İşletmelerde Ticari Alacak ve Borç Politikasının Belirleyicileri: BIST İmalat Sanayii üzerinde Ekonometrik Bir Uygulama

Öz

Ticari alacak ve borç yönetimi işletmeler için oldukça önemli bir konudur. Bu çalışmanın amacı işletmelerin alacak ve borç yönetimi için güncel ekonometrik modeller oluşturmaktır. Bu çerçevede, Borsa İstanbul’da imalat sektöründe faaliyet gösteren 110 firmanın 2008 – 2014 yıllarını kapsayan çeyrek dönem verisi kullanılarak ticari alacak ve borç politikasına yön verecek ekonometrik bir model oluşturulmuştur. Ekonometrik analiz yöntemi olarak panel regresyon analizi tercih edilmiştir. Kurulan birinci model, ticari alacaklara yatırım yapan işletme vade tanıyan işletme ’nin belirleyicilerini, ikinci model ticari borç finansmanı sağlayan işletme vade tanınan işletme ’nin belirleyicilerini ortaya çıkarmayı amaçlamaktadır. Elde edilen bulgular neticesinde ticari alacak / net satış oranı ile ticari borçlar / satışların maliyeti arasında anlamlı pozitif bir ilişki ortaya çıkarılmıştır. Diğer taraftan, ticari alacak / net satış oranı ile net satılar / toplam varlık, hazır değerler / toplam varlık, stoklar / toplam varlık oranları arasında anlamlı ve negatif yönlü bir ilişki tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca, ticari borçlar / satışların maliyeti ile stoklar / toplam varlıklar, hazır değerler / toplam varlıklar arasında anlamlı ve pozitif bir ilişkiye rastlanmıştır. Diğer taraftan, ticari borçlar / satışların maliyeti ile net kar / net satış arasında anlamlı ve negatif bir ilişkinin olduğu tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ticari Alacak Ticari Borç BIST İmalat Sanayi Panel Veri Analizi

Determination Of Account Receivable and Payable Policy in Firms: An Econometric Application on BIST Manufacturing Sector

Öz

Account receivable and payable management is crucial issue for businesses. The aim of this study is to investigate econometric models for receivable and payable management. In this framework, an econometric model has been developed to guide account receivables and payable policies by using quarterly data covering the years 2008 - 2014 of 110 companies including in the manufacturing sector in Stock Exchange Istanbul. Panel data analysis was preferred as the econometric analysis method. The first model is intended to reveal the determinants of the enterprise investing in Account receivables trade credit given and the determinants of the second model the entity providing the Account payable financing trade credit taken . As a result of the findings, a significant positive relation was found between Account receivable / net sales ratio and Account payables / cost of sold goods. On the other hand, there was a significant and negative relationship between Account receivables / net sales ratio and net sales / total assets, liquid assets/ total assets, inventories / total asset ratios. Additionally, there is a significant and positive relationship between the account payables / cost of sold goods and inventories/ total assets, liquid assets/ total assets ratios. On the other hand, it has been found that there is a significant and negative relationship between the account payables / cost of sold goods and net profit / net sales ratio.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Account Receivable Account Payables BIST Manufacturing Sector Panel Data Analysis

Kaynakça

1. Arellano, M. (1987). Practitioners’corner: Computing Robust Standard Errors for Within‐ groups Estimators. Oxford bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 49(4), 431-434.
2. Atkins, J. C., & Kim, Y. H. (1977). Comment and correction: opportunity cost in the evaluation of investment in accounts receivable. Financial Management, 71-74.
3. Baltagi, B. H., & Wu, P. X. (1999). Unequally Spaced Panel Data Regressions With AR (1) Disturbances. Econometric Theory, 15(6), 814-823.
4. Baltagi, B. (2008). Econometric Analysis Of Panel Data. John Wiley & Sons.
5. Baltagi, B. (2007). H.(2005), Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. John Wiley & Sons.
6. Bhargava, A., Franzini, L., & Narendranathan, W. (2006). Serial Correlation And The Fixed Effects Model. In Econometrics, Statistics And Computational Approaches In Food And Health Sciences (pp. 61-77).
7. Blazenko, G. W., & Vandezande, K. (2003). The Product Differentiation Hypothesis For Corporate Trade Credit. Managerial and Decision Economics, 24(6‐7), 457-469.
8. Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A. R. (1980). The Lagrange Multiplier Test And İts Applications To Model Specification In Econometrics. The Review of Economic Studies, 47(1), 239-253.

