This study aims to analyze the effect of
profitability (return on assets), liquidity (current ratio), company size and
business risk on capital structure in companies listed in the Jakarta Islamic
Index (JII) for the period 2015-2017. The samples in this study were 16
companies that met the research criteria through non probability sampling
method - purposive sampling. The analysis method used in this research is
multiple linear analysis method processed with eviews 9 software. The results
of this study indicate that profitability and liquidity have a negative and
significant effect on capital structure, while company size and business risk
have a positive and significant effect on capital structure.
Keywords: Profitability, Liquidity,
Company Size, Business Risk and Capital Structure.
INTRODUCTION
Companies that
are able to survive in times of crisis are companies that have a strong capital
structure. Capital structure is a permanent expenditure that reflects the
balance between long-term debt and corporate equity (Riyanto, 2009). In some company's capital structure, short-term debt is often not
taken into account because this type of debt is generally spontaneous (changes
according to changes in company activities, for example changes in sales
levels) while long-term debt is fixed for a relatively long period of time
(more than one year) so that its existence needs to be considered more by
financial managers. Capital structure refers to the different options used by
the company to finance its capital (Saleem et al., 2013).
Capital
structure can be measured by the ratio of total long-term debt to total equity
through Debt to Equity Ratio (DER). This ratio is used to describe the
proportion between long-term debt and company equity. If the amount of DER is
greater than 1.00 then the use of debt as a source of corporate funding is much
greater than the use of equity. Conversely, if the amount of DER is smaller
than 1.00, the use of equity as a source of company funding is much greater
than the use of debt.
The following
are the results of the average capital structure of 16 (sixteen) companies
listed in the Jakarta Islamic Index (JII) for the period 2015-2017 and meet the
research criteria:
Table
1.1. Capital Structure of Companies Listed in the Jakarta Islamic Index (JII)
Period 2015-2017
|
No. |
Company Name |
Period |
||
|
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
||
|
1 |
Adaro Energy Tbk. |
0,64 |
0,55 |
0,48 |
|
2 |
AKR Corporindo Tbk. |
0,42 |
0,24 |
0,26 |
|
3 |
Astra Internasional Tbk. |
0,34 |
0,23 |
0,26 |
|
4 |
Bumi Serpong Damai Tbk. |
0,35 |
0,34 |
0,31 |
|
5 |
Indofood CBP Sukses Makmur Tbk. |
0,25 |
0,21 |
0,24 |
|
6 |
Indofood Sukses Makmur Tbk. |
0,55 |
0,43 |
0,42 |
|
7 |
Kalbe Farma Tbk. |
0,04 |
0,04 |
0,04 |
|
8 |
Lippo Karawaci Tbk. |
0,93 |
0,75 |
0,61 |
|
9 |
PP London Sumatera Indonesia Tbk. |
0,13 |
0,14 |
0,15 |
|
10 |
Perusahaan Gas Negara (Persero) Tbk. |
0,93 |
0,90 |
0,83 |
|
11 |
Semen Indonesia (Persero) Tbk. |
0,15 |
0,18 |
0,32 |
|
12 |
Summerecon Agung Tbk. |
0,91 |
1,03 |
0,84 |
|
13 |
Telekomunikasi Indonesia (Persero) Tbk. |
0,40 |
0,33 |
0,37 |
|
14 |
United Tractors Tbk. |
0,11 |
0,07 |
0,13 |
|
15 |
Unilever Indonesia Tbk. |
0,16 |
0,25 |
0,23 |
|
16 |
Wijaya Karya (Persero) Tbk. |
0,66 |
0,29 |
0,35 |
|
|
Rata-Rata |
0,43 |
0,37 |
0,36 |
Source: Financial Statements of Companies Listed in the Jakarta Islamic
Index (JII) for the Period 2015-2017, processed.
Table 1.1. illustrates
that the average amount of capital structure proxied by Debt to Equity Ratio
(DER) in companies listed in the Jakarta Islamic Index (JII) for the period
2015 to 2017 has decreased from year to year. The decrease in the average
amount of Debt to Equity Ratio (DER) is below 1.00 so it can be said that the
capital structure used by these companies tends to come from the use of the company's
own equity.
According to (Brigham, 2011), companies whose funding sources tend to come from equity have several
advantages such as saving interest costs and company administrative costs and
minimizing the company's dependence on external parties so that company owners
are more free to manage their company's capital. On the other hand, the company
will also have several disadvantages such as difficulties in expanding its
business because business expansion requires large costs and difficulties in
obtaining investors.
