25, Pfizer is seeking such a shift in tax residency through an inversion, and others are expected to do so. [See our piece on Walgreen’s scrapped inversion


Concern over taxation isn’t limited to US multinationals. The Organization for Economic Development plans to tighten global rules for transfer pricing in an effort to crack down on the use of tax havens.

HIGHER BORROWING COSTS

Even if their off-shore cash isn’t taxed, corporate treasurers face the prospect of higher borrowing costs, owing to the eventual end of easy monetary policies by many central banks, including the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England. With rates likely to rise, the Association for Financial Professionals reported in the August issue of its “Risk!” newsletter that companies are swapping floating-rate debt for fixed-rate, and using swaps to hedge future debt issuance. Some of that requires syndication among a group of banks. Might it be cheaper to repatriate the foreign cash?

Not by a long shot—at least not at present. Fitch’s analysts estimate it would take 14 years for a company borrowing at current rates of 4% (or 2.5% after taking into account the tax deduction for interest) to break even if instead it used foreign cash and paid US tax on the funds at a 35% rate. That assumes no tax was paid to the foreign jurisdiction, and in most cases, the IRS would credit any foreign taxes a company paid. But if interest rates rise, the analysts note, “the break-even time would fall and may start to influence management actions.”

Of course, companies can make use of their foreign cash through short-term loans from their subsidiaries. For US companies, for example, so long as the loan terms are for fewer than 30 days in a row and 60 in the aggregate, the companies face no US tax for repatriation. 

In fact, some analysts believe that companies make extensive use of such short-term intracompany loans, though such practices may fly in the face of the claim that the funds are “permanently invested.”

Jeff Wallace, a principal in the US consultancy Greenwich Treasury Advisors, says that big US banks as well as foreign ones are helping treasurers manage that money. He explains that companies with considerable overseas cash typically consolidate it in an in-house bank situated in such tax havens as Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands or Switzerland. But he says big banks will offer to manage the in-house bank for them, saving them the expense of corporate staffing and IT infrastructure. Bank of America, for example, is very active in Ireland. On the other hand, he notes that foreign banks offer higher rates on deposits than comparably-rated US banks.

Nevertheless, the IRS rules about short-term loans lead other observers to doubt that corporate cash is just sitting in banks. “My sense is that the cash really is used all around the world by transforming it into intercompany loans and lending it to other subsidiaries, then paying it back at a specified time and then renewing the loan,” Jack Ciesielski, an analyst and principal at investment advisory firm R.G. Associates, wrote in an email. “The cash may be domiciled in any one country at a point in time, but moved anywhere else the day after balance sheet date.”

HIGHER BUT ELUSIVE YIELDS

Corporate concerns about government action don’t end with potential taxation. As a result of new rules requiring institutional money market funds that invest in nongovernment securities to let their net asset values float instead of fixing them at a $1 a share, the AFP reports that corporate treasurers may find it more difficult to issue commercial paper to fund short-term needs or invest cash in money funds at higher yields—despite a rise in interest rates.

As an alternative to the funds, some US treasurers are looking to invest in overnight or other short-term loans based on repurchase agreements of securities, or repos. But calling repo “a big risk” requiring daily analysis, Anthony Carfang, partner and director in consultancy Treasury Strategies, says “There’s no way a company can get the trade and execution that a money fund company can.”

But Laurens Tijdhof, partner at treasury consultancy Zanders says that it may be worthwhile to invest directly rather than depend on money funds—despite their advantages in diversification and execution. The money funds tend to invest in repos backed by a variety of collateral including lower-grade securities (for example, mortgage-backed securities), but corporates could insist on government-backed repos only, reducing the risk somewhat. “There has been quite a lot of discussion [among corporates] about this.”

Nonetheless, the AFP finds in its most recent corporate liquidity survey that 52% of corporate cash currently resides in banks, up from 50% last year and 25% in 2008.

But treasurers may need to reevaluate how and where they hold their deposits, and in fact must revisit their banking relationships entirely in light of Basel III global banking regulations. Carfang characterizes Basel III’s unprecedented emphasis on the liability side of bank balance sheets as a potential “sea change” in banking relationships, and the biggest in three or four decades.

