TC Pipelines MLP looks cheap

I’ve written before about TC Pipelines MLP (NYSE: TCP), which is an MLP created by TransCanada (TSX: TRP) consisting of certain US operating gas pipelines.

Today they issued Form 8-K announcing that the FERC hit on their earnings, which they previously estimated was $40 to $60 million a year, will be $20 to $30 million instead.

A bit of history:

At the end of 2017, TCP was earning $252 million net income to its controlling interests, or about $3.60/unit. Their common units were trading at around US$50/unit at this time. Distributions were $1/unit/quarter.

When we work the impact of FERC, on an annualized basis net income will be going down to $220-230 million. This will be about $3.15/unit. Distributions were decreased to $0.65/unit/quarter. Right now the common units are trading at US$29. Management is not increasing the distributions because they want to chip away at debt. It’s kind of surprising considering that this puts the distribution range below where the general partner (TRP) would receive significant incentive distributions.

Risk-free 10-year government bond yields are up about 75 basis points from December 31, 2017 to today, but does this really warrant this much of a haircut?

My guess is that the MLP sector is just highly unfavoured at the moment and that underlying assets are simply too “boring” in relation to cash, which starts to become a more viable option (2-year yields are roughly 287bps at the moment).

But considering the business is very stable (gas pipelines aren’t going anywhere and have significant regulatory burdens to construct, even in the USA), there appears to be much worse places for investment capital. Am I missing anything?

TC Pipelines MLP – Q2-2018 analysis – post-FERC

Both entities listed (NYSE: TCP, parent TSX:TRP, NYSE: EEP, parent TSX:ENB) got hit badly with the March 2018 FERC ruling. TCP got hit the worst (as measured by the percentage decline in market value) out of all of the MLP pipeline companies affected by the FERC ruling.

Initially in their Q1 release, they stated that the FERC ruling could have an adverse revenue impact of up to US$100 million. In light of their US$546 million in revenues in fiscal 2017, this was not a trivial impact. As a result, they dropped distributions from $4/unit/year (about US$292 million) to $2.60/unit/year (about US$190 million). This was a reduction of 35% in distributions.

The interesting element is that because it is structured as an MLP, the company can retain the cash and use it to pay off debt while the unitholders face the income taxes payable even though they never see the cash-in-hand (directly). Reducing distributions is a very effective strategy to paying down debt.

TCP’s MLP units were trading at about $48 before the FERC announcement. After the 35% distribution drop, the MLP units dropped more than half over the subsequent two months.

While there was an economic substance to the reduction in unit price (the FERC announcement did have a genuine impact on future distributable cash flows), the impact to the unit price was overblown (perhaps due to inflammatory language by the parent saying that TCP was “non-viable” and a sudden fear that they would not be able to obtain credit, etc.).

On July 19, 2018 the FERC provided some clarifications with respect to the future billing rates of natural gas pipeline MLPs and the taxation basis that they can charge customers. The stock market initially launched the unit price from $26 to $35, but that has tapered down as there is a realization that the new pronouncements are a partial backpedaling of the original March announcement.

Today, TCP announced their Q2 results and quantified the results of the revised FERC ruling to $40-$60 million. I’ve read management’s presentation and listened to the conference call for some additional colour. $40-60 million is still a significant amount of revenue to be lost, but not as bad as previously thought. There was still considerable uncertainty as to the exact number and also the future state of governance – the initial obvious route was conversion of the MLP to a C-Corporation, but now that does not appear to be attractive. The other obvious decision is a re-acquisition of TCP within TRP, similar to how Enbridge Energy Partners (NYSE: EEP) has a proposed re-acquisition by Enbridge back on the table.

Right now, pre-FERC, looking at 2017, TCP has revenues of $546 million (transmission revenues plus equity earnings), and about $445 million in operating cash flows (approx. $6.20/unit). Distributable cash is $310 million ($4.35/unit).

The impact of the FERC decision will start to hit the financial statements at the end of 2018, so 2018 will still be a relatively “clean” year. The excess of cash generated over distributions will be used to pay down debt – At the beginning of the year, the balance on their credit facility was $185 million, and on August 2, was paid down to $90 million. By the end of the year, it should be around $40 million or so. The coupon rate of this debt is very low (linked to the short-term US rate – about 3% at the end of June 2018) so there won’t be much of an interest expense savings.