From the above considerations,
whether the companies listed in the Jakarta Islamic Index (JII) will continue
to use more equity as a source of funding or will combine it with the use of
debt so that the capital structure is in an optimal composition. Optimal
capital structure is a condition where a company can use a combination of debt
and equity ideally. Optimal capital structure according to conservative approach
is a capital structure that uses long-term debt maximum 50% of the total equity
of the company.
The existence of factors
that influence the company's capital structure is important as a basis for
consideration in determining the composition of the company's capital
structure. In this study, there are several factors that are expected to
influence the capital structure of the company. Those factors are
profitability, liquidity, firm size and business risk.
RESEARCH
OBJECTIVES
1.
Analyzing the effect
of profitability on the capital structure of companies listed in the Jakarta
Islamic Index (JII).
2.
Analyzing the
effect of liquidity on capital structure of companies listed in Jakarta Islamic
Index (JII).
3.
Analyzing the
effect of company size on the capital structure of companies listed in the
Jakarta Islamic Index (JII).
4.
Analyzing the
effect of business risk on the capital structure of companies listed in the
Jakarta Islamic Index (JII).
LITERATURE REVIEW
(Riyanto, 2009) states that capital structure is a permanent expenditure that reflects
the balance between long-term debt and company equity. In this study, the proxy
used to measure the amount of capital structure is the debt to equity ratio
which is expressed in the following formula:
Profitability
according to (Sudana, 2011) is the company's ability to generate profits using
the resources owned by the company. In this study, the proxy used to measure
profitability is Return On Asset (ROA) which is expressed in the following
formula:
Liquidity is a
financial ratio used to measure a company's ability to meet its short-term debt
in a timely manner (Kasmir, 2013). In this study, the proxy used to measure the amount of liquidity is
the current ratio which is expressed in the following formula:
According to (Riyanto, 2009) company size is a measure that describes the size of a company which
is shown in total assets, total sales and average sales. In this study, the
proxy used to measure the size of the company is the natural logarithm of total
assets which is expressed in the following formula:
Business risk
will show how much the company risks if the company does not use debt (Brigham, 2011). In this study, the proxy used to measure the amount of business risk
is the standard deviation of the comparison between Earning Before Interest and
Taxexs (EBIT) and total sales which is expressed in the following formula:
The following
analysis framework is presented as outlined in the research model. The
relationship between several variables above can be described as follows:
RESEARCH METHOD
Object
of Research
The object of research
to be studied is the Capital Structure with its indicators Debt to Equity Ratio
(DER) against Profitability (ROA), Liquidity (Current Ratio), Company Size and
Business Risk in companies listed in the Jakarta Islamic Index (JII) starting
from the 2015 to the 2017 period.
Population
and Sample
Population
The population in this
study were 30 (thirty) companies listed in the Jakarta Islamic Index (JII) for
the period 2015 to 2017.
Sample
The samples in this
study were 16 (sixteen) companies listed in the Jakarta Islamic Index (JII)
during the study period, starting from the 2015-2017 period.
Research
Data Description
The data used
in this study are secondary data. The data collection technique used in this
research is non-probability sampling technique with purposive sampling method.
The dependent
variable in this research is Capital Structure with its indicator Debt to
Equity Ratio (DER) and the independent variables are Profitability (ROA),
Liquidity (Current Ratio), Company Size and Business Risk.
Analysis
Method
Descriptive
Analysis
|
|
Y |
ROA |
CR |
UP |
RB |
|
Mean |
3.381863 |
1.948006 |
5.283089 |
31.38800 |
2.302879 |
|
Median |
3.471923 |
1.879436 |
5.231847 |
31.38644 |
2.191638 |
|
Maksimum |
4.636669 |
3.642836 |
6.538574 |
33.32018 |
3.951244 |
|
Minimum |
1.280934 |
0.405465 |
4.104295 |
29.81130 |
0.741937 |
|
Std. Dev. |
0.842385 |
0.728426 |
0.545509 |
0.927117 |
0.652594 |
|
Obs |
48 |
48 |
48 |
48 |
48 |
Source: Data processing results with Eviews 9.
Inferential
Analysis
Classical
Assumption Test
Normality
Test
Source: Data
processing results with Eviews 9.
Based on the results
of the normality test above, it can be seen that the Jarque-Bera number shows a
value of 1.264121 with a ρ-value of 0.531496> 0.05 (α = 5%), it can be said
that the distribution of data distribution is normal.