More specifically, Carfang explains that for deposits that aren’t stable, owing to customers’ inconsistent cash flow, “corporates may find that banks no longer want all of their business.”

In addition, regulators may frown on banks’ paying a premium for deposits because that could indicate they are attempting to purchase them, which in turn would suggest their funding is weak.

Finally, treasurers may also soon have to post collateral if they are using derivatives to hedge interest-rate, commodity or currency risk. Although the requirements dictated by the Dodd-Frank Act were expected to exempt nonfinancial end users, the exemption has yet to be provided four years after the legislation was signed into law. That’s because bank regulators contend the law requires that collateral be posted by non-FIs, despite a letter from the law’s authors saying the opposite.

“It’s been a slow-moving train wreck,” says Luke Zubrod, director of risk and regulatory advice at consultancy Chatham Financial, of the derivatives rules.

And while new rules are expected as this article goes to press, Chatham doesn’t expect them to grant a complete exemption for nonfinancial end users. In fact, companies are now likely to have to either post collateral up front on such swaps or agree to do so once the value of the swap reaches a certain threshold. 

“It’s going to be very painful,” says Zubrod.

 


Table Of Contents


Far From Home

Percentage of cash (including long-term marketable securities) of selected Global Finance Cash 25 companies that is held abroad

Company
%

Amgen

91.6

Oracle

87.5

Merck

85.1

Coca-Cola

82.2

Microsoft

79.2

Apple

75.8

Cisco

72.9

Johnson & Johnson

63.7

Pfizer

53.1

General Electric

37.6

Source: Analyst’s Accounting Observer

Top Regional Public Companies By Cash On Balance Sheet

NORTH AMERICA | WESTERN EUROPE | CENTRAL & EASTERN EUROPE | LATIN AMERICA | ASIA | MIDDLE EAST | AFRICA

North America

The list of North American companies with the most cash on their balance sheets in 2013 was topped by GE, whose ample cash includes the activities of its substantial finance subsidiary. The huge increase in Verizon’s cash reflected not only the $49 billion in proceeds from debt it issued last September to finance the cash portion of its acquisition of Vodafone’s 45% interest in Verizon Wireless, but also a big increase in operating cash flow.

Rank
 Company
Country
Latest Reporting Year
Cash* ($mn)
Cash* ($mn) Previous Year
Change (YoY)

1.

GENERAL ELECTRIC

US

2013

88,555

77,268

11,287

2.

MICROSOFT

US

2013

76,775

63,040

13,735

3.

VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS

US

2013

54,129

3,563

50,566

4.

CISCO SYSTEMS

US

2013

50,610

48,716

1,894

5.

APPLE

US

2013

40,546

29,129

11,417

6.

ORACLE

US

2014

38,819

32,216

6,603

7.

PFIZER

US

2013

32,408

32,399

9

8.

JOHNSON & JOHNSON

US

2013

29,206

21,089

8,117

9.

GENERAL MOTORS

US

2013

28,993

27,410

1,583

10.

THE COCA-COLA COMPANY

US

2013

20,268

16,551

3,717

11.

INTEL

US

2013

20,087

18,162

1,925

12.

AMGEN

US

2013

19,401

24,061

-4,660

13.

MERCK

US

2013

17,486

16,141

1,345

14.

CHEVRON

US

2013

16,516

21,913

-5,397

15.

BOEING

US

2013

15,258

13,558

1,700

 

Western Europe

All but four of the 10 Western European companies with the most cash on their balance sheets saw their totals rise in 2013. The cash on GDF Suez’s balance sheets fell the most on a proportionate basis, by 16%, followed by Siemens (10%), Total (7%) and Airbus (3%). Deutsche Telekom added the most cash, with an increase of 107%, while Rio Tinto and Vodafone saw their cash grow by 45%. Sanofi also saw a big increase of more than a third.

Rank
 Company
Country
Latest Reporting Year
Cash* ($mn)
Cash* ($mn) Previous Year
Change (YoY)

1.

DAIMLER

DE

2013

22,694

19,864

2,830

2.

TOTAL

FR

2013

20,942

22,471

-1,529

3.

VODAFONE

GB

2012

19,618

13,545

6,073

4.

RENAULT

FR

2013

17,599

16,056

1,543

5.

TELEFÓNICA

ES

2013

16,681

15,462

1,219

6.