9. Cheng, N. S., & Pike, R. (2003). The Trade Credit Decision: Evidence Of UK Firms. Managerial and Decision Economics, 24(6‐7), 419-438.
10. Chiplin, B., & Wright, M. (1985). Inter‐Industry Dıfferences In The Response Of Trade Credıt To Changes In Monetary Polıcy. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 12(2), 221-248.
11. Choi, W. G., & Kim, Y. (2005). Trade Credit And The Effect Of Macro-Financial Shocks: Evidence From Us Panel Data. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 40(4), 897-925.
12. Copeland, T. E., & Khoury, N. T. (1980). Analysis of Credit Extensions in a World with Uncertainty. Université Laval. Faculté des sciences de l'administration.
13. Cunat, V. (2006). Trade Credit: Suppliers As Debt Collectors And İnsurance Providers. The Review of Financial Studies, 20(2), 491-527.
14. Deloof, M., & Jegers, M. (1996). Trade credit, Product Quality, And İntragroup Trade: Some European Evidence. Financial management, 33-43.
15. Driscoll, J. C., & Kraay, A. C. (1998). Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimation With Spatially
16. Dependent Panel Data. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 80(4), 549-560.
17. Emery, G. W. (1986). Positive Theories Of Trade Credit. Graduate School of Business, Indiana University.
18. Ferris, J. S. (1981). A Transactions Theory Of Trade Credit Use. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 96(2), 243-270.
19. Franks, J. R., Broyles, J. E., & Carleton, W. T. (1985). Corporate Finance: Concepts and Applications. Kent Publishing Company.
20. Giannetti, M. (2003). Do Better Institutions Mitigate Agency Problems? Evidence From Corporate Finance Choices. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 38(1), 185-212.
21. Gujarati, D. N., & Porter, D. C. (2003). Basic Econometrics. 4th. The McGraw− Hill.
22. Gujarati, D. (2004). Basic Econometrics. The McGraw− Hill.
23. Hausman, J. A. (1978). Specification Tests İn Econometrics. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 1251-1271.
24. Hsiao, C. (2014). Analysis of panel data (No. 54). Cambridge university press.
25. Ingves, S. (1984). Aspects Of Trade Credit. Economic Research Institute, Stockholm School of Economics [Ekonomiska forskningsinstitutet vid Handelshögskolan](EFI).
26. Judge, G. G., Griffiths, W. E., Hill, R. C., Lutkepohl, H., & Lee, T. C. (1985). The Theory And Practice Of Econometrics. New York: JohnWiley and Sons. JudgeThe Theory and Practice of Econometrics1985.
27. Kaplan, R. M. (1967). Credit Risks and Opportunities. Harvard Business Review, 45(2), 83-88.
28. Karahan, M. (2017). Muhasebe Meslek Mensuplarının KOBİ TFRS Hakkındaki Düşünceleri Ve Farkındalık Düzeyleri: Gaziantep Örneği Opinions and Awareness Levels of Members of the Accounting Profession about SME TFRS: Gaziantep Example. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 16(4), 998-1013.
29. Karahan, M., İğde, M., & Özbezek, D. (2017). Uluslararası Finansal Raporlama Standartlarının Kobi'ler Açısından Değerlendirilmesi-Türkiye Uygulaması. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 16(2).
30. Kim, Y. H., & Atkins, J. C. (1978). Evaluating Investments In Accounts Receivable: A Wealth Maximizing Framework. The Journal of Finance, 33(2), 403-412.
31. Laffer, A. B. (1970). Trade Credit And The Money Market. Journal of Political Economy, 78(2), 239-267.
32. Lee, Y. W., & Stowe, J. D. (1993). Product Risk, Asymmetric Information And Trade Credit. Journal of Financial and Quantitative analysis, 28(2), 285-300.
33. Lewellen, W. G., McConnell, J. J., & Scott, J. A. (1980). Capital Market İnfluences On Trade Credit Policies. Journal of Financial Research, 3(2), 105-113.
34. Long, M. S., Malitz, I. B., & Ravid, S. A. (1993). Trade Credit, Quality Guarantees, And Product Marketability. Financial management, 117-127.
35. Marotta, G. (1997). Does trade credit redistribution thwart monetary policy? Evidence from Italy. Applied Economics, 29(12), 1619-1629.
36. Martínez‐Sola, C., García‐Teruel, P. J., & Martínez‐Solano, P. (2013). Trade credit policy and firm value. Accounting & Finance, 53(3), 791-808.
37. Nadiri, M. I. (1969). The determinants of trade credit in the US total manufacturing sector. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 408-423.
38. Neale, C. W., & Shipley, D. D. (1985). An international comparative study of credit strategy. European Journal of Marketing, 19(6), 24-38.
39. Ng, C. K., Smith, J. K., & Smith, R. L. (1999). Evidence on the determinants of credit terms used in interfirm trade. The journal of finance, 54(3), 1109-1129.
40. Pazarlıoğlu, M. V., & Gürler, Ö. K. (2007). Telekomünikasyon Yatırımları ve Ekonomik Büyüme: Panel Veri Yaklaşımı. Finans Politik ve Ekonomik Yorumlar, 44(508), 35-43.
41. Petersen, M. A., & Rajan, R. G. (1994). The benefits of lending relationships: Evidence from small business data. The journal of finance, 49(1), 3-37.
42. Pike, R., & Cheng, N. S. (2001). Credit management: an examination of policy choices, practices and late payment in UK companies. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 28(7‐ 8), 1013-1042.
43. Rajan, R. G., & Zingales, L. (1995). What do we know about capital structure? Some evidence from international data. The journal of Finance, 50(5), 1421-1460.
44. Schwartz, R. A. (1974). An economic model of trade credit. Journal of financial and quantitative analysis, 9(4), 643-657.
45. Shipley, D., & Davies, L. (1991). The Role and Burden-Allocation Of Credit İn Distribution channels. Journal of Marketing Channels, 1(1), 3-22.
46. Storey, D. J. (2016). Understanding The Small Business Sector. Routledge.
47. Stowe, J., & Gehr, A. (1985). Contract costing and trade credit. In Western Finance Association Meeting, June.
48. Tatoğlu, F. Y. (2012). Panel Veri Ekonometrisi: Stata Uygulamalı. Beta Basım Yayın.
49. Walker, D. A. (1991). An Empirical Analysis Of Financing The Small Firm. In Advances in small business finance (pp. 47-61). Springer Netherlands.
50. Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric Analysis Of Cross Section And Panel Data. MIT press.
51. Yavuz, N. C., & Yilanci, V. (2013). Convergence in per capita carbon dioxide emissions among G7 countries: a TAR panel unit root approach. Environmental and Resource Economics, 1-9.