Multicollinearity
Test
|
Variable |
Coefficient Variance |
Uncentered VIF |
Centered VIF |
|
C |
15.18793 |
1960.690 |
NA |
|
ROA |
0.127778 |
71.16645 |
8.570261 |
|
CR |
0.038357 |
139.6509 |
1.442839 |
|
UP |
0.010749 |
1368.314 |
1.167921 |
|
RB |
0.173342 |
128.0057 |
9.331592 |
Source: Data
processing results with Eviews 9.
Based on the
multicollinearity test results above, it can be seen that the Centered VIF
value of Return on Assets (ROA) is 8.570261, Current Ratio (CR) is 1.442839,
Company Size (UP) is 1.67921 and Business Risk (RB) is 9.331592 where these
numbers show a value smaller than 10, so it can be said that among the research
variables there is no multicollinearity.
Autocorrelation
Test
Source: Data processing results with Eviews 9.
Based on the results
of the autocorrelation test above, it can be seen that the Prob. F value shows
a value of 0.5086 > 0.05 (α = 5%), so it can be said that there is no
autocorrelation in the regression equation.
Heteroskedasticity
Test
Source: Data processing results with Eviews 9.
Based on the
heteroscedasticity test results above, it can be seen that the ρ value Obs *
R-Squared shows a value of 0.1562> 0.05, so it can be said that the
regression equation data does not contain heteroscedasticity.
MODEL
FEASIBILITY TEST
Coefficient
of Determination (R2)
|
R-squared |
0.608047 |
Mean dependent var |
3.381863 |
|
Adjusted R-squared |
0.570719 |
S.D. dependent var |
0.842385 |
|
S.E. of regression |
0.555627 |
Akaike info criterion |
1.946860 |
|
Sum squared resid |
12.96631 |
Schwarz criterion |
1.141776 |
|
Log likelihood |
-36.42698 |
Hannan-Quinn criter. |
1.836916 |
|
F-statistic |
11.67479 |
Durbin-Watson stat |
1.866950 |
|
Prob(F-statistic) |
0.000002 |
|
|
Source: Data processing results with Eviews 9.
Based on the test
results of the coefficient of determination (R2) above, it can be seen that the
coefficient of determination (R-square) is 0.608047 or 60.80%. This shows that
60.80% of the variation in capital structure can be explained by the variation
of the four independent variables, namely Return on Assets, Current Ratio,
Company Size and Business Risk while the remaining 39.02% is influenced by
other factors not revealed in this study.
F Test
|
R-squared |
0.608047 |
Mean dependent var |
3.381863 |
|
Adjusted R-squared |
0.570719 |
S.D. dependent var |
0.842385 |
|
S.E. of regression |
0.555627 |
Akaike info criterion |
1.946860 |
|
Sum squared resid |
12.96631 |
Schwarz criterion |
1.141776 |
|
Log likelihood |
-36.42698 |
Hannan-Quinn criter. |
1.836916 |
|
F-statistic |
11.67479 |
Durbin-Watson stat |
1.866950 |
|
Prob(F-statistic) |
0.000002 |
|
|
Source: Data processing results with Eviews 9.
Based on the results of the calculation with the F-Test above, it can
be seen that the F-statistic shows a value of 11.67479 with a significance of
0.000002 <0.05, it can be said that the model in this study is feasible to
continue and research.
Multiple
Linear Regression Results
|
Variable |
Coefficient |
Std. Error |
t-Statistic |
Prob. |
|
C |
-0.348026 |
3.897169 |
-0.089302 |
0.9293 |
|
ROA |
-1.502687 |
0.357461 |
-4.203783 |
0.0001 |
|
CR |
-0.430424 |
0.195850 |
-2.197722 |
0.0334 |
|
UP |
0.220368 |
0.103678 |
2.125491 |
0.0393 |
|
RB |
0.874645 |
0.416343 |
2.100777 |
0.0009 |
Source: Data processing results with Eviews 9.
Based on the multiple
linear regression results above, the multiple linear regression equation can be
stated as follows:
|
Capital
Structure |
= |
-0.348026 – 1.502687 (ROA) – 0.430424
(CR) + 0.220368 (UP) + 0.874645 (RB) |
From the results of
the multiple linear regression equation above, each independent variable can be
interpreted as its effect on the dependent variable as follows:
a.
