eng Science and Education Publishing Journal of Finance and Accounting 2333-8857 2021-08-17 9 1 41 47 10.12691/jfa-9-1-4 JFA2021914 article Huseyin Yilmaz huseyin.yilmaz@bilecik.edu.tr, hyilmaz64@yahoo.com 1 Department of Accounting and Finance, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Bilecik ?eyh Edebali University-11230 Bilecik, Turkey Rubinstein criticizes both the Modigliani & Miller capital structure theorem and dividend policy theorem explained in M&M [6] and M&M [4]. He criticizes the M&M theorems in six points. They are similarity with some former opinions, firm value and stock value confusion, additional assumptions requirement opinion, general rejection of the capital structure irrelevancy, importance of separation opinion between dividend and retained earnings, and conflict between the M&M [6] and M&M [4] articles about dividend irrelevancy opinion. They do not accept the similarity assertion. After my study on Fisher [2], Williams [9], and MortonĄ¯s opinions in Rubinstein [8], I believe that, it could be thought that Rubinstein is right. Rubinstein also seems right about the conflict between the M&M [6] and M&M [4] articles. The other assertions of Rubinstein could be seen as a brain training. The M&M accept in advance that the M&M theorem is an innovation and a new opinion. http://pubs.sciepub.com/jfa/9/1/4/jfa-9-1-4.pdf Modigliani & Miller theorem M & M critics of Rubinstein fisherĄ¯s separation theorem williamsĄ¯ law of the conservation of investment value replies by the M & M to the critiques