GDF SUEZ

FR

2013

14,859

17,739

-2,880

7.

AIRBUS GROUP

NL

2013

14,532

15,003

-470

8.

SIEMENS

DE

2013

13,231

14,760

-1,529

9.

NOKIA

FI

2013

12,374

13,074

-700

10.

ERICSSON

SE

2013

12,000

11,793

207

11.

SANOFI

FR

2013

11,470

8,493

2,977

12.

DEUTSCHE TELEKOM

DE

2013

10,993

5,312

5,681

13.

RIO TINTO

GB

2013

10,505

7,373

3,132

14.

REPSOL

ES

2013

10,382

8,336

2,046

15.

E.ON

DE

2013

10,088

8,637

1,451

 

Central & Eastern Europe

Seven of the 10 Central and Eastern European companies with the most cash on their balance sheets at the end of 2013 were Russian. Given the Western sanctions that have been imposed on the country over its role in the Ukraine crisis, that disposition may well change this year. But in which direction? Revenues are likely to fall, but the companies might respond by curtailing spending by a greater amount.

Rank
 Company
Country
Latest Reporting Year
Cash* ($mn)
Cash* ($mn) Previous Year
Change (YoY)

1.

SURGUTNEFTEGAS

Russia

2013

14,578

12,154

2,423

2.

RUSSIAN HIGHWAYS

STATE COMPANY

Russia

2012

1,813

1,439

374

3.

MOSKOVSKY

METROPOLITEN

Russia

2012

1,754

652

1,103

4.

LASY PAŃSTWOWE

Poland

2012

936

828

107

5.

URALKALI

Russia

2013

933

1,666

-732

6.

SC OLYMPSTROY

Russia

2012

888

78

810

7.

SKOLKOVO

FUND

Russia

2012

767

506

261

8.

ACRON

Russia

2013

695

1,633

-938

9.

CESKA POSTA

Czech Republic

2012

687

434

254

10.

LESY ČESKÉ REPUBLIKY

Czech Republic

2012

558

514

44

 

LATIN AMERICA

The two Mexican companies on the list were the only ones that saw cash decline year-on-year. Cash at soft drink bottler Femsa fell by 28%, while that of media company Grupo Televisa declined by almost 17%.  At the other end of the spectrum, cash more than doubled at Chile’s Latam Airlines Group and at two Cayman Island companies, Hengan International Group and SINA Corp, with the latter seeing its total rise by 162%.

Rank
 Company
Country
Latest Reporting Year
Cash* ($mn)
Cash* ($mn) Previous Year
Change (YoY)

1.

SCHLUMBERGER

Curaçao

2013

8,370

6,274

2,096

2.

LATAM AIRLINES GROUP

Chile

2013

2,695

1,287

1,408

3.

EMBRAER

Brazil

2013

2,624

2,374

250

4.

HENGAN INTERNATIONAL GROUP

Cayman Islands

2013

2,531

1,240

1,291

5.

FEMSA

Mexico

2013

2,094

2,930

-836

6.

MARVELL TECHNOLOGY GROUP

Bermuda

2013

1,969

1,919

50

7.

SINA CORP

Cayman Islands

2013

1,868

714

1,155

8.

GREENTOWN CHINA HOLDINGS

Cayman Islands

2013

1,849

1,256

593

9.

TPK HOLDING

Cayman Islands

2013

1,583

801

782

10.

GRUPO TELEVISA

Mexico

2013

1,561

1,874

-313

 

Asia-Pacific

Japanese e-commerce site Rakuten saw its cash more than double last year, landing it on the Global 25 list this year and demonstrating the growth of online shopping. Meanwhile, South Korean electronics giant Samsung found itself under pressure to return cash to shareholders, and sure enough, the amount on its balance sheet fell by 10%. Elsewhere among the top 10 Asia-Pac companies, cash fell 17% at Petronas, 16% at Sony and 13% at Mitsui.

Rank
 Company
Country
Latest Reporting Year
Cash* ($mn)
Cash* ($mn) Previous Year
Change (YoY)

1.

Petronas

Malaysia

2012

42,053

50,595

-8,542

2.

TOYOTA MOTOR

Japan

2012

34,739

35,795

-1,056

3.

RAKUTEN

Japan

2013

17,200

8,254

8,946

4.