Return on
Assets (ROA) has a coefficient of -1.502687 with a significance level of
0.0001. If the company's ability to generate profits increases by 1%, the
company's tendency to use debt as a source of funding decreases by 1.502687.
The higher the amount of profit earned by the company, the lower the level of
debt it has.
b.
Current Ratio
(CR) has a coefficient of -0.430424 with a significance level of 0.0334. If the
amount of excess cash increases by 1%, the company's tendency to use debt as a
source of funding decreases by 0.430424. The higher the amount of excess cash
obtained by the company, the lower the level of debt it has.
c.
Company size
(CS) has a coefficient of 0.220368 with a significance level of 0.0393. If the
size of the company as seen from its total asset value increases by 1%, the
company's tendency to use debt as a source of funding will increase by
0.220368. The larger the size of the company, the greater the level of debt it
has.
d.
Business Risk
(RB) has a coefficient of 0.874645 with a significance level of 0.0009. If the
level of business risk increases by 1%, the tendency of companies to use debt
as a source of funding will increase by 0.220368. The greater the risk
experienced by the company, the greater the level of debt it has.
Hypothesis
Test (t-test)
The test will
be carried out with two test stages for each independent variable in this
research model, namely a significant test with a probability on the ρ-value and
a directional test on the coefficient value.
a.
Profitability
(Return on Assets/ROA)
From the regression result, it is found that with a significance level
of 95% (α = 5%) return on assets has a probability of 0.0001 <0.05, then
return on assets is in the H1 acceptance area, meaning that return on assets
has a significant effect on capital structure. Furthermore, the treatment or
direction test to determine whether the influence between the two variables is
a positive or negative influence by looking at the coefficient. From the
regression output, it can be seen that the coefficient of return on assets is negative
amounting to -1.502687. So it can be concluded that return on assets is in the
H1 acceptance area, meaning that return on assets has a negative and
significant effect on capital structure.
b.
Liquidity
(Current Ratio/CR)
From the regression result,
it is found that with a significance level of 95% (α = 5%) the current ratio
has a probability of 0.0334 <0.05, then the current ratio is in the H2
acceptance area, meaning that the current ratio has a significant effect on the
capital structure. Furthermore, the treatment or direction test to determine
whether the influence between the two variables is a positive or negative
influence by looking at the coefficient. From the regression output, it can be
seen that the current ratio is negative -0.430424. So it can be concluded that
the current ratio is in the H2 acceptance area, meaning that the current ratio
has a negative and significant effect on the capital structure.
c.
Company Size
From the regression
result, it is found that with a significance level of 95% (α = 5%), firm size
has a probability of 0.0393 <0.05 then firm size is in the acceptance area
of H3, meaning that firm size has a significant effect on capital structure.
Furthermore, the treatment or direction test to determine whether the influence
between the two variables is a positive or negative influence by looking at the
coefficient. From the regression output, it can be seen that the coefficient of
firm size is positive amounting to 0.220368. So it can be concluded that firm
size is in the acceptance area of H3, meaning that firm size has a positive and
significant effect on capital structure.
d.
Business Risk
From the regression
result, it is found that with a significance level of 95% (α = 5%), business
risk has a probability of 0.0009 <0.05 then business risk is in the
acceptance area of H4, meaning that business risk has a significant effect on
capital structure. Furthermore, the treatment or direction test to determine
whether the influence between the two variables is a positive or negative
influence by looking at the coefficient. From the regression output, it can be
seen that the coefficient of business risk is positive 0.874645. So it can be
concluded that business risk is in the H4 acceptance area, meaning that
business risk has a positive and significant effect on capital structure.
CONCLUSION
Based on the
results of the research and discussion previously described, it can be
concluded that Profitability has a negative and significant effect on the
company's capital structure, Liquidity has a negative and significant effect on
the company's capital structure, Company size has a positive and significant
effect on the company's capital structure, Business risk has a positive and
significant effect on the company's capital structure. We would like to express our sincere
appreciation to all those who have contributed to this research. Thank you to
the Faculty of Economics and Business, National University, Jakarta and the
Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Development, Universiti Malaysia
Terengganu for access to the necessary facilities and materials. Not to forget,
thank you to all respondents and participants who participated in this
research. Your dedication and contribution means a lot to the smooth running of
this research. Thank you for all the support you have provided.
REFERENCES
Adiyana, I.B.G. dan P.A. Ardiana. 2014.