The remainder of the debt profile of the company is at a low interest rate and can be extended without pressure given the investment grade credit rating (in 2019, $55 million, in 2020, $270 million, in 2021, $375 million, in 2022, $500 million).

Operationally, there are the usual concerns about smaller pipelines that have customer concentration risk (Bison expires in 2021, consisting of 17% of cash flows), but I do not see fundamental threats to USA domestic natural gas transportation.

Taking $50 million off of distributable cash results in $3.65/unit. At the market price of $30/unit, that’s a 12.2% total return on something that is in a very stable and predictable business. The $30 unit price appears to be a bit low and I suspect that TRP will attempt to re-incorporate TCP into it while the price is still relatively low.

Prior to all of this FERC business, six months ago (February 2018), TCP was trading at $50/unit and giving $4/unit distributions (8%) at roughly a 90% payout ratio. Now that the FERC matter has been settled somewhat, the market is currently pricing TCP at an 8.7% distribution level, at roughly a 70% payout ratio post-FERC (2019 steady-state amounts). The core business (natural gas transportation) hasn’t changed, so why the sudden doom and gloom? This MLP should creep up higher as regulatory matters get clarified. You’re not going to see TCP double to its previous US$50 glory, but I believe US$30/unit appears to be low.

(Note: TCP goes ex-dividend tomorrow, so you will see an immediate 65 cent drop in price from the currently mentioned $30 current market price when trading opens Friday).

TC Pipelines (Trans-Canada Pipelines) MLP and FERC Ruling

Today was a very interesting day for TC Pipelines MLP (NYSE: TCP) which is the USA MLP arm of TransCanada Corporation (TSX: TRP).

They were heavily impacted by a March 2018 FERC ruling concerning the calculation of regulatory revenue rates for oil and gas pipelines – essentially they were not allowed to incorporate the income tax expense of their unitholders into their rate calculations. Not surprisingly, the stock crashed in March (along with most other MLPs) and when TCP announced the subsequent consequence in their next quarterly report (May) they crashed even further. It is fairly evident by the stock chart when these moments occurred:

Today, the FERC partially backpedaled on this change announced in March for natural gas pipelines only (nothing mentioned on oil pipelines). According to my read of the commissioner’s details, they came to the conclusion that the underlying natural gas pipeline legislation had technical issues which did not allow them to enforce the previous order. Putting a long story short, they came to the conclusion that this change would be considered retroactive rule-making and hence they did not have the authority to implement the change. They provided a mechanism where gas pipelines could voluntarily consent to changes in exchange for the commission to not review their rates within a certain time period, but I doubt MLPs will exercise this if such changes are adverse.

This is effectively a reversal of the decision unless if Congress decides to intervene in the matter. Considering the perpetual dysfunctional mess in Congress and them not touching the underlying legislation to correct this matter, this is a huge victory for natural gas MLPs.

Finally, the rationale for TCP MLP dropping from $50 to $25 in the first place has completely evaporated – although interest rates have increased somewhat (causing some headwinds in the MLP price due to simple spreads over the risk-free rate), one can make an argument that the price should be restored close to previous levels. In other words, there is an argument to be made that the price should go even higher.

The FERC ruling does not appear to affect crude oil pipelines (this is a very loaded sentence).

The disclosure I will make is that I own call options in TCP, which bypasses messy taxation issues of foreigners owning USA MLPs.

========================================
Addenda:
Very quick valuation notes, TC Pipelines (NYSE: TCP)

Units outstanding: 71.3 million
General Partner: (TSX: TRP), owning approx. 23% of the entity
Distributable cash flows, 2015/16/17: $290/313/310

GP/Incentive Distribution Rights: 2% below $0.81/quarter, 15% to $0.88/quarter, 25% above $0.88/quarter

Top-line Revenues/Equity earnings (2017): US$446 million.

Debt: $2.3 billion, staggered across various term facilities/bonds. Refinancing available, will pay slightly more interest in rising-rate environment when rolling over debt. YTM on May 2027 unsecureds: 4.7%

Paper napkin valuation: $310 million / 71.3 million units, $4.35/unit, $35@12%, $42@10%. Does this warrant a 700bps or 500bps spread over debt? Historically was trading around $45-$50 (MLP sector was ‘more sexy’, perceived as ‘ultimately safe’, etc.)

Previous distributions were $1.00/quarter, but post-FERC, reduced to $0.65/quarter, citing debt ratios and anticipated reduction of revenues.