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS

South Korea

2013

16,840

18,728

-1,888

5.

SBI HOLDINGS

Japan

2012

16,644

13,999

2,644

6.

SONY

Japan

2012

16,186

19,178

-2,992

7.

MITSUBISHI

Japan

2012

15,893

16,900

-1,007

8.

MITSUI

Japan

2012

15,192

17,484

-2,293

9.

SOFTBANK

Japan

2012

14,592

12,426

2,166

10.

CYUAN GUO NONG YE JIN KU

Taiwan

2011

12,486

8,898

3,588

 

Middle East

Cash at Middle Eastern companies is almost as volatile as the region’s politics. While half of the companies listed in the Top 25 were Israeli, their totals sometimes went in opposite directions, with cash falling at Teva Pharmaceuticals by 64% and soaring at Ersaban Holdings by 3,147%. The volatility wasn’t limited to Israel, with the UAE’s Arabtec Holding seeing cash rise by 182%, while the amount on the books at Kuwait’s Zain fell by 31%.

Rank
 Company
Country
Latest Reporting Year
Cash* ($mn)
Cash* ($mn) Previous Year
Change (YoY)

1.

ERSABAN HOLDINGS

Israel

2012

3,148

1

3,147

2.

ISRAEL AEROSPACE INDUSTRIES

Israel

2013

1,957

1,331

626

3.

ZAIN

Kuwait

2013

1,423

1,086

337

4.

TASNEE

Saudi Arabia

2013

1,382

1,722

-340

5.

CHECK POINT SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGIES

Israel

2013

1,167

1,503

-337

6.

TEVA PHARMACEUTICAL

Israel

2013

1,038

2,879

-1,841

7.

RAFAEL ADVANCED DEFENSE SYSTEMS

Israel

2012

829

542

287

8.

SAUDI INTERNATIONAL PETROCHEMICAL CO

Saudi Arabia

2013

762

814

-52

9.

ARABTEC HOLDING

UAE

2013

704

250

454

10.

NATIONAL INDUSTRIES GROUP

Kuwait

2013

615

707

-92

 

Africa

South Africa dominates the list of the 10 most cash-rich companies in its region, with all but one of the list domiciled in that country. Most saw increases in cash, with Sasol, Naspers, Murray & Roberts and Aspen Pharmacare all experiencing gains of 38% or more. The biggest decline among the South Africa companies was at Shoprite, where cash fell by 38%. The only non–South African corporation among the ten, Golden Agri-Resources of Mauritius, also saw cash fall, by 14%.

Rank
 Company
Country
Latest Reporting Year
Cash* ($mn)
Cash* ($mn) Previous Year
Change (YoY)

1.

LAFARGE SOUTH AFRICA

South Africa

2013

3,437

N/A

N/A

2.

SASOL

South Africa

2013

2,656

1,606

1,050

3.

NASPERS

South Africa

2012

1,768

1,281

487

4.

STEINHOFF INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS

South Africa

2013

911

977

-66

5.

THE BIDVEST GROUP

South Africa

2013

838

716

122

6.

ANGLOGOLD ASHANTI

South Africa

2013

649

892

-243

7.

MURRAY & ROBERTS

South Africa

2013

623

413

210

8.

SHOPRITE

South Africa

2013

611

968

-357

9.

ASPEN PHARMACARE

South Africa

2013

605

405

200

10.

GOLDEN AGRI-RESOURCES

Mauritius

2013

587

685

-98

*Includes cash, cash equivalents and short-term securities (those maturing between three months and a year).  
Data valid as of July 16, 2014.
Data provided by: Orbis by Bureau van Dijk

arrow-chevron-right-redarrow-chevron-rightbutton-arrow-left-greybutton-arrow-left-red-400button-arrow-left-red-500button-arrow-left-red-600button-arrow-left-whitebutton-arrow-right-greybutton-arrow-right-red-400button-arrow-right-red-500button-arrow-right-red-600button-arrow-right-whitecaret-downcaret-rightclosecloseemailfacebook-square-holdfacebookhamburger-newhamburgerinstagramlinkedin-square-1linkedinpauseplaysearch-outlinesearchsubscribe-digitalsubscribe-printtwitter-square-holdtwitteryoutube