Pengaruh Ukuran Perusahaan, Risiko Bisnis, Pertumbuhan Aset, Profitabilitas,
dan Likuiditas pada Struktur Modal. E-Jurnal Akuntansi Universitas Udayana. 9
(3): 788-802. ISSN: 2302-8556.
Anwar, J., R. Andini., dan K. Raharjo. 2014.
Pengaruh Ukuran Perusahaan, Risiko Bisnis, Pertumbuhan Asset, Profitabilitas,
Struktur Kepemilikan dan Struktur Aktiva Terhadap Struktur Modal pada Perusahaan
manufaktur di Bursa Efek Indonesia Periode 2010-2013. Jurnal Ekonomi dan
Keuangan. 3 (2): 1-12.
Bayunitri, B.I. dan T.A. Malik. 2015. Analisis
Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Struktur Modal pada Perusahaan Manufaktur yang
Listing di Bursa Efek Indonesia. STAR Study and Accountung Research. 12 (1):
49-58. ISSN: 1693-4482.
Bhawa, I.B.M.D. dan M.R. Dewi. 2015. Pengaruh
Ukuran Perusahaan, Likuiditas, Profitabilitas dan Risiko Bisnis Terhadap
Struktur Modal Perusahaan Farmasi. E-Jurnal Manajemen Unud. 4 (7): 1949-1966.
ISSN: 2302-8912.
Brigham, E.F. dan J.F. Houston. 2011.
Fundamentals of Financial Management. 2
Book. 11th ed. Thomson Learning. United States of America. Terjemahan
A.A. Yulianto. 2011. Dasar-Dasar Manajemen Keuangan. Buku 2. Edisi 11. Salemba
Empat. Jakarta.
Chandra, T. 2012. Faktor-Faktor yang
Mempengaruhi Struktur Modal pada Perusahaan Properti dan Real Estate di
Indonesia. Jurnal Ekonomi dan Keuangan. 18 (4): 507-523. ISSN : 1411-0393.
Damayanti, N.P.D. dan I.M. Dana. 2017. Pengaruh
Ukuran Perusahaan, Profitabilitas dan Risiko Bisnis terhadap Struktur Modal
Pada Perusahaan Manufaktur di BEI. E-Journal Manajemen Unud. 6 (10): 5775-5803.
ISSN: 2302-8912.
Darsono, N.F. 2017. Faktor-Faktor yang
Mempengaruhi Struktur Modal di Perusahaan Indonesia (Pada Perusahaan Manufaktur
yang Terdaftar di BEI tahu 2011-2014.
Journal of Accounting. 6 (3): 1-9. ISSN: 2337-3806.
Dewiningrat, A.I dan I.K. Mustanda. 2018.
Pengaruh Likuiditas, Profitabilitas, Pertumbuhan Penjualan dan Struktur Aset
terhadap Struktur Modal. E-Journal Manajemen Unud. 7 (7): 3471-3501. ISSN:
2302-8912.
Dhingra, R. dan K. Dev. 2016. Determinants of
Capital Structure – A Study of Oil Industry in India. International Journal of
Engineering and Management Research. 6 (1): 35-42. ISSN: 2250-0758.
Fahmi, I. 2012. Analisis Laporan Keuangan.
Edisi 2. Alfabeta. Bandung.
Harahap, S.S. 2010. Analisis atas Laporan
Keuangan. Edisi 9. PT Raja Grafindo Persada. Jakarta.
Horne, J.C.V. dan J.M. Wachowicz. 2009.
Fundamentals of Financial Management. 13th ed. Prentice Hall. England.
Terjemahan H. Abdul. 2012. Prinsip-Prinsip Manajemen Keuangan. Edisi 13.
Salemba Empat. Jakarta.
Hudan, Y., D. Isynuwardhana., dan D.N.
Triyanto. 2016. Pengaruh Profitabilitas, Likuiditas dan Ukuran Perusahaan
Terhadap Struktur Modal (Studi pada Perusahaan Pertambangan Sektor Batubara
yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia tahun 2011-2015. E-Proceeding of
Management. 3 (2): 1596-1603. ISSN: 2355-9367.
IDX. Laporan keuangan dan tahunan. Diakses dari
https://www.idx.co.id/perusahaan-tercatat/laporan-keuangan-dan-tahunan/
Joni dan Lina. 2010. Faktor-Faktor yang
Mempengaruhi Struktur Modal. Jurnal Bisnis dan Akuntansi. 12 (2): 81-96.
Kasmir. 2013. Analisis Laporan Keuangan. Edisi
Pertama. PT Rajawali Pers. Jakarta.
Kayedi, S.I. dan G. Mohammad. 2013. Study the
Effect of Sales Growth on the Determaints of Capital Structure of Listed
Companies in Tehran Stock Exchange. TJEAS Journal. 7 (2): 1608-1613. ISSN
2025-0853.
Manullang, M. dan S. Dearlina. 2005. Pengantar
Manajemen Keuangan. Edisi 1. Buku 1. Andi. Yogyakarta.
Mouna, Z. dan N. Hedi. 2015. Determinant of
Capital Structure: Evidence from Tunisian Listed Firm. International Journal of
Business Management. 10 (9): 121-135. E-ISSN: 1833-8119.
Munawir, S. 2014. Analisis Laporan Keuangan.
Edisi 4. Liberty .Yogyakarta.
Murhadi, W.R. 2011. Detrminan Struktur Modal:
Studi di Asia Tenggara. Jurnal Manajemen dan Kewirausahaan. 13 (2): 91-98.
Murti, A.A. 2014. Analisis Faktor-Faktor yang
Mempengaruhi Struktur Modal pada Perusahaan Real Estate dan Properti. Jurnal
Ilmu Manajemen. 2 (2): 387-396.
Nugroho, N.C. 2014. Analisis Pengaruh
Profitabilitas, Pertumbuhan Penjualan, Ukuran Perusahaan dan Umur Perusahaan
terhadap Struktur Modal Usaha Mikro Kecil dan Menengah Kerajinan Kuningan di
Kabupaten Pati. Management Analysis Journal. 3 (2): 1-5. ISSN 2252-6552.
Prasetya, B.T. dan N. Asandimitra. 2014.
Pengaruh Profitabilitas, Ukuran Perusahaan, Growth Opportunity, Likuiditas,
Struktur Aset, Risiko Bisnis dan Non Debt Tax Shiled terhadap Struktur Modal pada
Perusahaan Sub Sektor Barang Konsumsi. Jurnal Ilmu Manajemen. 2 (4): 1341-1352.
Riyanto, B. 2011. Dasar-Dasar Pembelanjaan
Perusahaan. Edisi 4. Universitas Gadjah Mada. Yogyakarta.
Saleem, R.B., Q. Mehmood., M. Irfan., S.
Tariq., dan G. Akram. 2013. The Determinant Of Capital Structure Of Oil and Gas
Firms Listed On Karachi Stock Exchange In Pakistan. Interdisciplinary Journal
Of Contemporary Research In Business Copy Right. 4 (9): 225-235.
Santika, R.B. dan S. Bambang. 2011. Menentukan
Struktur Modal Perusahaan Manufaktur di Bursa Efek Indonesia (Determinat Of
Capital Structure On The Manufacturing Company Capital In Indonesia Stock
Exchange). Dinamika Keuangan dan Perbankan. 3 (2): 172-178.
Sartono, A. 2010. Manajemen Keuangan Teori dan
Aplikasi. Edisi 4. BPFE. Yogyakarta.
Sawitri, N.P.Y.R. dan P.V. Lestari. 2015.
Pengaruh Risiko Bisnis, Ukuran Perusahaan dan Pertumbuhan Penjualan terhadap
Struktur Modal. E-Jurnal Manajemen Unud. 4 (5): 1238-1251. ISSN: 2302-8912.
Sudana, I.M. 2011. Manajemen Keuangan Perusahaan
Teori dan Praktik. Erlangga. Jakarta.
Sugiyono. 2013. Metode Penelitian Bisnis.
Alfabeta. Bandung.
Sundari, D. Dan J. Susilowibowo. 2016. Pengaruh
Ukuran Perusahaan dan Non Debt Tax Shield Terhadap Struktur Modal pada
Perusahaan Sektor Keuangan. Jurnal Ekonomi dan Keuangan. 1 (1) : 1-12
Sutrisno. 2012. Manajemen Keuangan Teori,
Konsep dan Aplikasi. Buku 1. Edisi 1. Ekonisia. Yogyakarta.
Wahab, S.N.A. dan N.A.Ramli. 2014. The
Determinants of Capital Structure: An Empirical Investigation on Malaysian
Listed Government Linked Companies. International Journal of Economics and
Financial Issues. 4 (4): 930-945. ISSN: 2146-4138.
Winarno, W.W. 2017. Analisis Ekonometrika dan
Statistika dengan Eviews. Edisi 5. UPP STIM YKPN. Yogyakarta
